The wind won't mess it up too bad. We are now doing question and answer time at Pells Park on whatever day this is. October? How about August? 18? And we got a fine bunch of folks here. We're sitting under the big shelter and we just sang some wonderful hymns and now we're going to begin our question and answer time. And I encourage you Be willing to challenge pastors. He's admitted he's not doing this because he's a smarty pants. He's willing to do it because he wants to answer questions. But he also admitted to me at the way at the beginning, he says, if I get a question I can't answer, I'll tell you and then I'll go look up the answer. So this is about what does God say? That's what it's about. And he wants us to know what does God say? So I encourage you and don't be afraid to ask him a tough question. It's okay. Because we do want to hear what the Lord has to say. So we'll go to that first one that I got. And here's another one. And keep those cards and letters coming, folks. All right. And really what we're doing is we're asking God the questions. We want to know what God has to say about these things, whatever it might be. OK. What is spiritual warfare and how can we recognize it? What is spiritual warfare and how can we recognize it? Sure. I would say that the most significant passage that addresses spiritual warfare is Ephesians chapter 6. And in fact, if you have a copy of the scriptures with you, you could turn there. I would say that this is where the Apostle Paul lays this out. in probably the most vivid detail. So, Ephesians 6, in verse 10, Paul says, And of course, many of you are familiar with the description of the armor of God that is given in verses 13-17. That would be of course a worthy study in and of itself because those are really the tools that God gives us to be able to wage war against the powers that are described in verse 12. So verse 12 says, For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Those descriptions there are referring to the forces of evil angels that we call demons that are waging war against the believer. And so what Paul indicates here is that in this life, as we have warfare, we're ultimately not waging war against other people, even people that we might think are particularly wicked. you know, political powers or people in Hollywood and so forth. Ultimately, the warfare that we are engaged with is warfare against those spiritual demonic powers. And there is language in verse 12 that suggests that there is this hierarchy of demonic powers that is waging war against our souls. One common misconception that comes into play with spiritual warfare is This thought that people kind of have this idea that Satan is kind of this equal opposing force to God. And so people tend to think sometimes that Satan is everywhere at one time. God is the only one that is everywhere at once. He's the only one who is omnipresent. Satan is a creature just like you and me. And so Satan is bound by limitations. He cannot be more than one place at one time. So Satan actually has his demonic forces that do his bidding. I think part of the question came up of how we recognize the presence of spiritual warfare. I would say that it's more of an established fact. Sometimes people tend to get a little bit creepy when it comes to spiritual warfare. You know, looking at toys in a church nursery or something, trying to identify demons that are inhabiting those toys or something like that. That probably is getting us in a more unhelpful direction when we think about these types of things. Suffice it to say, Satan uses a number of different avenues to attack us in our spiritual walk. There is that famous triad that we refer to, the world, the flesh, and the devil. So sometimes when we think of spiritual warfare, we might think of those things that are a little bit more dark and sadistic. you know, things like Ouija boards and things of that nature. But Satan doesn't always work through those particularly dark, really noticeable means. In fact, scripture indicates that Satan appears as an angel of light. So many times the warfare that we are engaged with might be on a more subtle level, a subtle level. It might be, for instance, a temptation toward covetousness. And we don't tend to think of covetousness as something that's particularly dark or demonic. But Satan and his forces use those kinds of things against our souls. So how we recognize it? Well, I think ultimately we have to come back to the scriptures. Because the Scriptures tell us all of those things that Satan uses to wage war against our souls. And the way that we arm ourselves, of course again, goes back to the Scriptures. We have to know the Word of God, and we have to apply these various facets of the armor of God that are described here in Ephesians chapter 6. So, you look at verse 14, Paul mentions having your loins girt about with truth. the breastplate of righteousness, feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace. Verse 16 mentions the shield of faith. Verse 17, the helmet of salvation, really the idea of assurance of salvation. And then the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God. As we use those various aspects of the armor of God, that is what enables us to be victorious against all the forces of hell that are waging war against our souls. So hopefully that answers your question. appreciate that we got some good questions here okay i fully believe the resurrection of christ and i know it is very important that i have a living savior I realize I have thought that it is the death of Christ that grants me forgiveness of my sins and grants me salvation. Yet in 1 Corinthians 15, 17, Paul states that if Christ is not raised, we are yet in our sins. Can you help me understand the importance of Christ's resurrection in my salvation? Yes, very good question. The resurrection is what assures us that God accepted the payment of Christ on the cross. So this is the evidence, the fact that Christ is risen from the dead. That is God's stamp of approval saying, I have accepted Christ's once for all sacrifice at Calvary. So I would say that's one element. Of course, a dead Savior can't save us. If Christ, and some people have this idea of the resurrection, that Christ, you know, his spirit is still living with us and so forth. Well, the payment for sin was made in a body. And the fact that Christ is risen from the dead indicates that that risen body, that sacrifice for payment has been accepted. It is also the resurrection which leads logically to the next step, which is the ascension of Christ. And as we think of the ascension of Christ, some people tend to think of that as nothing more than Christ simply going up to heaven. But really, that word ascension, it has the idea that Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father, where He is reigning over the affairs of mankind today. Now we have to make a distinction because we recognize Christ as the second person of the Godhead, as the second person of the Trinity. He is the eternal God. So there is one sense in which Christ has reigned forever. He is the eternal God. He has always been God. But in Christ's present reign from the Father's right hand, there is a unique dimension because of the fact that He is not only God, but He is also man. He is the risen God-man who is seated at the right hand of God the Father. And it is that risen Savior that is described in Philippians chapter 2 when Paul says that God has exalted Christ and given Him literally the name which is above every name. So there is a unique dimension to this by virtue of the fact that Christ now sits on the right hand of the Father as the God-man. So you think of his reign prior to the incarnation, that is a reign simply as God. Now he is reigning as the God-man. And that has implications. I know we're getting a little bit complex, but it's actually quite a complex question in some ways. But that gets to the language that's used in Psalm 8. In fact, you could turn there for a moment, because probably if I try to quote it off the cuff, I won't necessarily do so well. But Psalm 8, this passage is quoted by the author of Hebrews, incidentally, along these very lines. So you have Psalm 8 in verse 3. When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars which Thou hast ordained, what is man that Thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that Thou visitest him? For Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands. Thou hast put all things under his feet." Okay. So, you think of this dominion mandate, this creation mandate that Adam was given. Now, he was told that he was to basically serve as a, we could say, a vice-regent under God's supreme authority, ruling over planet Earth. He was to have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the fowls of the air, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the Earth in Genesis chapter 1. Adam failed at that task. So what was needed was for there to be a Savior who would come. and who would ultimately succeed where Adam failed. So that's why it is significant that we not just have God reigning in heaven, but that we have the God-man seated at the right hand of the Father, because he is able to do what Adam failed to do. And of course, we know ultimately Christ, in his resurrected body, is going to return to Earth. He's going to set up his millennial kingdom. And he will ultimately triumph over all of his foes. So that's why it is significant that Jesus was raised from the dead. And that's why Paul uses such strong language there in 1 Corinthians 15, that if Christ isn't risen, all of this is completely in vain. We may as well go home, eat, drink, be merry. None of this matters if Christ didn't rise from the dead. Oh, wow. Okay, because the Bible is written in Greek and Hebrew, what language do you think we will speak in heaven? I would say all the languages we're speaking now. I have no reason to believe that God is just going to suddenly zap our brains and make us forget everything that happened in this earthly life. I imagine, of course, our sins and things like that, those would fade from memory. But I have no reason to imagine that we're going to forget everything that we've learned. So if we've learned a particular language, I see no reason to think that we won't speak that language in heaven. There's a book entitled Heaven, quite simply, by Randy Alcorn. What he has suggested is that the languages we speak now might be more of... You think of China, for example, where my wife is from. you have a common language that's used throughout China, Mandarin Chinese. But you may not know that there are actually many, many other dialects that are used throughout China. So when kids go to school, they learn standard Mandarin Chinese. But when they go home, and then when they go to their workplaces, when they go to places of business, they might speak their local dialect. I tend to think heaven will probably be like that. That we will have a common language that we all speak, which might be Hebrew. Because, of course, that's the language that the Old Testament was inspired in. It's the language of the Jews. Of course, we don't know with certainty. So I imagine there will be a common language that would enable all of us in heaven to speak to one another. But there will also, I think, we'll still retain knowledge of English and other languages that we've learned here on this earth. I don't think God is going to suddenly zap those away. So admittedly, that's a hypothetical. I don't know that with 100% certainty, because that's just one of those things that God has not revealed to us. But I'm just leaning on the fact that Again, I think that heaven, it's not just that God just takes us and he just starts over with a clean slate. I think he's taking us in our unique personalities, our unique skill sets and so forth. And really those are being enhanced throughout eternity. But we will still be the people that we are now with all the things that we've learned, with all the skills that we've acquired. So that's my best guess. OK. I'm going to hand this card to you, because maybe I'm not seeing the letters just right. Very simple. Israel the land, is it? And I think it's Jews, but let's see. Is it Israel the land? Is it? Does Israel belong to the Jews? Does Israel belong to the Jews? Oh, does Israel belong to the Jews? OK. All right. Thank you. Got you. Thank you. You've got to work with us. Right. OK, so the short answer is yes. But I assume that if I just said yes, that probably wouldn't satisfy everyone. So I'll give a little bit more detailed answer. The question is, does the land of Israel belong to the Jews? So the short answer is yes. The longer answer goes back, really, to the book of Genesis. In Genesis chapter 15. You have God, He has made this covenant arrangement with Abraham. And what is very significant in Genesis chapter 15 is that there is this blood covenant ceremony that God goes through in order to ratify the covenant that He has made with Abraham. So in the blood covenant ceremony, you would have animal sacrifices that would be slain. And the pieces of the sacrifices would be, you would have the two parties of the covenant. They would walk through the pieces of the sacrifices. And what they were indicating is that if I fail to keep this covenant, let me be like one of these slain animals. Now, what's very significant in Genesis 15 is that you do not have God and Abraham joining hands, walking through those pieces. In fact, in Genesis 15, Abraham is asleep. But God alone, through the burning lamp, the smoking torch, moves through the pieces of the sacrifices to indicate that He alone is responsible to fulfill the terms of the covenant. Now, that is why, foundationally, the thinking throughout church history has been very flawed about the Jewish people. There has been this view called replacement theology. The more technical term is supersessionism. And this is the thinking that basically God is through with the Jewish people. He has now turned his attention to the church. And so the promises to Israel are now null and void. That completely undercuts the faithfulness of God. Because God has entered into what we call an unconditional covenant with Abraham. Meaning that God alone is responsible to fulfill the covenant terms. It is not God and Abraham joining in what we call a bilateral or conditional covenant where there's agreements on both sides. Now, we do recognize that right now Israel is in unbelief. I believe that I have heard statistics that say that maybe as many as 30% or so of the Jewish people living in the land of Israel now are atheists. And of course, even the devout Jewish people are not receiving Jesus as their Messiah. Israel is in the land, but they are in unbelief. Now, it is entirely possible God may discipline His people even before the tribulation period. He might kick them out of the land again. We don't know. But what we do know is that God will keep his word. And there will be a future generation of Israelites, according to the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 11, all Israel will be saved. Zechariah 12, they will look on the one that they've pierced. They will mourn for him as for an only son. There will be a future generation of Israelites that will come to faith in the Messiah. They will realize, hey, we blew it. We rejected the Messiah. Really, Isaiah 53 is the prayer that they're going to say. They're going to say, you know, we despise this man, but this man was really our Messiah. And when that happens, they will repent. They will turn to Him. And according to Matthew 24, all of God's elect people, a reference there to the nation of Israel, they will be brought back to the promised land. And God will indeed fulfill all the promises that He gave to Abraham. So that's a very long way of saying yes. It was a good question. Very good question. Yes. Very important. Okay. The Bible has many references to genealogy which I often find myself skipping over. Do you have any encouragement as to help us to understand those passages and the need to not bypass? Yeah, I mean all of scripture is given by inspiration of God. So, and it does, Paul goes on to say in that passage in 2 Timothy that it is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Now, when we come to the genealogies, those are challenging passages. We have to remember that those would have been very important for the Jewish people. You think, for example, in the book of Ezra and in Nehemiah, there are genealogies that are given in those books. And those would have been very important to establish that those Jewish people that were returning had a right to be in the land. In many cases, it would have been important to establish that certain people had the proper lineage to serve in the priesthood. Of course, genealogies are supremely important, as indicated in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew begins with the genealogy of Christ to establish the fact that Jesus Christ is legitimate heir to the throne of David. So, admittedly, when you look through the genealogies, it's hard to come away with a direct one-to-one, to say, okay, well, you have this situation over in Bible times, and I can directly apply this to my life in this way. And I admit that it's not the most stimulating of material many times, especially when you're reading through Chronicles. But I think the important thing is to remember that each of these names was included by the inspiration of the Spirit. It had importance for the people of that day. And it is simply, I think, a reminder to us of the faithfulness of God. in, for example, preserving the line of the Messiah. It is remarkable when we think of the Jewish people. Of course, the previous question asked about the Jews. It is remarkable to think about the number of people that we read about in the scriptures. It would be hard-pressed for us to find exemplars of those people today. Have you ever met a Hittite, for example? Have you ever met a Canaanite? Have you ever met an Amorite? But we recognize that there is still a Jewish people in the land of Israel with a recognizable identity. So I think where those genealogies are significant are in reminding us of the faithfulness of God. God keeps all of his promises exactly as he said he would. Amen. God of all hope. Okay. Why does the Bible continually refer to Adam's sin? Let's face it, Eve sinned first. That is true, Eve did sin first. But this is the recognition that Adam, the term that we have for this in theology is that Adam is the federal head of the human race. So what Paul appeals to in 1 Timothy chapter 2 that we looked at in a recent message, and when he talks about the leadership in the church and the reasoning for why men are to teach and to have authority in the church, he appeals to the fact that Adam was formed first and then Eve. So the reason that it is Adam's sin that has brought sin and death upon the human race is that Adam is our representative head. That's the meaning of the term federal. So you think about how things work in our representative form of government. Really, the United States is not a pure democracy. despite the fact that that term is thrown around constantly in our culture, right? Technically speaking, we are a republic, right? We appoint representatives for us who vote for us. I mean, we don't, as citizens, vote on every single issue. We have representatives that do that for us. So that is the sense in which Adam is our head. He is our representative. So for each of us, he stood in our place. And you might say, well, I don't like my representative. Well, think about it this way. Adam was the best representative we could have had because he was in a perfect environment. He was made directly from the hand of God. It is not. Well, you know, Adam really blew it. I mean, boy, if I would have been in issues, I would have done things differently. No, this is the best representative we could have had. And he blew it. So really, all of this goes to the fact that ultimately the biblical worldview, and I know this is a controversial term, but I'm going to use it anyway because I think it's important. The biblical worldview is a patriarchal worldview. It is a worldview of male headship. Now, that's not to say that we don't recognize that women are equal in the sight of God. They have equal value. But the way that God has constructed the world is ultimately a recognition that men are the heads of their households. Men are really to take initiative in society at large. And so that's reflected in the fact that we fell in Adam and not in Eve. Tag along question to that. Sure. Is it fair to say that Eve didn't hear about that? don't eat the fruit directly from God. That had to be passed down. I mean, wasn't Adam alone when God approached him? Yeah, at least in terms of how we read it in Genesis 2, it appears that Adam would have been the one that heard those instructions directly. Now, we could hypothesize. I mean, God could have revealed those to Eve at a later time. And of course, we don't know. But we know, of course, that Adam would have been the first one to receive those instructions. And in his position of headship, there was greater responsibility. So, men, if you look at this and you think, you know, you're kind of puffing your chest out and thinking, you know, well, how cool I am, you know, I'm, you know, I'm the head. Well, realize that there's also greater accountability and responsibility that comes with that, right? The wife is told to submit to the husband as Christ, as the church submits to Christ. But we are told to love our wives as Christ loved the church. That's a pretty heavy responsibility. So just bear that in mind. I know that these are controversial ideas in our culture, but we have to bear in mind these types of things when we come to addressing these issues that really rub our culture the wrong way. And Abraham Lent Pastor refers to that. We're bumping against culture. But what this reminds us of is he is presenting the Word of God. And so, praise the Lord. Okay, 1 Corinthians 11, four and five. It says, a woman to have her head uncovered while praying is a dishonor. Does this apply to today? Yes, very good question. There is a complicated discussion behind 1 Corinthians 11, and excuse me, I'm gonna try to move this over a little bit because that, let's see if I can get to where that, okay, that's a little better. Sorry, that sun was blinding me. So there is some dispute about the proper interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11. And really, there's a lot of different perspectives on this chapter. I'll give you the two main approaches. Of course, there are many who would argue that the reference to having one's head covered is a reference to having a hat or a veil or some type of head covering. There are others who argue on the basis of what is said at the end of this discussion. You have in verse 15, if a woman have long hair, it is a glory for her, for her hair is given her for a covering. There are some who suggest that the covering that is referenced here is a reference to a woman's long hair. That's really the first issue that needs to be untangled in addressing this text. The other thing that would need to be addressed is bringing this command over into the present time. So is Paul here, is he giving a timeless command that says that in all the churches for all times, women need to, if he's referring to a veil or a hat or a head covering of some kind, is this something that is an eternal principle, that women always need to do this in the churches? Or was this a cultural symbol that was relevant in Paul's own day that signified in that culture that the woman was submitting to the authority of her husband, but that there could be other symbols that we would use in our own day that would signify the same thing. That is really the focal point of debate in this chapter. And I will just confess, I have not really undertaken a detailed exegetical study of 1 Corinthians 11. So I would be open to seeing data from both sides. I would direct your attention to, there is a YouTube channel, and I believe the gentleman's name is, I want to say Mike Winger. You can look it up. I think it's Mike Winger, if I'm not mistaken. And I believe that he has done like a six or seven hour video dealing with first Corinthians chapter 11 and going through all the different interpretations of it and really trying to untangle what it means. So I would direct you there because that's probably going to give you all of the relevant data that you need to know about first Corinthians 11. And maybe you can speed it up if you can't handle listening to it for that many hours. Okay, on the same card, same questioner, 1 Corinthians 9, 17, what does a dispensation of the gospel mean here in this verse? So for Paul says, if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward, but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. So we have to recognize what a dispensation is. Now, often, In the parlance that we use in theology, and I am going to move over again because that sun is now moving over a bit. Sorry. I don't want to be blinded here. The word dispensation, we tend to, and we as a church, we describe ourselves as dispensational. Basically, I'll give you the 10 second answer as to what that means. It means that we hold to the fact that the church and Israel are different. There's a lot more that I could explain, but if you want the simple answer, that's basically what a dispensationalist is. Now, the word dispensation, typically when we think of dispensations as dispensationalists, we tend to think of a system, for example, that was enumerated by Scofield in his notes. He lays out seven different dispensations. We tend to think of those as periods of time. And I think that there is, I do agree with Scofield's dispensations. I think that those are biblical. But the meaning of the word dispensation literally means a household law or a stewardship, okay? So what Paul is referring to here when he says a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me, he is meaning the fact that the gospel has been entrusted to him as a stewardship. So if you're thinking in terms of that sevenfold dispensation system, that probably is going to lead you astray when you're thinking of this passage. But really, that's, I think, more the idea that Paul has in mind here, that God has entrusted this to Paul, this is a stewardship that he has, and he's accountable to God for how he carries that out. And that really is borne out in the remainder of 1 Corinthians chapter 9. How do you know the Bible is God's Word? Okay, I would say that the Bible is self-authenticated. Now, I know that that sounds like a very evasive answer, but it is its own best proof. There is the classic statement that has been made that the Bible is like a lion, that you don't need to defend it. You just let it loose and let it do its work. So you think of the fact that if we have a standard that is the ultimate standard, It would be foolish to try to compare that standard against anything else. If we think about this logically, when I worked at BJU Press, we gave an analogy of this in one of our books. I probably can't do it justice like the writer could, but let's suppose that you are measuring someone's height. You use one of those tape measures. How do you know that that tape measure is accurate? Well, you could put another tape measure right next to it. But what have you done? Ultimately in doing that, you're saying that this tape measure is inadequate. We need a better tape measure to confirm this one. Now how would you know that that tape measure is accurate? Well, you could keep multiplying tape measures, right? We would assume that somewhere in the world, I don't know where, but there is an ultimate standard for what constitutes an inch, for what constitutes a foot, and really any of these tape measures, rulers, whatever, they're just approximations of that ultimate standard. So really, when we talk about the Bible, there is nothing that stands above the Bible that the Bible has to be held accountable to. What I will say is this, is that ultimately, every bit of evidence that we have, whether it's scientific, whether it's the findings of archaeology, Everything we have will ultimately be found to measure up to what the Bible teaches. The problem that we have now is not that there has ever been anything that has disproved the Bible. The problem we have is insufficient evidence. You think, for example, of George Washington and how he died by the practice of bloodletting. Why did that happen? It happened because of insufficient knowledge of medicine, right? Now, we have advanced in our knowledge of medicine, but wouldn't we still acknowledge that human knowledge in this area is still greatly lacking? There's still much we don't know. There's a book by Stephen Hawking. Briefer history of time, he makes this mention of the fact that, you know, this woman challenged this lecturer one time and said that, you know, the world was standing on a turtle or something like that, standing on the back of a turtle. And the lecturer was kind of taken back. Well, he said, well, what's underneath the turtle? And she said, well, it's just turtles all the way down. The point Hawking made is that everything we know today could end up being a stack of turtles, basically. We think we know so much as human beings, but the knowledge we have is so tiny, infinitesimally small, compared to all the knowledge that's out there. So the problem that we encounter when, you know, you see these news reports, they get so, you know, riled up about, well, you know, this is a piece of evidence that could completely undermine the Bible. The real problem with those is not the piece of evidence itself. It is our limited human thinking. And it is the limitations that we have in analyzing all the evidence that's there. So ultimately, every piece of evidence we have will ultimately be found to line up with the Bible. But I would say if we want to really consider what I think is the best evidence for the Christian faith, and I don't see a problem with evidences, I think that ultimately those are secondary compared to the authority of scripture itself. But where I would turn is ultimately to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Ultimately, you have, okay, in the person of Christ, you have all these prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled to precision, hundreds of years, these prophecies given before Jesus was born. You have in Jesus Christ, of course, the sacrifice made, you have the resurrection of Christ, But really, I would point to the fact that you had all of these independent eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Christ. You have the apostles. You have what 1st Corinthians 15 mentions is over 500 brethren at once. You had all of these people that were willing to lay down their lives for the resurrection of Christ. Now think about it. Would Peter have been willing to lay down his life for something he knew was alive? Would Thomas have been willing to lay down his life for something he knew was a lie? Would John be willing to be exiled to the island of Patmos for something he knew was a lie? The fact that these apostles suffered so much for the cause of Christ is a testimony to the fact that they really believed that they had seen and touched the risen Christ. So that would be the ultimate evidence that I would point to. Of course, there are other books that have been written along these lines. One book that I find particularly helpful, Josh McDowell has written a book, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. He goes very meticulously through all these different evidences for the life of Christ, the veracity of the scriptures. And so there are resources like that that I would recommend. But ultimately, I would point to the resurrection of Christ, I think, as being the greatest evidence for the truthfulness of scripture. Okay, this is a question that was put to me through a text in the past couple weeks. And I was going to read it off my phone, but I don't want to mess that thing up. So I'm doing it from memory. Some churches disallow women to lead and be pastors. Is this biblical or traditional? I would say it's definitely biblical. The greatest evidence I would point to would be 1 Timothy chapter 2. You can turn there if you'd like. We mentioned this reference in passing recently. But I think that this passage is crystal clear. And it's especially clear because of the basis that Paul uses for his reasoning here. 1 Timothy chapter 2. I'm sorry, the wind is blowing my pages here, but 1 Timothy 2 and verse 11, let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. And you have two different functions that are being mentioned in verse 12. First of all, I suffer not a woman to teach. The context here is in the gathered church worship. The reference here is not to women teaching children, for example, or a woman teaching in a school, or even a Sunday school. The reference here is to a woman teaching in the gathered worship of the church, where you have both men and women in attendance. It is mentioned here that the woman is not to teach in that way. It is also said here that she is not to usurp authority over the man. The pastoral office is a position of leadership in the church. And this is exactly what is forbidden in this text. A woman is not to have a position of authority in the church insofar as she is directing men, insofar as she is teaching to men. And so this prohibits both the function of preaching in the local church and the office of the pastorate. Neither of those are to be given over to women. Notice how Paul reasons in verse 13. was first formed, then Eve. He appeals to the order of creation. Adam was created first, so there's a headship inherent in the fact that Adam was created first. Then he says in verse 14, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. And this, boy, we might get the tomatoes thrown at me. Try to control yourself, okay? What this, I think, points to is a general, OK? And I say general. I'm not saying that this is... I don't think Paul is saying that this is absolutely true under every circumstance. But he's pointing to a generally greater degree of vulnerability, of deceivability on the part of women as compared to men, OK? And this indicates for us that the pastoral leadership should be reserved for men. And you do find, incidentally, in Paul's writings, particularly when you look at Timothy and Titus, he talks about silly old women laden with sins being carried away by false teaching. So that is suggestive of the fact that there needs to be strong male leadership in the church. Now, I understand that there are places. I'm familiar with the situation, for example, in China today, where there is a lack of men to lead the churches. And I preached at a church, for example, where there was a woman, quote, unquote, pastor. Technically speaking, that church biblically has no pastor. Now, I was willing to speak there, and I appreciated that woman's faithfulness. I mean, she recognized there was no man willing to do what she was doing. But, biblically speaking, the office of the pastor is reserved for men. So I think that Paul's reasoning here in 1 Timothy 2 is very clear. I really think that you have to do very significant gymnastics to get out of the clear teaching of scripture, that the office of the pastor is reserved for qualified men. I'm gonna tie this one right in, a fresh question here, Acts 2.17. It just says women prophesying. Right. Yeah. Acts chapter 2 verse 17. And that is, I'll turn there just so I'm sure that I'm looking at what you're looking at. It shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy and your young men shall see visions and your old men dream dreams. So that is the gift of prophecy. You do have in the book of Acts, the daughters of Philip, for example, who are mentioned as prophetesses. You do occasionally in the Old Testament, you see women serving in a prophetic role. But I would differentiate between the office of a prophetess, Okay, I would just differentiate that from the office of a pastor in the context of a local church So there is an indication that God has at various periods of history. He has revealed himself to women He has communicated through women to make his truth known but that is in the prophetic office that is not in the office of oversight in the local church What is particularly significant about the local church context is that the office of pastor is an office of authority. So there could be a prophetess who speaks on behalf of God, but that doesn't mean that she's exercising authority over a local congregation where there are both men and women. a man in the local church is exercising authority as pastor. So that's where I would draw the differentiation. And also, I would say at this point, too, we have to recognize the fact that what we are committed to as a church is the fact that the prophetic office has ceased. We're no longer getting new revelation from God. So this is the final revelation from God. So there's nothing that needs to be given in addition to what we have in the scripture. So that is why I would reject women prophesying, quote unquote, in churches today, because we simply don't have any biblical warrant for that now that we have the completed canon of scripture. Can you explain Mark 16, 16, where it says, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved? Yeah, I would say that you have to go to the next part of that verse to get the full context. He that believeth not shall be damned. So there is a failure to believe results in damnation, right? But a positive statement is given. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. It does not say he that believeth and is not baptized shall be damned. Now, it is important for me to say this at this point, OK? I don't think that the New Testament envisioned that you would have somebody who would come to faith in Christ without subsequently being baptized. Being baptized was a public statement that one was putting his trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, that's not to say... I do believe... I mean, the thief on the cross, for example, right? I mean, certainly he didn't undergo baptism. And I do believe that there are Christians that have not been baptized. But the New Testament expectation is that baptism logically follows... from conversion. So really that is the identifying mark that one has identified himself with Christ. And I do think we have to take seriously what Jesus says in Matthew chapter 10, that if you're not willing to acknowledge me before men, I'm not going to acknowledge you before the Father in heaven. So if one professes faith in Christ and that person is not willing to be baptized, I would have significant questions about whether that person is really trusting in Christ. The rapture, born-again believers are with the upper taker. Are also the young pre-accountability gone up? That's a good question. Scripture does not give us a clear answer to that question. I would say the language that is used of those left behind in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, I mean, it speaks of, in fact, we could look at that, just so I'm not speaking off the top of my head. The language that is used of the world at large during that time, you have in verse 11 in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, for this cause God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned who believe not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. I would suggest that this language suggests a strong degree of intentionality to those that come and are taking the mark of the beast and so forth. And I could see maybe a logical case to be made that children that have not yet reached the age where they can reasonably exercise faith in Christ, that they would also be taken up in the rapture. But again, I don't know that I have a specific clear evidence from scripture that would say yes or no on that question. So I will just have to say I'm leaving that up to the Lord. Okay, second part on this same questioner. Who that are left behind, so I'm guessing this is after the rapture, who that are left behind can be saved? Well, I would say that anybody who hasn't taken the mark of the beast could be saved, in theory, in the sense of the open invitation of the gospel. We do read in Revelation that there is this innumerable multitude that comes to Christ during the tribulation. Now, that passage that I just read, some people have taken that passage to mean that if a person has heard the gospel, before the tribulation period, and then they go into the tribulation period, and they've rejected the gospel before the rapture, that there will not be an opportunity for that person to be saved after the rapture. I don't think that this text really addresses that point. I think you really have to do some gymnastics to get that out of this passage in 2 Thessalonians 2, because there's just nothing that explicitly declares that. I do think there will be a multitude of people that come to Christ after the rapture. Now, I do think there's an urgency with the gospel call. Don't have this mentality, if you're sitting out there without Christ, I would urge you, don't have this mentality that, well, once I see all my friends taken up in the rapture, then I'm going to believe the gospel. I'll know it's all true then. I wouldn't count on that. I would suggest probably the world of that time, we see how the media manipulated people during COVID-19, right? All the narratives the media was able to push. I would not be surprised if there are all kinds of clever narratives to explain why vast numbers of people around the world have disappeared. Satan is creative enough to get people to believe all kinds of different lies. So friend, the time for salvation is now. The time to put your trust in the Lord Jesus Christ is now without delay. I simply can't stress that enough. But as for who will come to Christ during the tribulation, I mean, we do know that initially there will be the 144,000 Jewish witnesses that are referenced in Revelation chapter 7. We do also, again, read in Revelation 7 of this innumerable multitude that comes to Christ. And ultimately, we know that there will be that generation of Jewish people that will see their Messiah and will repent and trust in Him. So there will be multitudes of people that come to Christ during the tribulation. We're down to the last one that I have. Does anybody have any light questions coming in? Maybe it's too long to write out and you just want to ask it. Yeah, you're welcome. If you're brave enough to take the floor. Lonely life with the deacon today. This is a question from the deacon. I have, I often refer before the church when leading singing that an encouragement and exhortation is regarding worship. We come together to worship and the favorite passage of scripture is when Jesus confronts a woman at the well. That whole scenario is just an overwhelming encounter. But once she catches on, once he's told her who she really is, And he said, bring your husband. Let's just leave him with that. And she said, I have no husband. He said, get your husband, bring him here. She said, I have no husband. And Jesus answered her and he said, thou hast well said. And I'm reading, this is in John chapter four, and I'm on verse 17. Thou hast well said, I have no husband. For thou hast had five husbands, and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband. In that says thou truly. If that wouldn't take your breath away, if you were in her place. And I love her words. She sayeth unto him, sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. No kidding, no kidding. But immediately, it turned her to a very serious question. Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and ye say, and he's referring to Jesus, a Jew, ye say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. And Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what. We know what we worship for salvation is of the Jews. And now we're getting to where my question is rooted. But the hour cometh and now is when true worshipers shall worship the father in spirit and in truth. For the father seeketh such to worship him. Get that, the father seeketh such to worship him. God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. And in all honesty, in the years that I've read that, Jesus didn't give a thorough explanation of what that means. What would you, as a teacher, suggest about what it means to worship in spirit and in truth? Yeah, I mean, of course, truth is probably the easier of those to explain. Obviously our worship has to conform to the truth as it's revealed in scripture. So that, I mean, that one is fairly straightforward. I think the expression that probably is a little bit more challenging to us is the in spirit. At that term spirit, it's the Greek word pneuma, and so there's quite a variety of meaning. In theory, it could be saying worshipping in the spirit, though that's probably unlikely here, just given the overall context, since it's already mentioned that God is a spirit. Some have taken this more in the sense of kind of a spirit in the sense of a person's personal attitude in worship, so that there needs to be a real engagement with the heart, so to speak, when one is worshiping, that this is not just, you're just kind of going through motions, you know, that this is just mechanical, that you're doing this in truth. Yes, you're doing it according to the scriptures, but you're also doing this with your faculties engaged. There's an earnestness in this worship. So I suppose, I don't know that I've not, this is another one of those texts that I've not necessarily gone through and done a thorough exegetical treatment, but that's probably the way that I would lean in seeing this. You know, you tend to think when you think of worship, there's kind of a couple of different extremes. You could think of these kinds of services where there's kind of chaos taking place. You've got people running down the aisles and screaming and raising hands and people rolling around on the floor. There's a lot of spirit there. But in many cases, there's not much truth, right? But you can also think of another type of scenario where You know, you have the frozen chosen type of idea. Everybody is kind of, you know, sitting very stiffly. And you have a man that stands up and he preaches this book. He gives the truth. But the singing is not very earnest. The people are not really engaged. There's no life. It's a very dead type of atmosphere. And I think that Jesus' words here, they really bring us to a counterbalance between those two, that we have to have both elements. There needs to be an engagement with the Spirit, that there's a liveliness to this. Of course, in the context here, it's not the specific location, ultimately, that becomes important. Of course, we know that in the Old Testament, Jerusalem was the place that men ought to worship. But now, with the coming of Christ, now we recognize, of course, that God is worshiped by multitude of people in a multitude of places because now the temple resides among his people ye are the temple of God as Paul says in Corinthians so there is not we're not bound by localities but wherever we are we can worship God in spirit and in truth so it is a passage probably I would be open to studying this at greater length and maybe being able to give you a more informed answer Something that comes to mind is when we talk about taking the Lord's table, and there the discerning, and we talk about let a man examine himself, and it's calling us to dig down deep and look at our heart, and we've talked about that today, the heart. And I mean, it's kind of related to that, is take stock of yourself as you're doing this. Are you really worshipping, or what are you doing? Are you following Monkey See, Monkey Do, or what? Sure. No, I think there's a valid element, I think, of bringing that in. Absolutely. Something I just point out as pastors going through this, and this is a second, maybe the third passage, I think the second one tonight, that he said, that's one I really haven't dug down into. Now, as I'm sitting here listening, I'm thinking, is there anything you haven't dug down into? It's all right there. But when he's talking about exegesis, digging down, unearthing, he has learned and been trained, and by the spirit of God, that he's graced with God, He is digging deeper than most of us have any idea how to even know how to do it. I mean, there's tools, techniques, and languages, and thank God for that. That's all I'm saying. And there's many men like him, many men who just labored their lives away studying the Word of God. They don't just give flippant answers. They want to know. And I'm glad we're asking questions tonight that you want to know. Praise the Lord. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you. Very good questions, by the way. All of those were very thoughtful questions. And I appreciate your willingness to really put your heart into those and your minds. And again, even aside from events like this, even when, you know, Even in a moment when we have our meal, if you see me and you want to ask a question then, of course, you're always welcome to do that. I can't guarantee that I have all the answers, but if I don't have an answer, I can look in the scriptures and I can try to give you an answer. So thank you again. Good participation, and I'm really encouraged that you all are thinking carefully. Continue to harbor that Proverbs 2 mentality, to search for wisdom as for hidden treasure. And what Pastor just mentioned, the more we do that, the more we talk with one another and dialogue and toss out questions. Hey, I was looking at this verse and what do you think? Be engaged in the scriptures. It's a great thing. That's what we need to be doing. That's how we edify one another and build one another up. When we don't have an answer, let's go to someone who might have a better shot at it. Praise the Lord. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you. We'll pop off our recording and we'll get on with some singing, I believe.