MBT (S2:E3): Questions about Discernment



In this episode, Tim and Jovan cover the various questions about discernment… knowing the will of God… trusting our feelings… that kind of stuff.

Chris Nicola joins Tim and Jovan on the podcast!

Monkey Bread Theology is a podcast that addresses listener questions regarding faith, God, the Bible, Christianity, Jesus, and the church.

Go to our website to submit your question – www.monkeybreadtheology.com

A special thank you to the Ministry League for including us! – https://ministryleague.com

Additional Resource

Jovan Payes, Scripture Over FeelingsMaking Disciples Training Program (2017)


MBT (S2:E2 Part 1): Holy Water and Miracles & Gifts in the Modern Day



In this episode, Tim and Jovan cover the topic – “Holy Water and Miracles & Gifts in the modern day.”

An evening with a ministry student part 1 or 2. Thank you for joining us, Xander!

Monkey Bread Theology is a podcast that addresses listener questions regarding faith, God, the Bible, Christianity, Jesus, and the church.

Go to our website to submit your question – www.monkeybreadtheology.com

A special thank you to the Ministry League for including us! – https://ministryleague.com


MBT (S2:E2 Part 2): Why No Musical Instruments in Church of Christ Worship?



In this episode, Tim and Jovan cover the topic – “Why no musical instruments in Church of Christ worship”

An evening with a ministry student, part 2 or 2. Thank you for joining us, Xander!

Monkey Bread Theology is a podcast that addresses listener questions regarding faith, God, the Bible, Christianity, Jesus, and the church.

Go to our website to submit your question – www.monkeybreadtheology.com

A special thank you to the Ministry League for including us! – https://ministryleague.com

Additional Resource

Jovan Payes, An Outline Study on Instrumental Music in Worship (2017)


MBT (S2:E1): Why does God allow Pain & Suffering?



In this episode, Tim and Jovan cover the topic – “Why does God allow Pain & Suffering?”

Plus, a bit about the Mandela Effect.

Monkey Bread Theology is a podcast that addresses listener questions regarding faith, God, the Bible, Christianity, Jesus, and the church.

Go to our website to submit your question – www.monkeybreadtheology.com

A special thank you to the Ministry League for including us! – https://ministryleague.com


Q&A: May Women Teach Baptized Boys?

The following question comes up once and a while in various forms:

Is it permissible for a baptized boy to be taught by a woman in the church’s Bible School program?

Questions like this often emerge from the heart of a concerned Christian parent whose heart wishes to honor the Lord. I pray and hope that the following guide will be helpful to those seeking an answer to this question.

The question has several elements which much be addressed. They will form the headings of this brief response in the following order: (1) what is the prohibition in 1 Timothy 2:12?, and (2) does baptism make a person an adult?

The Prohibition in 1 Timothy 2:12

Paul writes to Timothy,

I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. (English Standard Version)

If left alone an argument may be made to the effect that a woman can never instruct nor be in a position of authority over a man —never. This would, however, be stripping the passage from its larger context and thereby generating a dangerously misleading analysis of these words.

Paul’s prohibition is built upon two lines of reasoning: (1) the order of creation, and (2) the profile of the fall. Observe:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. (1 Tim 2:13–14 ESV).[1]

Although some apply this passage to domestic relationships (husband and wife), or to relationships in the world, such as in business (no women bosses), Paul is specifically addressing the “places” of Christian assemblies. He is not addressing all interactions between women and men, Christian or otherwise.

In verse 8, Paul uses the phrase “in every place” (en panti topō) which is a short hand for “in every place of assembly.”[2] Thus, the focus of Paul’s prohibition has quite a limited application —the Christian assembly. This is further made clear by the mention of the males —as opposed to the women— who are to pray in the assembly (v. 8), and the emphasis on godly women as doers of good works (vv. 9-10) and as active learners in the assembly (vv. 11-15).

Perhaps a point of clarification is in order. Paul does base the “headship/respect” principle for married couples on the order of creation (Eph 5:22–33), but with a different focus. It would be inappropriate to argue —based on 1 Timothy 2:11–15 alone— that women are to be silent at home before their husbands, and contradictory to passages that assume women have administrative authority in their own home (1 Tim 5:14), which also includes martial rights and due consideration from the husband (1 Cor 7:4–5).

Thus, the prohibition in this passage addresses the particular setting of the worship assembly. This must be kept in mind.

Before we move forward. I know there are many genuine believers that would cringe at the notion that there are teaching limitations along gender lines within the church assembly. Yet, while I understand some do believe this instruction to be ad hoc —unique— and therefore, not normative, Paul’s argument is built on his apostolic application of Genesis 2:18-25 and 3:1-14 which refer to the order of creation and the order of the fall.[3]

This should never be confused with an emphasis on the superiority of men and the inferiority of women, both are equal image-bearers of God (Gen 1:27; 2:18).[4]

Is Adulthood Bestowed at Baptism?

This is the heart of the question. The New Testament, in no place that I have found, marks baptism as the transitional act which bestows not only forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38) but also adulthood upon the recipient. If adulthood is bestowed at baptism, then, what of those who are baptized in their 30s or 40s — have these people been simply children up to this point?

I have heard it said before:

If a boy is ready to make the most important decision he will ever make, then should he not be regarded as an adult? Why not?

While the argument appears to have merit, such a view can have disastrous consequences. Let me further my point. Does this also apply to young baptized girls? Are they now adults ready to marry and bear children? Should the newly baptized boy be thrust into church leadership now because he is a “man”? Why not?

This is not New Testament logic on three grounds: (1) it is nowhere mentioned in the NT, (2) baptism is about the “new creation” and forgiveness of sin (Acts 2:38; 2 Cor 5:17), and (3) baptism is about a “new birth” —a sort of spiritual infancy (John 3:3). So the logic of the gospel runs in the opposite direction of the above claim. Baptism is certainly the most important decision a person can ever make, but that by default does not make a person an adult. This is not what the NT teaches. The assertion is an opinion and we must be very careful with opinions.

Still, even in the New Testament world, there were different words used to describe age groups.[5] One key point to observe is that the ancient world held very a different view of children than modern times when it comes to concepts like merit and value, property, rights, etc. Nevertheless, we will survey these words quickly:

  1. Bréphos means “young” and “fruit of the body” and thus refers to small children/childhood (2 Tim 3:15), newborn infants (1 Pet 2:2), and those within the womb (Luke 1:41, 44).
  2. The words país (small, little), paidíon (little child) and paidárion (little boy, John 6:9) are bit interconnected. Paidion may refer to someone not yet 7 (Matt 2:11,13–14), which covers are large span of time; whereas, a child from the ages 7-14 would be called pais (Luke 8:51, 54). The “adolescent” (14-21) was called a meirákion but the word is not used in the NT (2 Macc 7:25).
  3. There is téknon and teknion: These terms generally reflect “origin” (descendent), the early dependent state of children, and those who are figuratively so (téknon: Luke 11:13; Mark 7:27; Phil 2:22). And teknion was a nursery term for “little child” and is often affectionately used for Christians (John 13:33; 1 John 2:12).

Even when Paul speaks to Timothy and speaks of his “youth” (1 Tim 4:12), he is speaking in relative terms. The word (neotes) itself is relative and often associated with a “youthful spirit” and being impetuous[6] and covered a period until the approximate age of 40.[7]

In no instance is there an example from Scripture that a child becomes an adult at the point of baptism, regardless of the important choice they have made.

Finally, let me add the following. Christians are often called upon to become mature or complete (teleios 1 Cor 14:20). Even the church universal is called upon to grow into “mature manhood” (teleios aner) in the Ephesian letter (4:13; cf. Col 1:28, 4:12). What is more to the flavor of NT teaching is that baptism begins a process of spiritual maturity. It is not a commentary on biological maturity (the brain is not fully mature until the mid-twenties), on legal maturity and accountability (nations and cultures differ), nor on the wisdom the church depends on from its mature leaders.

We should never crush the embers of zeal among our youngest believers and disciples. We need to encourage them and give them an environment for their faith to be nurtured and yield its fruit. I would stress, however, that we do not artificially affirm something upon them like adulthood that there is no biblical nor social basis to do. Furthermore, we should not sideline our teaching sisters, many of whom are mothers and grandmothers who administer their own homes with children under their authority (Tit 2:4; 1 Tim 5:14).

So Where Do We Go From Here?

I see no scriptural evidence to remove a young baptized boy from a Bible class taught by a Christian woman simply on the merit that the boy is baptized. But, this does not settle the matter in my view.

The Scriptures do not clearly define a line that distinguishes childhood from adulthood. We often use the phrase, “age of accountability.” Again, there is no general consensus. Is age twenty, based on God’s punishment upon the unbelieving Israelites at the precipice of the Land of Promise (Exod 14:29)? If so, then no youth is accountable before that age and, therefore, baptism would be inappropriate.

Yet, there are plenty of references of young people called by the Lord and brought into His service. Samuel’s call in his early teens to service (1 Sam 3). Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign as king (2 Kings 22:1). Mary was certainly “young” (11-13 years old?) when she conceived Jesus by the power of God while betrothed to Joseph (Luke 1). In her oracle, she acknowledges her inclusion in God’s plan of salvation (Luke 1:49). So, it is not a tidy situation to say young people cannot come into God’s plan.

By and large, the conversion excerpts from the Book of Acts narrate responses from believing adults: (1) the Jews on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), (2) the Samaritan converts (Acts 8), (3) the conversion of Simon the sorcerer (Acts 8), (4) the conversion of the Ethiopian treasurer (Acts 8), (5) the conversion of Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9, 22, 26), (6) the conversion of Cornelius and his household (Acts 10-11), (7) the conversion of Lydia (Acts 16), (8) the conversion of the Philippian jailor (Acts 16), (9) the Athenian converts (Acts 17), (10) the Corinthian converts (Acts 18), and (11) the Ephesian converts (Acts 19).

There may be some wiggle room in the reference to “household” in cases like Acts 11:14 and 16:33-34 to include younger believing members. R. C H. Lenksi, for example, viewed “household” (Grk. oikos) as a reference to Cornelius’ “family” in Acts 11:14 and 16:33-34.[8] In a study on the multi-functional social setting of the household in Luke and Acts, John Elliott notes that the term includes “family and kin,” but the term may also include “personnel and property.”[9] This may then include servants, slaves, and household managers who also responded to the gospel. At any rate, a baptized youth does not an adult member of a Greco-Roman household make.

At the heart of conversion, however, is the need for forgiveness of sin, the capacity for belief and obedience, and commitment towards discipleship. This would exclude the youthfully immature to the infantile of the house. So where do we go from here? Youths who respond to God in baptism are still youths subject to their own parents.

Concluding Thoughts

That being said, we concede that there is tremendous wisdom to maintain consistency in the church’s teaching program. Since there is no “clear-cut” age to gauge adulthood in Scripture, it would seem best for congregations and families to determine for themselves an age where the teaching program of the church exclusively selects male teachers during those transitional years from late middle school through high school. But, it should be clear that this is only a judgment call.

Endnotes

  1. Unless otherwise stated all Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version of The Holy Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).
  2. Everett Ferguson, “Tópos in 1 Timothy 2:8,” ResQ 33.2 (1991): 65–73.
  3. Bruce K. Waltke, “1 Timothy 2:8-15: Unique or Normative?,” Crux 28.1 (March 1992): 22-27. Repr., CBMW News/Journal of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 1.4 (Oct 1996): 4-7.
  4. Bruce K. Waltke and Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 88.
  5. Albrecht Oepke, “pais…,” TDNT 5:636–39.
  6. H. G. Liddell, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon (1888; repr., Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1996), 529.
  7. Wayne Jackson, Before I Die: Paul’s Letters to Timothy and Titus (Stockton, CA: Christian Courier Publications, 2007), 124.
  8. “He was to tell Cornelius what would save both him and his house (family). It was a matter of saving this household.” R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1961), 443. Later, regarding the Philippian jailor and his house: “The jailor and his family were baptized in the ordinary way by an application of water in the name of the Triune God” (Lenski, Acts of the Apostles, 683).
  9. John H. Elliott, “Temple Versus Household in Luke-Acts: A Contrast in Social Institutions,” in The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation, ed. Jerome H. Neyrey (1991; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 225. See also, Jovan Payes “Organizing God’s House in 1-2 Timothy and Titus.”

Q&A: Does God Hear the Prayer of a Non-Christian?

I received a question about prayer and the non-Christian. It asks whether God will or can hear the prayer of a non-Christian. I believe it is a question worth exploring. Here are a few of my thoughts on this blessing.

Prayer

In the Hebrew Bible, a common word translated “prayer” is tephillah (76x). It is found in various contexts of prayer, whether it be the act of prayer, a house of prayer, a prayer on behalf of someone else.[1] It is even used in several of the introductory superscriptions of the Psalms, identifying them specifically as the “prayer of…” David (17, 86, 142), Moses (90), of a certain afflicted (102), and of Habakkuk (3:1).

Prayer is certainly a form of communication lifted up to God, and if the psalms are any indication then prayer may be expressed a wide range of emotions and types. There may be laments expressing frustration and faith, the need for help in the middle of confusion and so forth. There is praise for God faithfulness employing God’s previous saving acts, or his creative powers seen in nature, and extol his wisdom and sovereignty. Prayer even channels our anger and sense of injustice, requesting God to avenge his people by bringing judgment upon their enemies.

That is a wide spectrum of human emotions and desires that may be offered to God. It seems to clear to me that prayer can express to God every part of the human experience —and for the Christian, the Holy Spirit communicates those “groanings” which are “too deep for words” (Romans 8:26, 27).

The question at hand, however, is not the extent of things which humans may pray about but whether God hears the prayer of a non-Christian.

What do We Mean by “Hear”?

I am of the opinion that we need to think of what we mean by God “hearing” our prayers. Hearing is a function of the ear, and an ear hears everything but may choose to focus on a specific sound; thus, some sounds are listened to while others are still heard. This limited analogy simply raises the point that “hearing” is a complex matter.

In Isaiah 59:1–2, the Lord’s distance from his rebellious people is made quite clear:

Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save, or his ear dull, that it cannot hear; but your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear. (English Standard Version)

This clearly suggests that there may be contexts in which “hearing” is not about ability, but about choice. God can elect to forego answering his people’s requests of intervention when facing the consequences of their sins.

One’s lifestyle can affect whether God takes into consideration their prayer. For example, Christian husbands are warned that their behavior toward their wife may in fact “hinder” their prayers (1 Peter 3:7). The warning is significant: “live with your wives in an understanding way.” The sexual overtones are often unnoticed in English translations, but Scot McKnight highlights this:

The order for Christian husbands is one of being considerate—literally, of “living with one’s wife knowledgeably.” The verb synoikeo (“living together”) was especially used for sexual relations between husband and wife (Deut. 22:13; 24:1; 25:5), and that is no doubt the intended meaning here, though obviously not limited to that. The Christian man, Peter says, is neither demanding nor selfish in his sexual and marital relations; he is instead considerate, sensitive, and serving.

Scot McKnight, 1 Peter NIVAC (Zondervan, 1996)[2]

Many Christian husbands ought to pay attention to this verse, not merely because of its impact on “answered prayers.” It reinforces a biblical truth that how we treat others impacts our relationship with God. Here, Peter tells husbands that an authentic and healthy marital sex life (and more) affects our relationship with God.

Furthermore, it seems that God’s people are warned that mistreatment of the “sojourner” (Heb., gēr) will not go unnoticed. Mistreatment of “the pilgrim” will likewise affect their prayers. These were non-Israelites that were not members of the Mosaic covenant but lived in the land among the Israelites semi-assimilated. In Exodus 22:23–24, when the sojourner, widow, fatherless cries out to God due to their mistreatment by Israel, God will “surely hear their cry” and bring wrath upon his people. This suggests the non-Israelite’s prayers will be heard in response to injustice among God’s people.

This small sample seems to underscore that the behavior of God’s people does and will hinder His willingness to give attention to our prayers; and, it seems that God is concerned about the injustice perpetrated by his people and will hear the cries of those who suffer at their hands. The words of James are quite poignant:

You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. (Jas 4:2–3)

What about the Non-Christian?

It was the opinion of E. G. Sewell (1830–1924) that the

Bible teaches very plainly that neither alien prays nor prayers of members will be heard while the one that prays is willingly violating or refusing God’s requirements.[3]

Questions Answered by Lipscomb and Sewell

By “alien” Sewell means the non-Christian.

Sewell argues that God’s people cannot “expect” to be heard when they “turn” from “hearing” God’s word, but his “eyes” and “ears” are attentive to “the righteous” calls of prayer (Proverbs 28:9; cf. 1 Peter 3:12, Psalm 34:15).

The fundamental principle of prayer is found in 1 John 3:22, “whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him.” The argument appears rather strong. After all, the lordship of Jesus, to whom we approach in prayer must be accompanied by “doing” the will of his father (Matthew 7:21).

Thus, Sewell concludes,

No man, in the church or out of it, need expect God to hear and answer his prayer unless he is devoting his heart and life to doing the will of God as revealed in the New Testament.[4]

Questions Answered by Lipscomb and Sewell

When the healed blind man says, “We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him” (John 9:31), he is affirming a general truth about those rebellious souls who are in covenant with God. This is not a statement about all non-Christians.

This perspective is quite sensible, but it does not exclude the non-Christian who is seeking the Lord.

The Case of Cornelius (Acts 10–11)

We need to be very careful to assume what the Bible teaches on prayer. God’s knowledge is infinite, he preemptively knows what we are going to ask of him (Matthew 6:8). But, the quality of our request along with the quality of our relationship with God seems to play into the reception of our prayer (James 4:3).

The case of Cornelius demonstrates that prayer by a devout person may be heard, however.

Luke portrays Cornelius as a “devout” person who “feared God” (Acts 10:2), who developed various expressions of his spiritual development (alms, prayer). On paper, we might say his character alone made his relationship with God impeachable. In fact, God took his prayers into consideration, for the angel said, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God” (10:4b).

David Lipscomb (1831–1917) once said,

When a man believes in God and realizes that he is lost, he cannot help praying. God hears such prayers. There is no sin in such prayers. The danger is in the man relying on such prayers and failing to obey God’s commands in other things. This is the point to be guarded against.[5]

Queries and Answers

I think he is right on point when it comes to evaluating the case of Cornelius. Prayer and devotion only brought Cornelius so far. What is telling from Luke’s account is that he portrays Cornelius as a Gentile who is as close to a Jew as possible, and his character is directly related to his prayers have been acknowledge by God.[6]

What is will no doubt be controversial for many followers of Jesus is the caution against reliance on prayers for conversion experiences as is common in many “Christian” circles. It goes by many names, such as “the Sinner’s prayer. But, as David Platt raises during a discussion on disciple making,

“Should it not concern us that there is no such superstitious prayer in the New Testament?”

David Platt, “Why ‘Accepting Jesus in Your Heart’ is Superstitious & Unbiblical,” VergeNetwork[7]

I believe it should concern us. Luke clearly points out Peter was summoned to Cornelius to tell him things he needed “to hear” (10:22), a “message” through which he would be saved (11:14). In response to the preaching of the gospel, Cornelius and his household were baptized (10:42–48; 11:18). It was this same Peter that affirmed the importance of repentance and baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).

For our purpose, to answer if God hears the prayer of a non-Christian, it seems that there is precedent to see that a non-Christian drawing near to God may have his or her prayers heard. So God heard the prayer of Cornelius before his conversion to Christ, and I believe we should be mindful of the many “Corneliuses” that exist today.

Concluding Thoughts

It would seem then that the answer to the question above depends on what we mean by “hear.” In one sense, God hears everything; however, in another sense, God does appear to be selective. We cannot draw up a formula that “a + b = answered prayers,” but it does appear that a person’s character and covenantal relationship with God are major components to prayer.

Scripture more often than not speaks in terms of those who are in covenant with God, and the implications of whether or not God will hear their prayers. Yet, as demonstrated in the case of Cornelius, being an outsider of the covenant does not mean God will ignore the prayers of the “alien sinner” seeking God’s glory and his salvation. The God of the sparrow is faithful to his creation, and for this, we should be thankful (Matt 10:29-31; Luke 12:6-7).

Endnotes

  1. Brown, Francis, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), 813.
  2. Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, NIVAC (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 186.
  3. David Lipscomb and E. G. Sewell, Questions Answered by Lipscomb and Sewell, ed. M. C. Kurfees (Nashville, TN: McQuiddy, 1921), 494.
  4. Lipscomb and Sewell, Questions Answered, 495.
  5. David Lipscomb, Queries and Answers, ed. J. W. Shepherd (Nashville, TN: McQuiddy, 1910), 341.
  6. C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004), 1:493.
  7. David Platt, “Why ‘Accepting Jesus In Your Heart’ Is Superstitious & Unbiblical,” VergeNetwork (April 11, 2012).