Q. What is the Biblical meaning of speaking in tongues? Is it fruitful? Is it real when I hear people doing it or is it just babel?
Spiritual gifts are for the edification of the church (1 cor 14:12). So any spiritual gift that is given is for the external manifestation of ministry to build the kingdom of God. We are all given spiritual gifts and we should not covet others’ but pray to ask God to reveal our own so that we may serve our part in God’s design.

Ephesians 2:10 “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. “

Gifts are given so that we may complete the work that God has given us. This is why we should not covet others’ gifts, because each part has its own function and eternal end.

Speaking in tongues is a sign for unbelievers not believers (1 cor 14:22). The use of tongues biblically is always applied for the spirit to remove the language barrier between people so that those who do not speak the language may hear and understand the gospel. The perfect example of this is in Acts 2 at Pentecost. Many of the believers were in the upper room and they all started to speak in tongues, the direct effect of them speaking in tongues was that Jews from “every nation under heaven” heard the gospel in their native tongue/language.

Paul gives the tongues rule book in 1 Corinthians 14. First, tongues must be interpreted if it is in a church setting so the edification can come. Paul says in vs. 16, how can i say Amen, if i don’t know what was said. Also if an unbeliever walks into a service and hears the tongues without interpretation he would think everyone is crazy(vs.23). Tongues are not a spiritual aptitude to know that we are believers, we are all given spiritual gifts and it is in the manifestation of the fruits of the Spirit that we know believers, not in a specific gift.

Q. How does the “problem of evil” resolve itself in the Christian faith?  If God created everything, does that mean He also created evil?

When God created the heavens and the earth, everything He made was good (Genesis 1:31).  There was no trace of evil – no shortcoming in anything God had made.

Our first parents, Adam and Eve, enjoyed uninhibited communion with God in the garden He had given to them.  They loved Him of their own volition, and obeyed Him freely.  The Bible does not define exactly how long this continued, but at some point, evil entered this world through the lie of the serpent (Satan) to Eve.  By placing doubt into her mind as to whether God really meant what He said, he convinced her that she would be like God if she were to disobey Him.  She believed him, and ate of the only fruit in the garden which God strictly forbade.  Adam, being at her side, failed to protect her in her moment of temptation, and ate the fruit as well.  At this moment, Genesis tells us “their eyes were opened,” and they made coverings to hide their bodies (Genesis 3:7).

At the heart of the “problem of evil” is the element of human freedom.*  The Bible speaks often about role of human choice in believing and obeying him (Romans 1:18-23), and emphasizes the need for us to make a decision about whether we will follow him.  An objection which is often leveled against Christianity is that God is a cosmic tyrant who says “you do it my way, or no way at all.”  In reality, God has always given us two options: His or our own.  C. S. Lewis wrote that there are two types of people: There are those who kneel before God and say “thy will be done,” and those who refuse to bend their knee to Him, to whom God then says, “very well.  Thy will be done.”  Freedom to choose is a mark of humanness. As God chose to love us before we were born, so we, being made in His image and likeness, also have the choice to love Him. But He will not coerce us, and this is evidenced in the fact that even our first parents had the choice to believe God, or to believe the lie.

The answer then, is that God created everything, including human freedom, and humanity chose to abuse this gift.  Thus He did not create evil, and He is not responsible for evil.  Evil is the result of human beings abusing the gift of free will. And free will, though it carries the capacity to be used for evil, is also the only way in which true love can exist.  If we did not have the freedom to choose evil, then neither would we have the freedom of choosing to truly love.
______________________
*As an aside, “the problem of evil” is often used as an attack on faith.  However, evil is an even bigger problem for the atheist than it is for the Christian.  When we posit that there is real evil, we also assume that there is real good.  But this distinction requires a real, objective moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil.  This moral law must have a source, and that source is God, as it is absurd to think that humanity would ever develope such a universal, innate moral compass by chance.  Thus the problem of evil does more to bolster the claim for God than to dispel it.

Q. How is man able to sin prior to the fall? In the Bible it calls Adam and Eve perfect but then they go and sin, does that mean even in a perfect state man sins? If God is also perfect can he sin?
Human beings are engineered, within this life, with the way we are made at this time, to be able to sin.  Romans 5:12 “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world…”  God created people with the capacity to choose, part of the being “made in the image and likeness of God”.  Most people are very positive about possessing this ability to choose, even if it can get us into trouble.  Which it has.  But the ability to choose is the preferred design for humanity, not a pre-programed ability to always make the correct choice (like a machine, a robot).  So even though Adam and Eve were perfect, they possessed the ability to disobey and become imperfect, because of their humanness.

The biblical solution seems to be, obtain a regenerated spirit (Ephesians 2:1, theologians view our human spirits as the part of us being made alive), achieve a transformed mind (Romans 12:2), and then one day, become privileged with a newly designed body, a resurrected body (1Co 15:42 “So also is the resurrection of the dead.  The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.”)  Having a resurrected body, seems to be the final step in the path to perfection (1Co 15:53).  Practical perfection, not positional perfection which we receive at the moment of salvation (Colossians 2:10 “and you are complete in Him…”  ‘complete’  pleroo  full, complete, perfect)

God is Spirit and does not have a mortal human body like ours (John 4:24), and therefore has never possessed the capacity to sin. When He did become incarnate through Jesus, as Jesus, (1Tim 3:16  “God was manifested in the flesh” NKJV ), Deity dominated and the incarnate God could not and did not sin (Hebrews 4:15 “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin’.).

Q. My husband of 13 years does not love me anymore to the point that he tried to kill me with one of his guns and bruised me up that day in front of our preschooler. On police advice, I filed a protective order against him and 2 weeks later I filed for divorce. I’m scared to stay married to him because I know he hates me. Do I have biblical grounds for divorce, or should I dismiss the filing on my next hearing?
First of all this is a delicate situation and one that requires sensitivity, compassion, and care. No one in their right mind would think that the situation at hand necessitates hanging around. Even if I didn’t know anything about God’s Word, and what it says about specific grounds for divorce, I would still tend to lean towards the side of caution here and tell you that this predicament is one that you or anyone else would want not to continue lingering in.
Biblical Grounds For Divorce
The great news is that the Bible is very clear and direct in stating what the grounds for divorce are. To help you easily remember them, they all start with the letter d. They are death (Romans 7:2-3); disloyalty (Matthew 19:3,9); and desertion (1 Corinthians 7:10-11). In all of these instances as seen in the above passages as well, the Bible supports and sanctions a remarriage.

But there seems to be a fourth reason that the Bible includes as grounds for a divorce. If we read again in 1 Corinthians chapter 7, we see from verses 10 and 11 this presented: “Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord:” (Meaning this was actually the instruction of Jesus while incarnate on earth)  “A wife is not to depart (the Greek word here is the word for divorce) from her husband”. That’s it…that was the teaching and the standard of Jesus. No divorce, sorry wives, no divorce.
What About Danger In The Marriage?
So the question enters, what if he is not unfaithful, and he hasn’t physically abandoned the marriage/family, but he is beating her up daily, or bringing drug dealers home, or pedophiles who are endangering the kids, or he is robbing banks etc…? The point is that there is a serious threat or danger within the marriage. “But even if she does depart (again, the same word: divorce).” What this is saying is that there will be instances for a woman divorcing a husband for a reasonable cause (danger). This is what Jesus is inferring. But there’s a qualifier: “Let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband”

She can divorce because of danger but has to remain unmarried. If he gets his act together, there may be hope for the marriage in the future.  So the wife can get out of the way of danger, but has to remain unmarried.  This qualifier keeps a wife from tossing her husband for a lesser reason (irritations).  Because if she did walk away for a lesser reason, she would not have true Biblical grounds for divorcing her husband.

So, the final analysis is that Jesus leaves room for a wife being able to terminate a marriage if she is any sort of perceived danger.

Q. Many times it is said that God’s love is unconditional…but that is not an actual adjective used in the Bible to describe it. Is His love truly unconditional? And if not, how should it be described?
The New Testament writers possessed a variety of words for love in the Koine Greek language of their period.

For example they had the availability of using storge, a word which represents family love or the love between subjects and their king.  Philia is another word representing love, which was evident within a reciprocal relationship.  Eros was not only a deity in Greek culture, but a word for love, avoided by bible writers.  But word that they choose, agape/agapo/agapao, seemed to be a little less used.  Maybe a little less defined.  So the believers in the first century, began to give this word, through the Holy Spirit, a greater, more advanced, and elevated meeting.

E.g. Romans 5.5 tells us that this love is “poured out” not rationed by God or by His followers.  Romans 8:35 emphasizes, “who shall separate us from the love of Christ”, and then the passage goes on to name a considerable list of things that are unable to separate us from the love of God.

1 Corinthians 13:9 tells us that “agape never fails”.  Definitely setting it apart from other varieties of love. 1 Corinthians 13:13 tells us that it is “greater than faith and hope”. Ephesians 3:19 explains that it “passes knowledge”

But probably the reason why followers of Jesus Christ confine and define this type of love to the idea of being unconditional…is because of the contextual definition provided by the bible itself as it speaks of the concept.

Romans 5:8 “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for all” Ephesians 5:2 “…as Christ also has loved us, and given Himself for us, and offering and a sacrifice…” Ephesians 5:25 “…as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her…”

So it seems evident, that Christ’s love is demonstrated by sacrifice, a personal sacrifice resulting in His own death. This sacrifice was not given conditionally.  Jesus died for the “world”, kosmos…world of people.  He died first, and then extended an invitation.  His sacrifice, this act of love was given unconditionally, but not without qualification. Love must be facilitated through “repentance and faith”, but it is still given. Love is offered first, and that is the point, Jesus died first, without condition.

Q. Matthew 5:17 says “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”-Jesus.  Does that mean that we should be following old testament law?  There is a lot of crazy stuff on the OT like you are supposed to stone your wife if you find out she’s not a virgin on your wedding night Deuteronomy 22:20 and also there is random stuff like “Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.” Leviticus 19:19.  But then of course there are certain old laws that the early church decides no longer matter like eating kosher and circumcision.  How do we know what we can discard and what we must uphold?
The law was (is) very complicated and extensive.  At the time of Jesus it represented over 300 biblical instructions (those recorded in the Torah) and over 300 unwritten and later to be recorded human, traditional, additions called the Talmud which were later placed also into a written record.

The Torah represents certain legal compartments which can be understood as…

• Civil (land measurements and distributions, corporal and capital consequences, civil law things)
• Ceremonial (or religious, Sabbaths Ex 20:8, feasts and festivals Lev 23 etc., purification things, tithes)
• Moral (e.g. most of the 10 commandments, Ex 20 “not murder, not commit adultery, not steal”)

Israel was commanded to observe the Civil, Ceremonial and Moral laws of God to represent their distinction…their uniqueness (Ex 31:13 for example).

Jesus was a Jew, and therefore of course he would keep the law, the only person ever to live on earth who did, perfectly. Additionally, at times Jesus would have to clarify or re-interpret the law (just because Israel knew the law and attempted to observe it, didn’t mean they fully understood it) Jesus says “You have heard” Matt 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43 and then he goes on to clarify. “Have you not read”  Matt 19:4 …and then he reminds them of things they were suppose to know.

The church is not Israel…a reading of the New Testament will support the church’s observance/obedience to the Moral law of the Old Testament, and that, of course, to reveal sons of God, not to produce sons of God.

Galatians 2:16 “knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ”

Q. The Bible claims that man was made from the dirt, which leaves no room for evolution from apes. But what about the rest of the species? Is it possible that Noah had every kind of animal, meaning every kind of animal from which today’s species evolved?
Apologetically, most evangelicals believe in micro evolution (as opposed to macro evolution)…minor variations that have and are happening as the years go by.  The bible probably doesn’t speak to this issue, but does reference the migration of mankind (the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth…who their descendants were…and where they geographically gravitated to, and how they developed ethnically, Genesis 10).

As people transitioned ethnically, animals went through micro transitions as well.  But the basic types of animal life that were created by God from the beginning of human history, was established and recorded in Genesis Chapter 2.

Q. Why were the dinosaurs not in the bible?
Although the bible does not use the specific word “dinosaur”, scripture does reference two unusually huge creatures that fit the description:
Behomoth
Job 40:15-19 “behemoth” (Hebrew: בַּהֲמוֹת bĕhemowth): large, land quadrupeds.

Notice the discription…
Verse 16 “his strength is in his hips”
Verse 17 “He moves his tail like a cedar” (elephant, hippos, etc. have little tails)
Verse 18 “His bones are like beams of bronze”
Verse 19 “He is the first of the ways of God” (Core creation of God, not a mutation?)
Leviathan
Job 41:1, 2 “leviathan” (Hebrew: לִוְיָתָן, livyathan) slithering animal, serpent , dragon, any very large aquatic creature

Notice the description…
Verse 1 “Can you draw out Leviathan with a hook, or snare his tongue with a line which you lower”
Verse 2 “Can you put a reed through his nose, or pierce his jaw with a hook?” (Would the answer be “no” because leviathan is too large?)
Psalm 104:26 “There the ships sail about, that leviathan, which you have made to play there” (Large bodies of water where ships sail…that is where leviathan habitation is)
Isaiah 27:1 “Leviathan that twisted serpent, and he will slaythe reptile that is in the sea”
God’s Greatness On Display
Remember, the bible is not simply an encyclopedia meant to document every detail of every creature and event in history. It is more importantly an historical account of God’s creation, human history, our fall into sin, and God’s rescue mission for his creation through the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. And with everything God created, there is a purpose. Regarding these large creatures mentioned above, the contexts seem to operate around the premise of these creatures reflecting the greatness and competency of God.

Q. There are many inconsistencies between the different gospels.  How do you account for them?  Doesn’t that prove that they are inherently wrong?
Clarifying Terms
First, we have to clarify what is meant by the word “inconsistencies.”  If by this we mean that one Gospel might include details which another omits, then really this question is a non-issue.  Whenever you have multiple reports of a single event, there will always be variances in details, yet the essential facts of the matter (if the witnesses are authentic) remain the same.

In fact, the subtle distinctions within the Gospels amount to simply more evidence for their factuality.  If the Gospels were exactly the same, the claim would be leveled that the writers conspired to produce four uniform books, without independently checking their facts.  Any historian is immediately skeptical when reviewing separate accounts of an event which are exactly the same.

Realistically, all of us understand this.  If two students submit book reviews which address exactly the same sections and passages within the same book (with no variances in perspective or content) the professor will immediately be suspicious that they did not research the material themselves, but instead collaborated.

Consider the conclusion of Harvard Law professor Simon Greenleaf on the variances within the Gospels: “There is enough of a discrepancy to show that there could have been no previous concert among them; and at the same time such substantial agreement as to show that they were all independent narrators of the same great transaction.”*
Contradictions?
The real intent of this question is most likely to bring up alleged “contradictions” within the Gospels.  While the answer to that allegation would be better found in the scores of books and online resources written to address it, it should be noted that supposed “contradictions” in the Gospels (or the entire Bible for that matter) have been raised and refuted for about the last 1,500 years.  By this point, there are no new objections left to raise.  The moderators of this forum invite further questions pertaining to specific passages which might be considered contradictions.

_______________________
*Greenleaf, Simon. The Testimony of the Evangelists. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984).

Q. The Bible is just a collection of letters and documents written by men.  How do we know that what they are writing is true? Does any scientific evidence exist to prove their validity?

Even if the Bible was just a collection of letters and documents that were written by men, it would be one of the most cohesive, unified, and historically accurate literary works ever compiled. The concept of 40 authors compiling information over the course of 1600 years to produce a literary work that is so consistent with itself is a literary wonder. No other book ever written can boast such consistency, comprehensiveness, and accuracy.

The Internal Test

The first step to take is to look at the Bible internally. What does it say about itself? Well, it says that “scripture” is literally God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). It also says that its words never came by the will of man, but by holy men of God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21). It also claims to be perfect (the Law of the Lord is perfect – Psalm 19:7), pure (Your Word is very pure – 119:140), eternal (the Word of the Lord endures forever – Isaiah 40:8), and that God is preserving it (till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled – Matt. 5:18). Through the use of oral tradition (an ancient way of meticulously and carefully passing information along verbally) and manuscripts (written methods), God used holy men to be his stenographers.

Prophecy is also something that is evident in Scripture as well. Many things were written about in the Old Testament that wouldn’t happen for hundreds and sometimes over a thousand years. Some examples to note are: Isaiah 7:14 tells us that “Immanuel” will be born of a virgin. 700 years later, Matthew 3;14 records that event transpiring; Micah 5:2 tells us that Jesus will be born (out of the all the cities in the world) in Bethlehem some 700 years later. Matthew 2:1 once again confirms this fact that Jesus was indeed born in Bethlehem.
The External Test
Next, one should look at external evidence of the Bible. Many people, even though they are presented with sound argumentation regarding the Bible’s internal proof, need more than that.

Historians who lived in Jesus’ day wrote about the events that centered around Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. For example, there are some that dispute the Jewish historian Josephus’ claims regarding Jesus but it is documented that he said in his work The Antiquities of the Jews…
“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
Josephus was born in 37 AD which makes him a contemporary of the early church Apostles. Seeing as though Josephus writes about the events that the entire Bible center around, and that he was an outsider (meaning he did not believe that Jesus was God, the Messiah, or the Son of God) leads one to deduce further that the Biblical authors were on to something and in fact inspired by God to write down what they did.

More external evidence lies in the historical names, dates, and locations of the Biblical stories. For example, Cyrus, the king Persia in the 6th century BC, is a historical figure who is mentioned more than 20 times in Scripture. Isn’t it also an interesting fact that the Bible was written in languages that are still spoken today? Many of the ancient languages are not spoken today but Hebrew and Greek are two that stood the test of time. Probably not a coincidence.
The Bibliographical Test
Finally, one should look at the Bible from a bibliographical stand point.
There are over 20,000 ancient Biblical manuscripts that exist today. No other ancient book can make that claim. In fact, the closest that a book comes to the number of manuscripts is Homer’s Illiad, in which there are 643 copies.

With the Dead Sea Scroll findings in the Qumran caves in the winter of 1946-47, there is more bibliographical evidence than ever before. Manuscripts were found that were dated before the time of Christ…these same manuscripts, such as an entire copy of Isaiah, foretell the coming of Jesus, which validates the prophetic nature of the Great Scroll (as it is called), which (as was alluded to) was written over a hundred years before Jesus even walked the earth.

There is so much more proof that can validate the validity of the Bible but in the end, it is a matter of doing the research ourselves in order to come up with further answers. This answer is not the comprehensive end-all, be-all to why the Bible is true in every way. We encourage you, our readers to do your own research and come to your own conclusions, because we believe in truth. We believe that it has been revealed to mankind. And we believe that it is possible to find clear answers.