A: "Theophilus" means "lover of God." Luke addressed his New Testament writings to someone named Theophilus. An early bishop named Theophilus was also known for enlightening the Goths — sort of what yours truly does, don't you think?

Q: What do students call you?

A: "Perfesser."

Q: I'm not ashamed of my faith, but I prefer to discuss it quietly with someone I know, rather than confronting a whole classroom. Is there a place for someone like me?

A: Some are gifted to speak in groups, while others are gifted in friendship evangelism — you may be one of them! Just don't jump to conclusions about which gifts you don't have. Most gifts are like seeds. They need to be nourished by practice in order to attain their maturity and vigor.

Q: My sociology textbook says, "Religion is a matter of faith; sociologists deal with empirical matters, things they can observe or measure. ... Unlike theologians, however, they cannot evaluate the truth of a religion's teachings." How do I respond?

A: If the book means that sociologists have no better insight into the reasons for belief in God than anyone else, it's right. But if it means that Christians have no empirical reasons for faith, it's wrong. Check out the article by philosopher William Lane Craig, "Historical Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Q: A character in your column "Accused!" says, "Oh-h-h, I see now. Throwing Scripture references around the classroom ... was like throwing pearls around a barnyard at feeding time." Would passing out Bible tracts be regarded as "throwing pearls"?

A: We should speak Scripture only to people who are willing to hear and consider it. If Christians station themselves on the corner of a campus boulevard and offer sound Bible tracts to those who are willing to take them, there's no problem. If they throw them through the windows of passing cars, there is.

Q: My friend says there's nothing wrong with smoking weed. If I say it's illegal, he says that's just societal constraints. If I say it's not healthy, he says it's used for medicine, so it must be from God. How do I biblically prove to him that smoking weed is wrong? We're both Christians.

A: Although it's true that God made marijuana, He didn't give it to us for purposes of violating his commandments. Scripture instructs us to be sober, forbids intoxication and directs us to obey the laws. There is an exception for laws which are contrary to God's commands — but not for laws we just happen to dislike! Finally, although marijuana helps treat certain specific conditions, such as glaucoma, it has severe and cumulative side effects, and is apparently useless for other conditions. There is absolutely no basis for using it as a general health tonic. I'm afraid your friend is rationalizing.

Q: The Office Hours column "A Skeptical View of Christianity" says "the Bible includes at least nine tests just for the authenticity of alleged gifts of the Holy Spirit." What are they, and where in the Bible I can read more about them?

A: Here they are. All must be satisfied before you can conclude that a supposed gift is authentic.

Positive Tests

1. Scripture. Does the alleged gift conform to the word of God rather than the outlook of the world? See Acts 17:10-11, Romans 12:2-3, and 1 John 4:1,4-6.

2. Lordship. Does it exalt God, and Him alone? Specifically, does it exalt Jesus as incarnate Christ? See Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 1 Corinthians 12:1-3, and 1 John 4:1-3.

3. Fruits. Does the person who manifests it have Christian speech and character? Matthew 7:15-20 refers to the fruits of the Spirit. Galatians 5:19-24 identifies these fruits as traits of Christian character. Matthew 12:33-37, Luke 6:43-45, James 3:5-12, and also Ecclesiasticus 27:6 (which is in the Apocrypha), single out holy speech as an especially important sign of such character. But Matthew 7:21 warns that holy speech is not the same as superficially pious God-talk.

4. Edification. Does it build up the community of believers? See 1 Corinthians 14:12,26 — but in the context of the entire chapter.

5. Order. Is it under voluntary control and compatible with good order in worship? See 1 Corinthians 14:28, 33, 39-40 — but in the context of the entire chapter.

6. Corroboration. Do those who have mature spiritual discernment and oversee the congregation judge it authentic? See 1 Corinthians 12:10b and 14:29 and Ephesians 4:11-16.

7. Accountability. Does the person manifesting it willingly submit to this testing? See 1 Corinthians 14:36-38.

Negative Tests

1. Sin. Does the supposed gift involve any moral evil, or even the appearance of moral evil? If so, reject it. See Psalm 5:4, Malachi 2:17, 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22, James 1:13, 1 Peter 1:16 (which alludes to Leviticus 11:44-45, 19:2, and 20:7), and 3 John 1:11.

2. Predictive Failure. Has it even once given rise to a prophecy that failed to come true? If so, reject it. See Deuteronomy 18:21-22.

Q: What does sexual purity mean within marriage? Can you step out of line with sex within marriage?

A: I think you're asking, "Is it okay for married couples to do anything whatsoever with each other?" No, even within marriage there is such a thing as stepping out of line.

God invented male and female, sex and marriage, for at least three purposes. One is to unite the couple in a deep, permanent, trusting and self-giving bond. Another is to have children and bring them up to love the Lord. The third is to make the couple a living symbol of the sacrificial love of Christ for the Church and the Church's adoring response.

Purity means that married people may have sex only with each other, and only in ways that honor and celebrate these three purposes. Anything that dishonors them is impure, grieves God and ultimately hurts even the spouses themselves. A few examples are having sex in ways that hurt or humiliate, refusing sex out of spite, making selfishly excessive demands for sex, refusing the gift of children, and pretending that the spouse is someone else.

Q: What was Pontius Pilate hinting when he asked "What is truth?" He thought Jesus was innocent — was he fed up with the unfair Roman judicial process?

A: No one knows for sure what Pontius Pilate meant, but in my opinion he was a philosophical skeptic who despaired of knowing truth and thought that his question was unanswerable. That's why he thought it was such a good way to end the conversation. He handed over Jesus for execution not because the judicial system forced him to, but because he was afraid of what his enemies would say if he let Jesus go (see John 19:12).

Q: A girl friend says that my belief that God is the source of love implies that no one can be good on his own. She feels this dishonors her view that God does not exist. Can you have respect for an opinion you think is dead wrong?

A: By telling your friend about God's truth and love, you are respecting her — in the only way which is truly possible. You're telling her what it is about God and us which makes sense of respecting others. If we weren't made in God's image, we wouldn't owe respect to each other any more than the spider owes respect to the fly. Respect doesn't mean never expressing disagreement.

Q: I disagree the Office Hours column "Can War Be Justified?" Jesus Christ calls his followers to be peacemakers. If we truly want peace, why should we take up arms?

A: Jesus did say we should be peacemakers, but Paul said rulers are appointed by God to bear the sword in order to execute the wrath of God on wrongdoers. If the Bible is true, both teachings are true. We must reconcile them, not choose between them. Remember, too, that there is no political solution to the problem of sin. Not even a justified war could end all wars — but not even refusing to fight could bring a lasting peace.

Q: I was intrigued by the column about war, but it left the biggest question unanswered. Isn't the soldier's place to follow orders — to "render unto Caesar"?

A: Alas, you've quoted only half of what Jesus said. He didn't say "Render unto Caesar," period; he said "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's" (Matthew 22:21). The Bible is full of instances of right and proper disobedience to unjust commands. For example, the Hebrew midwives refused Pharaoh's command to kill all male Hebrew infants, and God rewarded them (Exodus 1). The Three Worthies refused King Nebuchadnezzar's command to worship an idol, and God saved them (Daniel 3). When the Apostles were told by the Sanhedrin to stop preaching about Jesus, they said "We must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). God is above all earthly authorities, and must be obeyed no matter what.

If you have questions you’d like to Ask Theo, send us an email and we'll pass it along to him.