Share This Episode
The Narrow Path Steve Gregg Logo

The Narrow Path 11/19

The Narrow Path / Steve Gregg
The Truth Network Radio
November 19, 2020 7:00 am

The Narrow Path 11/19

The Narrow Path / Steve Gregg

On-Demand NEW!

This broadcaster has 144 show archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

November 19, 2020 7:00 am

Enjoy this program from Steve Gregg and The Narrow Path Radio.

COVERED TOPICS / TAGS (Click to Search)
The Narrow Path Steve Gregg
In Touch
Charles Stanley
A New Beginning
Greg Laurie
In Touch
Charles Stanley
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg

Welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast my name Steve Greg live for an hour each week. The afternoon taking your calls a few questions about the Bible or about Christianity. Feel free to give me a lot call and will talk about here.

If you have a difference of opinion from the host. You can always call talk about that here also the number to call is 844-484-5737 now when our lives are full so if you don't to you don't don't bother calling right now but if you call in a few minutes.

Usually line will be found to be opened up.

The numbers 844-484-5737 our first caller today is David calling for Eugene, Oregon. Welcome to the narrow path is for calling. Thank you Steve. I'm about two questions for you first is you nonbelievers living today have any more promises as an nonbelievers who lived during the Old Testament times before I Jesus died on the cross. Well, I promises to unbelievers. I actually don't know of any promises made to unbelievers in the Bible. There are some threats made nonbelievers. In some cases, but as far as promises know what what are you thinking of what kind of promises all thank you. I was just thinking, of course, when Jesus was saying how God is kind to the faithful and the unfaithful by having no rainfall on the right of a righteous man, while also following on the field of an unrighteous man, I just didn't know if God views an unbeliever living in 2020 the same way he might've viewed a nonbeliever living in 568 BC right well I don't, I think he judges all men according to their works, and there are some unbelievers who are much more wicked than others and I don't think that we could just say that a nonbeliever stands and assert relation with God for being a nonbeliever. There's many different ways that people are away from God. Some people are away from God seeking God. Other people are away from God because are running from God or hate God. So there's really there be a big difference is that I don't know that actual promises except that if they will repent and believe that they'll be say that's a promise unbelievers, I guess, but it's of course it's a promise that only applies if they become believers. Okay.

Thank you in that leads to my second question, I was listening to a pretty prominent pastor who I trust a lot of the stuff that he says and he made a point about Matthew chapter 25 verse 46 with Jesus said then you know the righteous will go away. The righteous go away to eternal life, but the wicked to eternal punishment, and he said that if we look at hell is not an internal punishment for the wicked, then we can't take that same word used as eternal for eternal life for the for the righteous and and so that we did. Maybe even heaven wouldn't be eternal and I wanted to get your take on that.

Sure it's a very common argument that is raised against any view that denies the eternal torment of view of hell you must be aware there are different views of hell. The traditional view is that hell is a place of eternal ceaseless conscious torment and there are people who believe that the Bible doesn't teach that in that it teaches something else about hell out of there's a lot of scriptures that need to be considered before one could make an intelligent decision about that but those who do believe in a eternal torment view of hell, eternal conscious torment of they will often raise that particular verse because the word ion is which is translated there eternal or everlasting and and is frequently translated that way in the New Testament in English. It is used of life for the, the righteous, and for the punishment of the wicked, so they say will look we got the same adjective here for the life of the righteous which we know to be everlasting. On the one hand, and for the punishment of the wicked which we also must then conclude is everlasting because the word ion is is used in both cases to describe both the argument is, I think it works well for people who don't think very deeply about things or maybe who don't know her and study this very well. I you know it may be a good argument, especially if the view is correct, but it certainly doesn't make the point because the word ion is a are Greek scholars in the evangelical conservative world have given it a variety of different possible meanings. It's true in our Bibles. It is very often translated everlasting or eternal. And because of that people who don't know much about Greek and only read English version say lots of adherence eternal and settles the question, but but that's not necessarily the meaning. The Greek scholars note to hold it can, it can refer to something that's eternal certainly. But the word the word is related to the noun for age ion in the Greek or like eon for us on age and exactly what relationship this adjective has Susan noun at its root is very much disk discussed and an disputed, it has something to do with an agent and many scholars believe that it refers to enduring for an age, something that is described as ion. Yes is something that endures for an age now. How long is in a 12 and age is a very long time. That's is very inexact. If something endures for an age we don't know how long that is, it may not email it may last for 100 years if if that seems like an age. From our perspective or my last for a thousand years are millionaires. It might even last forever. You see the Greek word ion is is used in the Septuagint, which is the Greek Old Testament, translated from the Hebrew Old Testament back before the time of Christ in the word ion and ion is these two words, they are used to translate the Hebrew word alarm in Hebrew. It's old law and when you read the word forever or eternal. And in the Old Testament you're using your reading and English were translate the word along. Now alarm is very much like ion is in that it has something to do with a very long time. In fact, the word alarm comes from a root that means hidden meaning.

The ending is hidden if some if this has an ending. We can't see it from here because it's over the horizon.

Many, many lexicons will indicate that alarming something beyond the horizon of sight out if something is beyond the horizon of sites that is way off, as we often we can see the end of it. And if that is true, it might last forever or might not, because once it leaves our field of vision over the horizon.

We don't know if it goes on eternally or if it ends soon after we just don't know him in the word alarm does not mean everlasting and the word ion is does not mean everlasting particular but both words and one is transferred by the other.

When you translate the Hebrew to the Greek Septuagint. Both of them refer to something related to very long time and age are so and so something can be age enduring and an even and and and and and have no end at all or can be age enduring and have an end at some point way off their and that's the inexactness of that word.

Now there's another set of Greek scholars, among them would be FF Bruce is in my opinion one of the greatest evangelical commentators of the 20th century who have said that the relationship of the word ion is to the word ion or age is not talk about duration, but the nature of its pertaining to an age of the word ion is is related to the word for age, but it's relationship to that word is not entirely clear, doesn't mean it's lasting for an age enduring radar doesn't mean it belongs to that age orders appropriate to that age and and therefore people like FF Bruce and many others who are conservative Christian scholars have said ion is could reasonably be understood to simply mean pertaining to the messianic age which would be perhaps like our same eschatological. It's something that's if we target the eschatological resurrection retirement something that relates to the end and something that relates to that, becoming age and so let's take the test case that you brought up which was a Matthew 2546 it says the righteous will go into Ionia's life, but the wicked to ion his punishment. Okay, so what is I honestly doesn't mean very long-lasting, perhaps even forever. It could mean that and it could mean that even if the last the long-lasting. This is not equal. For example if I say tortoises to live a very long time. It doesn't mean they all live the exact same length of time because a very long time.

Is is not exact. In fact, if you met a tortoise that that was immortal. You could still see it last a very long time.

So real to say that something lasts a long time for for ages or whatever he or you can't see the end of her from here, it could refer to something like God.

For example, that last forever, but it could last.

It could refer to something that doesn't last forever like Jerusalem's gates, which are called everlasting doors or like the mountains, which are called everlasting Hills or like the length of time that a slave will serve his master once he has given up his right to freedom. After seven years and has his ear pierced.

He will serve forever same words so you know the length of time is different, but the same word is used of the man who serves his master for the rest of his lifetime and not be on that is said to do so.

Ionia, Sir Aland, in Hebrew, the gates of Jerusalem last longer than a man's lifetimes, but there also called alarm into the hills. The hills last longer than the gates of Jerusalem, but there also called alarm and God bless Letterman everything is he never ends. And he scuttled up so you can see, the word is inexact and it doesn't really say it doesn't mean everlasting is not the meaning of the word. I don't think any lexicon will support the idea that the only herbal principle are necessary. Meaning is everlasting but it can refer to things that are now let's just say Jesus said the righteous will either going to the life of the messianic age. While the wicked go into the punishment of the missing messages that would be a fair treatment, according to many Greek scholars of that statement it would not tell us how long either of these last the life of the age or the punishment is repaired both pertaining to the age, or if we make the word mean the length of time, then we say these people to very long life and these people want a very long punishment might not be the same length of time and the fact that the same word is used in both would not even give a hint about whether the same now, some says, but if ion is doesn't necessarily mean eternal, and it's the word it's always used.

To target eternal life.

How do we know that the eternal life are going to have is endless. If it doesn't necessary mean that in the Greek well because it's not the only word that used to speak of our life. We we have the Bible speaks our immortality when were raised immortal word immortal only means one thing you can't die and so so we could conclude on other bases that the life of the age is immortal life, but you would not be able to conclude on the same basis that the punishment of the is immortal or everlasting. Thank you very much Steve very very helpful. My pleasure thank you for calling absolutely, governorship all right. Our next caller in line is that Paul from Delray Oaks, California Paul, welcome to the neuropathic for calling you my regard to Luke 22 verses 43 through 44. Darkroom Luke clears refer to this usually hyperbole or cross theologically possible motion extremely emotional person who actually sweat blood well I have. I don't think it's hyperbole or anything like that and I'm no I'm no medical expert, but I have definitely heard at least. Teachers have told me this and I Can't tell you where to look to find the proof of it that there is a condition where a person under extreme stress does have capillaries in their forehead and in the face's articles orders explode or erupt or whatever, but they but it is possible to bleed through your skin and situations of extreme stress. I don't know the medical term for that and I and I would know where to turn. You to find that out. Perhaps some some modern commentators on Luke might contend that information but I've heard it taught that way from people that I trusted course I learned something from them that I don't leave anymore, but but I I've heard it enough from different sources that I like I tend to believe it and I don't see any reason why it could be true, and for that matter. As I read the passage I don't see any reason why Luke would include that feature in it by way of hyperbole. I would think would be a need to, or that of the serrated purpose so I think it literally happens now it says he sweat, as it were great drops of blood.

So some people say well he didn't say he was sweating blood. It says he what he was sweating was like great drops of blood have so I guess maybe there thinking what it's saying is that his actual sweat, which is no different than ordinary sweat was coming down in large droplets falling from him like like he was bleeding but on the other hand, I don't know the drops of blood are particularly known to be large larger than drops of water necessarily or so. I don't really know the comparing sweat to blood would be a difference in your comparison of size.

I think it would have to do more with color and it's probable that when somebody has this condition.

I have a researcher here in the office. My wife and she is look this up. She says that the condition is called heritage process HDR a TID ROSI asked now to know where she found that she finds a great I would know to look for.

She is a gene is called yes she is so is called Herod to dove process again spelled HDR ATI 00 what she's correcting it all okay.

She spelled it wrong for sensors not exactly Jennifer she's very smart it's it's humid to draw since this is not a H with an abscess HCM ATI DRO SIS AHIMA to draw since and I still think she's just for him from that because I wouldn't overlook for the without knowing the name and first place. All right, so that answer question. God bless you both. Thank you talk to people by now.

All right. Our next caller.

Steve from Lakewood, Washington hi Steve, good to hear from you. More more like nobody to be the next president of the United States. Unfortunately, and he said things, but all right not absolute like with someone like you haven't been left eight-month speech about if you look at the last eight months fact checking us in going to and you also said that the quote unquote please speak limited to, the God of religion against homosexual, so he or Congress actually are able to legislate that people like you program can no longer speak against fornication about it and in the church and state. Think like the Christian. The committee or commission for kicking thing.

I think you much wealthier. Okay Steve I think is so the question is, is if it becomes illegal to say true things that the Bible says because it's considered to be hate speech then what will I do if I do tell you this for several years now I've told people around me that I expect the time to come where it will be illegal to tell the truth, especially about people's sexual behaviors and things like that that are to actually quote the Bible will be a crime, perhaps even to read the Bible will be a crime but that probably it will be an issue. It'll probably be an issue of either you know homosexuality are transgender those kinds of things that would be the spark that causes the great fight, what shall we say, I've always known that I could face that problem because people are faced similar things in Canada for some years now I've been aware that I knew I knew were going that direction.

And so it's been in my mind that the time to come where I could actually not only be taken off the of the Arab possibly put in jail for saying things that are true and as I saw an interesting meme that incorporated management hundreds are just saw an interesting may be evidence of something like truth is hate speech to those who hate the truth you know and I think that's pretty much the way it looks that people who don't love the truth. If you tell the truth and you say you're the hater, when in fact they're going to hate the truth I don't hate anybody never have hated anyone but that's I can save me having to say I don't hate anyone. If I say things that are some idiots call hate speech because they think it is well you know the powers that be are not on our side at this point. Although the Supreme Court probably still is. I imagine if that becomes a law, there will be a challenge to and I did. I don't care to be the first challenger of it. But if I was not… I take it enough.

I was prosecuted for saying something that's true and un-hateful went to jail and you know I wouldn't mind arguing or take my case to the Supreme Court, in which case, of course, that law will be overthrown unless unless it happens.

After the left has packed the court and of the pack the court with people who don't believe in free speech. Then, of course, all bets are off. But at the same time. If I were to go to jail for saying the truth I should certainly would not be the first Christian to have done so and, in fact, some Christians have had much worse fates than that for speaking the truth. We just have not been accustomed to now is of course of the president would have no right to tell us that the Christian speech is hate speech and therefore illegal… Not something that a president has the right to do a Congress if it is fully in the hands of leftist might make laws like that. But then again, they cannot stand up to a court challenge.

If there is ever a Supreme Court that it came before who cared about truth and the Constitution, of course, the Constitution, which guarantees not only freedom of speech and freedom of religious expression you would would would condemn any such laws, but whether a court would condemn them or not depends on what kind of a court rehab right now. I'm pretty sure the court we have would allow free speech because the court would have us a majority of the people seated on it. I believe are in favor of the Constitution and really think that they should do their job, which is to interpret by the Constitution.

What is legal and what is not. I think that might be very helpful with my case or anyone else's on this came to this before the Supreme Court right now that the law be overthrown. But that's exactly why the left wants to pack the court as they've made very clear they want to put on for five more justices so that they can. The court ruled by people who don't care about Constitution like to present himself like the like Nancy Pelosi and Micah Kemal Harrison took care of Constitution. They care about power and if they put people in the courts who care about power, then the notes we may lose all or freedom of speech. The amazing thing is they would have the sympathy of about half the country if they did, this can affect which shows how much arming the very fact that the country would elect these people shows that our country has lost sight of the Constitution, or at least lost sight of who it is they're voting for you. I think a lot of people vote along party lines and don't even pay attention to what the people are voting for our advocating, but you're right arming those of us who voted against Biden.

We would be where the people pay attention to people who actually are listening to what they're saying and also have some knowledge of the competition because we're were over 30 years old and and and and we were raised at a time when the Constitution was still considered in this country to be the highest law of the land which is, it is whether it's violated or not. If they violated their and there just criminals because if you violate the law even if you hold office. Your criminal and so to violate the Constitution. Any sitting president org or Congressman or woman who violates concerts is a criminal because they are violating the law of the land and they are not above it that they are under. Furthermore there under the current variant of the people to because this is they are public servants.

They have been elected into an office which serves the public and this would be a government that is, by the people.

That's what makes it different than all the government before state's government was formed and so you know. It's obvious that these people get away with talking this way and get elected anyway because we have a huge number, especially the younger people, but some older people do who simply don't pay attention. They either don't think about the truth along biblical lines or in law constitutional lines.

They might not even know the Constitution says, and they apparently don't know what these candidates said because I can't imagine very many people knowingly wanting to vote into a system discrete totalitarianism if people like totalitarianism, they could move to China or North Korea or Venezuela and and live under if they think it's a good thing that got most of us think still think that's not a good and so I think someone would challenge that if it is passed out. That doesn't mean people will be arrested before challenge, but no time may come when we couldn't even successfully challenge because the court are packed with the conspirators against the country.

Anyway, let me tell you I really think sometime when I have more time listening to the narrow path for another half hour ahead and will take more calls during that half are you listening to the narrow path we are commercial free hour every weekday. No commercials. Nothing for sale just listener supported. You go to our website. The narrow to see how you can support us, which would help I'll be back in 30 seconds stated. Tell your family. Tell your friends tell everyone you know about the Bible radio show that has nothing to do everything to give you the narrow path with Grant when today's radio show in Denver regarding your social media and send a link to the narrow, one can find free time on your teaching blog article verse by verse teachings and archives of the narrowband radio shows and tell them to listen live right here on the radio. Thank you for sharing. Listener supported the narrow path. Greg will come back to the narrow path radio broadcast regular life for another half hour taking your calls.

Questions about the Bible and the Christian faith of a guy to talk to about those. If you have different host very much big let's talk about that number to call is 844-484-5730 7X 844-484-5737 our next caller is Duane from Virginia Duane, welcome to the neuropathic for calling you. Thank you Vicki have a question it's going to write at least on social media on Facebook. It appeared a bit of glowing a group of up questions and maybe this is not new. Certainly you would know you preparing teachers longer than that date so but it just seems like at least that is a growing group of people who say that the Jesus is not God. So oneness and Trinitarian understanding is false, and that Scriptures like God was manifest manifest in the flesh.

First Timothy 316, the subject that they will manifest in the flesh is not the same as God, and the flesh, and then the justification for a job on one the word was made flesh, they'll say what that was.

God was a plan and in the mind of the letter was the thought or plan. And so my question is for you is just is. This understanding, in fact, with John talks about in first John as the spirit of antichrist alloys that going too far. Well, the lances were in first John whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ, the same as antichrist, and it also says in chapter 4 that whoever denies that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

And that's the spirit of antichrist. So there are certain things that people can deny about Christ, and that would qualify them as antichrist. Now one could argue that, you know, one could say why I believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ. I also believe you came in the flesh I just don't believe he was God. Now they said that there technically walking the fine line where you couldn't on the base of those verses say there antichrist you have to decide why are they saying Jesus is not God. Is it because they simply haven't understood the Scriptures properly or is it that they are opposed to the truth about we sometimes don't bear this in mind that when we talk for example to a Jehovah's Witness or Mormon or some cultist who doesn't believe as we do about God, then we we assume all their evil they are innovative they are. The love that they hate the truth and they and their enemies of God and some of these people make maybe the ones who know better within the group could be described that way but some these people they don't know any better, they've just they don't know the Bible. They been they've been shown some Bible verses and been told what they mean by somebody and it's not really what they really mean, but they don't know any different and lots of people. These groups are really, I think people are seeking God and this is evident by the fact that some of them come out of those groups and and continue to serve God so sudden. People in these groups are not all enemies of God are that of the truth. They just are mistaken and we have to make a difference. I think between a person whose seeking to know God properly, but is making a mistake on the one hand, and somebody who's really opposed to Christ. Now there've always been people who deny that Jesus is God directly. They've existed since before the time of the Nicene Council of each of the Aryans denied that Jesus is God and that's what caused advice and counsel.

I think they were misunderstanding the Scripture and it is it's not too hard to misunderstand the Scripture about this because there are's. While there are some statements like the ones you mention which actually do indeed teach that Jesus is God. There are other Scriptures were Jesus distinguishes himself from the father and ends with they don't understand how that works out. So they try to find some way of reinterpreting one group of texts in order to make it fit in their minds.

The other group. There are Scriptures were Jesus is distinguished from the father and there's verses where he's identified with father, some of them are in the same chapter with each other as in first. As in John 14, when Jesus said, you know, the father is in me and the father. If you see me have seen the father and then later in the same chapters as the father is greater than I.

Now, anyone who wants to do the hard work of thinking and studying. I believe can come to a relatively satisfying way to harmonize these passages and that's what trinitarianism does. That's what I do, quite apart from any and all consumer you know some people say one of the Nicene Council gone the other way while they be wrong if they gone the other way and I got I would still study my Bible myself and I think I would still reach the same conclusions I have, even if they hadn't reached the I hope because I actually have been started Bible rather independently of concern about whether degrees with this teacher that teacher this traditional document traditional doctors. I think I would probably come to my same opinions.

If it hadn't really been finally decided, but is now much more common to find a variety of people denying that Jesus is God because of the Internet because anyone can say anything on the social media and they don't have to be experts, they can just people who are strongly opinionated and haven't really studied very well, or do or don't quite understand well what they've studied the real way to understand who Jesus is going to require that we have a pretty thorough grasp of the whole Bible.

And some people do but a lot of people don't.

All they know is that they ran into verse or two and they don't know what to do with it and it doesn't seem to go along with the traditional view they've heard and so they just kinda come up with something that works for them.

But in my opinion if your first the whole Bible, you can find a harmony of all these things because the Bible does not contradict itself about Jesus and in my opinion, to say that Jesus is God in the flesh is the most scriptural way to describe him, and agrees with John chapter 1 the word was God and the Word was made flesh, I really sort logos word, it can mean different things that can mean the thoughts of the logic or the or the or the spoken word can mean different things but one thing we can't make it not mean is what John said. John said the Word was God and the Word became flesh so is already created. The Word was God and that he takes that word makes it flesh in Christ, and we beheld his glory, and he uses language that is very much like the Shekinah glory in the tabernacle, since the Word was made flesh and tabernacle with us, and we beheld his glory well. Israel beheld the glory of Yahweh in the tabernacle and the pillar of cloud which is a theophany it's an appearance of God in a visible form and that's the comparison it that John seems to make with Jesus. Likewise, in first Timothy 533, which you mentioned you.

He was manifest in the flesh. Now the King James is God was manifest in the flesh, which is very helpful to a person who's a Trinitarian but actually the older manuscripts don't say God was manifest versus he was nonetheless what it says he was or God was the truth.

Is it saying that he was manifest. He is somebody who was not originally in the flesh. He is the divine is divine. Paul said he existed in the form of God, and he didn't count his equality with God a thing to be grasped, so he emptied himself and took on the form of a servant in Philippians chapter 2, but in first Timothy chapter 3, he was manifest of the word manifest is a very important word in understand Jesus because God in the Bible throughout the Bible is spoken of as existing everywhere. We can refer to that doctrine as the universal presence of God. God is everywhere is in outer space season. The microscopic world is throughout the world and him we live and move and have our being is everywhere.

Okay, that's the universal presence of God. But then there's another doctrine. The Bible doesn't give this name but we could about the manifest presence of God.

God is everywhere, but he manifests himself not everywhere he manifests himself in a pillar of cloud or pillar of fire. He manifests himself in human form 20 wrestled with Jacob all night or when he met with Abraham's Melchizedek or any other time in the burning bush, God was manifested there and and so God who is everywhere and is universally present is manifestly present. In some places, not all and just as God manifested as a man to wrestled with Jacob all night.

God manifests himself as a man to walk among us, and we beheld his glory, and's know the people who don't understand these concepts. They just don't know what to do with statements of Scripture that some of them seem to point one direction. Some of the another, but frankly, if we understand the whole counsel of God.

The whole whole Scripture and all the examples of God making himself visible and things like that. It suddenly becomes something that's not so quite so hard to do but but you know you can hear all kinds of strange things on the Internet you can hear this program for strange but don't trust anything you hear on the Internet including me you to study about the Scriptures, if you want to hear how I explained the Scriptures on this. I do have lectures at my website under the topic. Knowing God, and there's there's you can see by the names of the lectures that serve what about the Trinity there for about the deity of Christ, and so forth and I do I do my best to harmonize the Scriptures of those lectures. If you go to the narrow and then look under topical lectures, topical lectures and find the knowing God series, then you'll find you'll find lectures that are labeled in ways that you can recognize the title of the subject matter.

All right, they mandate they think the book would made me so shocked at just about the whole thing was that that this particular person will generally agree a lot with multiple screeches on the Princeton things like that but the noise and it is actually up pastor, though I don't ever see the name of the church, but that patents out just shocking the apt all the time that the thing just to just kinda came out of nowhere and then demanded around Duckett while it's been around for a long time insist that the Internet has made it more visible and everything else to have procedure called Wayne thank you Jade thanks – all right or next color is Rod from Hawaii rod welcome to the neuropathic for calling your comments on when we are born again of anointed believers Christian. Are we considered sinners and a year to use as Romans 323 and take it off the thank you okay well okay thank you. Romans 323 does say all have sinned and come short of the glory of God and we could even say about ourselves first. We have sent before we were believers, but we've also seen since were believers. Now I recalled sinners you know I did.

I don't know that we is hard to know how the Bible would advise us about speaking that way.

The Bible very realistic.

We've called we've we've repented of a life of sin we been called to follow Jesus, which is a life of not sinning but living in holiness, obedience, and we have taken up that call so we are now no longer in pursuit of sin and therefore that were in pursuit of Christ in holiness, so to call her so sinners would not be. It certainly wouldn't be as appropriate as it would've been back when we were identified as surfactant. We are actually following sin instead of Christ, we if we if we if we recognize that we have turned from sin, to serve the living and true God, and are seeking to live in holiness and not in sin, then, although we can admit what we do sometime soon we we would see it's not appropriate colors of sinners in the sense that a nonbelievers center and who doesn't live to please God. On the other hand, Paul did say you know this is a faithful saying that Christ died to save sinners, of whom I am chief.

Paul did use the he did use the present tense and so some people say he still considered himself to be a sinner and the chief of sinners at that even though he's an apostle and follower of Christ.

Now that may be. That may be argued from that present tense from not sure that Paul meant it that way.

I think Paul would argue that I am the same person. In a sense, who used to persecute the church. That's me. I'm in that sense, the one who is committed the worst of sins, and I'm the worst sinner but I don't know that he's saying anything about his present living as as a sin. I don't believe he did live as a center. I think that he may be simply referring to the fact that he is the same person that he was in a very real sense that he is continuity sure is a new person to but that's not perhaps the part of the truth that is focusing we are new creation in Christ, but still ice have the same DNA.

I have the same history I have the same crimes. In my past that I had before was a Christian and therefore if that person was the chief of sinners. Well, that's me, and he may be he may not be referring to anything about his own present activities.

I spent I suspect is not so again the Bible doesn't really encourage Christians to call themselves sinners, but Saints, but it also does not encourage us to be arrogant or to pretend that we are without sin. If anyone says he is without sin. He's a liar and the truth is not in so I would just never use the word center to describe myself as my identity unless I was talking to another person says I have a sinner to an army in the sense I'm somebody who commits sin, sometimes it's like calling someone a thief. Have I ever stolen anything will actually happen is younger okay doesn't make me a thief. I guess it does. But I don't steal things now, but if somebody is a career thief and that's what they do regularly, then calling them a thief and calling me a thief would be very different thing and it be very strange.

In fact, for anyone who knows how I live to call me thief because I am not a thief anymore, but I'm the same person who used to do bad things and still still want to do bad things that are still things but that the point is, it's a word that that is flexible and we have to. If we call ourselves by that word. We have made very clear in what sense would mean that.

So the people don't get the wrong impression. Think it was sent.

Same thing is from recall a rebel against God. A sinner. That's how I would wrestle with that question. Thank you. I can from Monrovia, California.

Welcome to the neuropathic for calling Michael yeah Mark verse 35 limited part. Not great. Already the hours wait manuscript on 38. But he said to them, how many mold you have going.

See when they found out they said five then he commanded them to make all to sit down and group green grass or questionnaires, where we were in the group green grass component quite okay my coffee here okay well I don't think a deserted place is necessarily a sandy desert a deserted place might have plenty of rain still be deserted.

I think what he's referring to. They were not in a city they were not in a town where they're not in a civilized area placement course it wasn't deserted while they were there 5000 of them. There are people there but the point is he's describing the location. In contrast to many of the locations were Jesus does miracles, most of them were in cities and towns either in Jerusalem or Capernaum or someplace like that. But this was an area where there wasn't population living there and that's I think what it means by deserted place, as opposed to a populace place many different but I don't think deserted me as a desert like we think everything the desertas cacti sand Gila monsters and stuff like that and it's not suggesting that when it says it was deserted.

Thank you for your call Todd from Idaho. I came to Kane's father was Adam Kathy Adam, why not tell the not not listed as a defendant of Adam Weldon when all the descendents of Adam are not mention the Bible he he and his wife after not well Adam and Eve are born eliminated at the defendant that what to call it that would not. He was not eliminated as a descendent when we have that the line of Adam given in Genesis 5. It follows the line of able but it doesn't ignore other doesn't say that Adam didn't have other children to think it says specifically and he had sons and daughters specifically says that in verse four so Adam had many sons and daughters and the Bible follows the line of of able, not the line of King or any of the other sons or daughters. Likewise, after Chapter 11. It doesn't follow the lives of any of the kids of Noah, except for Abraham and after a while it stops falling all the sons of Abram just follows Isaac and Jacob and so forth. So the genealogies they don't name everybody in every generation was born from someone, but we do know that Cain was born as a son of Adam, because it says in Genesis 41 Adam knew his wife that is have sex with her and she conceived and bore Cain.

Okay, so you can be any clearer. But that's Adam have sex with his wife and she conceived and are capable had lots of cute right there on the defendant.

What not. I think you're not a very good reader of the Bible, but maybe you just have a good reader at all. If you're sensible you'll know this sentence means something very specific. Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain and she said I have gained a man from the Lord not perhaps your us serpent seed advocate who believes that Eve had sex with the serpent and that Cain was the son of the serpent I and I can't imagine that you're coming making this point if you're not in that heresy. That is a heresy and it's very clear why would the woman say I've gained a man from the Lord.

If in fact it come from the devil if she had sex with a snake in and had the child which I got this in the Lord.

Now she's so there's there's not one line in the Bible that would support the idea of the serpent seed doctrine and I know you from northern Idaho and I know there's some strange cults up there that believe that heresy thank you for your call. Okay, let's talk to Bernie for Massachusetts. Welcome to the neuropathic for calling Michael a question, call a couple of days ago.

He asked about the thing that in heaven there is no evil. Yet even found in the heart of Satan. And he gave I believe the applicant 12 (and you said that the one that is no mention of the suffering day. Actually, Jesus Scripture. The Scripture gave us for Ezekiel 28 it says you were perfect in all yours till which iniquity was found in you.

That's the Scripture but but I did say that losers Lucifer is not mentioned in Ezekiel 28 but I also I also said we did talk about Isaiah 1412 for the King James version mentions Lucifer not know modern translation would would use were looser there because the Greek doesn't order to keep the Hebrew doesn't use were looser so I can 12 what happened to out of heaven.

I don't believe that Isaiah 14 or Ezekiel 28. I think either of them talk that Satan is no reference to Satan, and neither of them. Having said that, what would be in the best that you can describe what happened to Satan or even 1/3 of the angels. He you know you got to pull out of heaven. I can get the Bible never mentions 1/3 of the angels flying out of heaven. The idea the idea that 1/3 of the angels fell comes from a single verse in Revelation 12 for which does not say that he met angels falling it says of the of the serpent was the devil Dragon. His tail drew 1/3 of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth and the dragon stood before the woman who is ready to bear give birth to a child now. His tail drew the stars of heaven through the earth now doesn't say the stars of heaven are angels. In fact, the idea the idea of the stars of angels of stars in front of the earth comes from Daniel Revelation has a lot of imagery taken from Daniel course and in Daniel chapter 8 and verse 10. There's a passage that is indisputably about Antiochus epiphanies a character who persecuted the Jews and about 168 BC and it says in Daniel 810 it says it made the little horn, which represents Antiochus grew up to the host of heaven. It cast down some of the host and some of the stars to the ground, and trampled them at this referring to what Antiochus epiphanies that is compared to casting stars to the ground, but actually what Antiochus did. He did do anything to stars or to angels.

He did, he did crush the righteous Jews who opposed him, and later in Daniel chapter 12 in verse three it says then shall the righteous shine as this is the stars are as the firmament, and those who turn many righteous turned righteous will shine as the stars forever son Daniel stars are representative of righteous people and Antiochus epiphanies cast down righteous people in that is trampled on them and in Revelation, it picks up that same image. The devil also cast 1/3 of the stars to the ground out. One could say this refers to angels, but there's nothing in the passage that would suggest it, and if we don't have that, then there's nothing in the Bible it says that 1/3 of the angels felt there are references to angels falling in no second Timothy chapter 2, and I think verse four. Six. I think it mentions the angels fell and also in Jude versus I think this may or may have adverse wrong, but it's in Jude on his one chapter should so should be easy to find, so Jude and second Peter two both refer to angels itself doesn't say anything any proportion of fell so a lot of a lot of what we've heard about Satan having this rebellion in heaven and drawing 1/3 of the angels with him, and being cast out, he became the devil they became the demons that that could've happened, but the Bible doesn't say it happened anywhere and therefore it's strictly a tradition that may be true but I'm not gonna say it didn't happen. I just if it did, were not told all right appreciate your call. God bless you. You listen to the narrow path radio broadcast.

Check me out… Just believe me something to hear here is a waiter. That's not what I've heard, I think is wrong I could be wrong, but you should check it out. I generally don't affirm anything unless I'm pretty sure you're not confined differently in the body. Go ahead and do your research because I don't want anyone to simply believe me I've nothing to gain listening to the narrow path radio broadcast my name Steve Greg and we been doing this for you know what 23 years now and I were listener supported. We have to pay for time on the radio. If you want to write to us. You can write to the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 or go to our website design narrow

You can donate or just take stuff for free. The narrow thanks for joining us.

Let's talk again tomorrow

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime