- Posted
In this episode of ‘The Narrow Path,’ host Steve Gregg tackles some deep and introspective questions about faith, serving…
In this episode of The Narrow Path with Steve Gregg, listeners explore a variety of thought-provoking topics, including resolving apparent contradictions in Scripture, the role of Christian nationalism, and interpreting parables like the wheat and the tares. Steve also offers insights on fostering spiritual growth in families, the biblical view on imagination, and engaging with diverse beliefs in Bible studies. Whether addressing theological questions or practical concerns, this episode provides clarity and encouragement for living out the Christian faith authentically.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 11 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour this day as we are almost every weekday. We did have a day off because of New Year this week and a day off because of Christmas last week, but we’re back on our regular daily live schedule. And that’s a schedule where you can call in and ask questions if you have them about the Bible or the Christian faith. We’ll talk about them. You can bring up points that you disagree with the host about. We can talk about those. I’m looking at a very unusual situation. We have no calls waiting. We have about one program out of every hundred, perhaps, we start the show with no calls waiting yet. But that’s an excellent opportunity. For you, because some of you try to call when the lines are full and don’t get through. Almost certainly, if you call right now, you will get through. The number is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. I have a question that was written in to me a while ago, and I usually wait for times like this when we don’t have calls waiting, which isn’t very frequently. to take on the air the questions that people write in. This one comes from Chris, who said, Steve, in 2 Chronicles 22.2, it states that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign. But the previous verse says he reigned after the death of his father Jehoram, who died at age 40. See, 2 Chronicles 21.20, she says, or he or she. This would mean that Jehoram died at age 40, leaving behind a 42-year-old son to reign in his place. How could a 40-year-old man have a son two years older than himself? Well, that is a very good, does provide a serious difficulty. However, it’s less difficult because we have the parallel story also in 2 Kings, in chapter 8. And there, we read that, not that… not that Ahaziah was 42 years when he came to power, but he was 22 years old. Now, in other words, we have two parallel accounts. These parallels in Chronicles and Kings are similar to parallel accounts in Mark or Matthew or Luke, where they’re telling the same story, and the same story is told in different versions. Obviously, One of these two stories is incorrect, and the one that is possible to be correct is the one that says that Ahaziah was actually only 22 years when his father died, and therefore he was born when his father was 18, which isn’t too strange. In some cases, men became kings in Israel when they’re eight years old or very young. Obviously, they didn’t have any children at age eight, but they might easily have children by the time they’re 18. And so that was apparently the case. I think we’d understand that Jehoram was 18 when his son Ahaziah was born. So when Jehoram died at age 40, Ahaziah was 22. Now, if we say, well, then why does it say differently in 2 Chronicles? Well, 2 Chronicles was written later than Kings and is obviously copied later. the story was copied either from Kings or from an earlier version of 2 Chronicles, because we don’t have the original. We don’t have the original autographs in the hands of the authors. And it would seem to me that since the number 22, as the age of Ahaziah at the time he came to power, is older, then the obviously mistaken version that somebody either writing Chronicles or more likely copying a copy of Chronicles accidentally misread 22 as 42. And this is not just an explanation of convenience. It’s actually an explanation of necessity. And it’s not strange because we have many cases in the Old Testament where numbers, statistics and numbers and things like that, are different in our copies than they were in the originals. We know this, for example, because when it’s talking about the chariot horses of Solomon, I believe it’s Chronicles, tells us he had 4,000 chariot horses. And I think it’s Kings that says he had 40,000. Now, obviously, it’s actually, they’re parallel accounts. He either had 40,000 or 4,000. 4,000 is much more realistic, and most scholars believe 4,000 is correct. But the parallel account that said 40,000 obviously is a result of somebody copying the number down wrong. And that’s what happened. You know, the Bible was written at a certain time, and then it was only preserved by people copying it over and over again. And from time to time, a mistake was made in copying. We simply can’t deny that. We have the mistake. glaring right in front of us. Now, some people think that that provides an excuse for not believing the Bible because, oh, it’s changed, you know, through copying. Yeah, well, it’s changed through copying in inconsequential ways. If someone wants to say that a whole story is significantly changed by copying, well, then we have to explain how it was that a copyist made such a huge mistake. It’s not hard to see how a copyist might mistake one number for a similar looking number. It happens all the time, and it’s not surprising at all. But if we want to say that something was changed by copyists that significantly changed the whole message of the story or the meaning of the sentence or something like that, we’d have to explain why would they do that? How could that happen? How could someone mistakenly do that? Making small and insignificant mistakes in copying is not a problem. and not hard to explain how it happens. But to make some significant change where, let’s say, the original taught a certain thing and the copy later taught the opposite thing, well, you’d have to account for that in a way that doesn’t seem very likely to be true. I don’t think we have any significant differences in meaning in the Bible between the copies. I don’t think any major changes have been made that would affect anything of value here. But numbers, statistics, those things are often miscopied. And when they are, sometimes they come up with kind of ridiculous results, like the one you point out, that, you know, this would have Jehoram dying at age 40 and leaving behind a 42-year-old son. Obviously, that’s ridiculous. But because we have, we can see where it came from. It came, it was a copy from an earlier record in 2 Kings, and the earlier record doesn’t have a problem. We can just see that the second account is the result of somebody copying something wrongly. And remember, you know, once an original has been copied… the original is usually left to decay and disappear. And the copy goes on as if it’s the original, and other people make copies of it. So a copy that had a mistake becomes the original for later copies. And so a mistake can be perpetuated through many generations of copying. And that’s obviously what has happened in some cases. But none that would give any alarm to a person who’s interested in knowing what the Bible teaches or how to be obedient to God. So that is a good question, and it’s probably one that needs to be addressed from time to time, so I’m glad you asked it. Let’s talk to Andy from Oroville, California. Andy, welcome.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hey, Steve.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hi.
SPEAKER 04 :
Happy New Year. Hi. I know you’re not a dispensationalist, but do you believe that we are living in the age of grace?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, you certainly don’t have to be a dispensationalist to believe we’re living in the age of grace if we mean by that the gospel age.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, so my question is, can tares be saved in this age? Can who be saved? Tares, you know, like the wheat and the tares, or the tares just, yeah.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, I believe anybody can be saved if they’ll turn to God. The wheat and the tares is an image that’s only found in one passage in the Bible, which is the parable that Jesus told of the wheat and the tares. And he described the wheat as the children of the kingdom and the tares as the children of the devil. Now, if we’re going to take the details of the parable in a strict literalness, then no, tares will never become wheat and wheat will never become tares. But, of course, the point of the parable is not to say that the children of the devil can never become children of God or that the children of God can never become children of the devil. It’s pointing out that the field is full of both, and it is inadvisable to try to root out the one prematurely because you might root out some of the other. That’s the point. A man sowed wheat in his field. An enemy sowed tares in the field at night. They began to grow together. They looked a lot alike at the beginning, though as they reached maturity, they would look more different from each other. It would be easier to distinguish the wheat from the tares. The tares were of no value and had to be eliminated from the field, but they didn’t want to do that prematurely because if the servants were attempting to remove all the tares in the early stages of growth, they might mistakenly remove some of the good wheat, which they didn’t want to remove. So the owner said, well, let them grow. Let them grow to maturity, and then it would be obvious which is which. Then we’ll go through and remove the tares.
SPEAKER 04 :
So when Jesus was talking to Pharisees, and he’s saying, you know, woe to you, Pharisees, and he says that they’re of their father, the devil, because the Pharisees have turned and accepted Jesus and been saved as well? Yes, yes, and some did.
SPEAKER 11 :
Some did. Yeah, there were Pharisees. In the book of Acts, there are Pharisees that turned to Christ, including Saul of Tarsus.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, yeah, right. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. All right.
SPEAKER 11 :
That’s good. Good talk. Thanks for your call. Thanks.
SPEAKER 04 :
Bye.
SPEAKER 11 :
Bye. Okay, we’re going to talk next to George from Northern California. Got a lot of California calls and some Arizona calls on the board here. And if you’d like to call, you can do so right now at the number 844-484-5737. George, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hey, Steve. Thanks for taking my call. I got a question. You know, in politics, obviously, we had, you know, many years where it was kind of the liberals were large and in charge. And now we’re seeing a swing to where the Republicans are getting in, and we’re obviously seeing more conservative elements taking the stand. You know, you’ve heard, you know, slogans like Make America Pray Again. You’ve heard about Bibles in Schools. You’ve heard about the Christian nationalists. I’m sure you’ve followed some of the things that they’re saying. And, you know, what are your thoughts on that? Do you think that America is heading towards kind of like a Christian revival?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, you know… I have heard the term Christian nationalist, to be sure. I’m not entirely clear what that means. If it means a person who is a nationalist, that is to say they believe that in international foreign policy, a nation should put the interests of their own people first, I think that’s probably a reasonable thing. I think that’s why God gives rulers to nations is to enforce justice and protection and so forth for the people that they rule. So it would seem that the leaders of a nation have a first priority to make sure that their policies are good for the people that they are serving and that they are ruling. Now, that doesn’t eliminate the duty or at least the opportunity of to make policies that are also good for other nations. You know, the idea America first has been prominent during the last few years in electoral politics. And, you know, I don’t believe that America is first in God’s sight. But I think in the sight or in the policies of those who govern America, they should be looking to the well-being of the American people that elected them First, and that would be true of every nation. It doesn’t mean America is a better nation than some other in God’s sight. It just means that every nation, its government, should look out for its people first. And then insofar as they can reach out to others and do good to others, then they should. Now, that’s what nationalism is, as I would use the term. Now, a lot of people, when they think of nationalism, they think of Nazis and things like that, which is, to my mind, not a reasonable association. Sure, the Nazis were nationalists, but so is any nation that defends its borders against invasion from other people, for example. or that makes sure that its people have the freedoms and opportunities that the country affords before foreigners have those in our country. So to put the interests of the American people first is a reasonable thing for the American government to do. But this is not a particularly Christian thing to do. It’s just an honest thing to do when people are, run for office, they promise to do that very thing. And that’s why they get elected. So people who are honest should do what they promise to do. And that will usually mean meeting the needs as much as possible of their own people first. Now, that’s not specifically Christian, though Christians should be honest. So being honest is consistent with Christianity. I could be a nationalist in that philosophical sense that I just described. And I can also be a Christian. But does that make me a Christian nationalist? I don’t think that’s what the term means. I think the term Christian nationalist means something like having a nation that somehow enforces Christian ideas on its populace. Now, if that’s what Christian nationalism means, I don’t believe in that, only because I don’t believe anyone should enforce Christian ideas on anybody. But when I say Christian ideas, I mean specifically Christian ideas. In other words… No government should say, okay, from now on, everyone has to tithe to the church. Although, frankly, European governments have done that for centuries, whether they’re Catholic or Lutheran or whatever. I mean, the people are taxed as a tithe to the churches, or have been. We don’t have a national church here in America, so I don’t think that should be done. I don’t think there should be any law made that people have to go to church or have to believe in Jesus. God has left that to be a voluntary act. And only because it is voluntary doesn’t make any difference with God. If people were forced to do it, then it would have no value in terms of authenticity of conversion. I would say no nation should make laws enforcing Christianity per se, though I think every nation should make laws that are just and that are moral and good because even non-Christians are benefited from a just society and are expected to be just. I mean, every nation believes there’s such a thing as justice, even though many countries don’t mind violating it in their governance. Everyone knows what justice is. This is not a strictly Christian value, though it’s a very high priority with Christians. So it’s easy to sort of see kind of some kind of slush between the two, between American interests and Christian principle. And that’s largely because Western civilization has, from very early centuries, been infiltrated and affected and shaped by Christian principles. I’m not a Christian nationalist if it means that I think this nation is a Christian nation. I know better than that. I’m not a Christian nationalist if that means that I believe we should use the force of law to make people be Christians. I don’t think you can do that. I don’t think people can be made to be Christians. So if that’s what Christian nationalism means, no. If it means that as a Christian, I have certain ideas of justice and righteousness that should characterize every nation, including America, then I would like to see America be one of those nations that observes those principles. Is that Christian nationalism? If so, then I guess that’s what I am. But I would never use that term for myself. I’m not even sure why that term would be used. I don’t think Christianity is political in the first instance. But I think that any worldview has its own morality that it adopts. And I think Christian morality is the truest morality. And I think that every nation, America as well, should govern and legislate according to those rules of morality. That’s not the same thing. For example, when we say, I don’t believe it should be legal to abort babies. Of course I don’t. I mean, it should never be legal to murder people. And that’s true whether it’s a pagan nation or a Christian nation. Murdering people isn’t evil. and therefore should always be illegal. This is not the imposition of a religious conviction. This is not the imposition of a Christianity on a secular nation. This is simply imposition of protection of human life, which every nation should have laws that do that. So sometimes people mistakenly think that because we stand against abortion, for example, which usually is a plank in the platform on the conservative side, And people who follow the Bible do so. They do support the abolition of abortion. That’s only because we really believe that abortion is an act that has innocent victims. And I don’t believe there should be any law in any land that allows one person to victimize another person. That’s not justice. And I think justice is the goal. So I’m not a Christian nationalist, but I’m a Christian in favor of justice. And I do believe that in a country where we have the power to influence policy, which is not the case in every country that’s existed on earth, but in ours we can, I think we should influence it toward justice. I can’t think of any reason to call that Christian nationalism, but if that’s what someone has in mind, then that’s what I am. But I think… that those who use the term Christian nationalism must mean something else than that, because I can’t imagine. I’m just a Christian. You know, I’m just Christian. You know, I’m not a Christian national. I’m just a Christian. Do I believe in nationalism? Well, if that means that a country needs to look to the interests of its people before it penalizes its people to look out for the interests of other people outside, I guess I’m a nationalist in that sense. So it’s, you know, it’s a vague term to me. It’s always been a vague term to me when I’ve heard it. I’ve never quite understood what it meant. But I hope that clarifies where I’m at anyway. with you. Let’s talk to Michael from Englewood, California. Michael, welcome.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yes. I have a possible two-part question, depending on how you answer the first one. I’m wondering why does Matthew 6.12 say, For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, but Luke 11 doesn’t say that.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, Luke 11 doesn’t say that because it’s not in the Greek manuscripts of Luke. It’s not even in all the… I don’t think it’s in all the Greek manuscripts of Matthew, but it’s in some of them. It’s sort of a tag at the end of the Lord’s Prayer. It’s not even a prayer per se. It’s more of an… statement of faith. You know, when we pray, we’re putting up petitions to God. Your kingdom come, your will be done, give us this day our daily bread, forgive us our debts, you know, lead us not into temptation. These are things we’re asking God for. At the end of Matthew’s version, in some manuscripts, it adds, for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, which actually is mostly a borrowing of wording from something David prayed In Chronicles, in 1 Chronicles, there’s a prayer that David prayed that had essentially that line in it. But some manuscripts of Matthew do not have that line at the end of the prayer, and none of the manuscripts of Luke have it, which raises serious questions whether Jesus really included it. Or if he did, apparently Luke didn’t think it was essential to include it, but some manuscripts of Matthew didn’t either. I think it’s very probable, I can’t answer definitively, I think it’s very probable that that was not originally part of the prayer. even as Luke would suggest in some manuscripts of Matthew. But the reason some manuscripts of Matthew came to have it is perhaps some scribe who is copying Matthew thought, well, this prayer kind of just doesn’t conclude. It just kind of leaves you hanging. There should be some kind of an ending added on. So they took some words from one of David’s prayers and stuck it on there. Now, I don’t really… I don’t really see that as a problem. It’s a problem to people who have a certain view of the Bible, that everything has to be exactly the way it was when it was first written. Of course, that would be desirable. I would wish it were, but it’s not. So we need to say, okay, here’s a textual difference in Matthew, a variation in the manuscripts. Does it matter? It doesn’t matter whether Jesus had added that or not. I don’t know that it does. Not enough to me to alarm me. But that’s why it’s found in some translations of Matthew’s version in Matthew 6, but not found in Luke.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, so then that does kind of lead me to the second part, since Matthew changes. What about when it says change not or don’t change one jot or tittle? That’s where I think it’s problematic.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, I don’t know of anything that says don’t change one jot or tittle. In Matthew 5, Jesus did say not one tittle of the law will pass before all is fulfilled. He wasn’t talking about the writing down of the manuscripts of the Bible when he talked about not one jot or tittle of the past. He’s not saying that some jot or tittle that was written down in one manuscript will not cease to be in some later manuscript. That’s not what he’s saying. He’s saying the whole law as a system of pleasing God. will not change in any way until the new system has come through the fulfilling of the old. The new system was the new covenant. The old was the old covenant. And he’s saying until the new covenant comes and fulfills the old covenant, then not one thing will change in the old covenant. He doesn’t mean it won’t, you know, what’s written down won’t change. Um, He’s saying that the validity of the law won’t change. It’s still in force until. And I believe, of course, it’s not in force now because of the new covenant. But Jesus was talking several years before the new covenant came to Jewish people and saying, don’t think I’ve come to destroy the law. The whole law is going to stay in force until it’s fulfilled. But he said he came to fulfill it. He said, I did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. And so we have to assume that since he came to do that, that’s what he did. And so those jots and tittles are no longer relevant to those seeking the will of God in terms of how he wants them to live. We don’t have to consult the law of Moses. We can just consult the teachings of Christ about that. So that’s what that’s talking about. Now, it is true that the Bible does say not to add to the word of God or subtract from it. It says that in Proverbs 30. Moses said that in Deuteronomy about the law. Even Revelation says that about the book of Revelation. From time to time, some book like Deuteronomy or Revelation will say, okay, this is complete now. Don’t change it. Don’t add or subtract from this. It doesn’t mean no other books can be written. Certainly, there’s no problem that other books of the Bible have been written after Deuteronomy. Okay. And as far as I know, I think there were some written after Revelation. I think the Gospel of John and the Epistles of John give some evidence of having been written after Revelation. So it’s not saying don’t add anything to the Bible, like don’t write any more books of the Bible. It’s just saying this book, Deuteronomy, this book, Revelation, whatever, it’s complete. Don’t change it. Don’t modify it. It’s as it should be. Now, frankly, even though it says that in Revelation, many manuscript copyists did change things. The manuscript evidence for Revelation is the most shoddy and inconsistent of any book of the Bible. There’s a lot of variations that have come into the manuscripts of Revelation. But they weren’t supposed to. Basically, the command was not to do that. Hey, I appreciate your call. I don’t have any time before the break. We have another half hour coming up, though, so don’t go away. If you’re listening to The Narrow Path, our website is thenarrowpath.com. I’ll be back in 30 seconds, so stay tuned.
SPEAKER 02 :
Take the narrow path with you everywhere on your phone or other device by downloading our app from the App Store or from Google Play. You can listen to the radio broadcasts live or later from the app, as well as many other lectures posted at our website. Search for the app by typing the same name as the website, the narrow path, and enjoy the learning experience. It’s rare to get such good stuff for free these days.
SPEAKER 11 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for another half hour taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or you’d like to call to disagree with the host, we’d be glad to hear from you. The number to call is 844- Our next caller today is JC from Chandler, Arizona. Hi, JC. Welcome.
SPEAKER 03 :
Hi. Good afternoon, Steve. Your website and your radio show are such a blessing. It’s such a great resource. But the treat for me is seeing you in person. And I was fortunate enough to see you when you came to Arizona last year in Gilbert when Larry and his wife put that great dinner on. Do you have any plans on coming to Arizona again this year?
SPEAKER 11 :
You know, 2025 at this point is fairly open. I have not fully scheduled, haven’t even very thoroughly scheduled at all. I have about three trips scheduled this year. The rest is open. I’d be glad to come back. I usually come to Arizona about once a year. but we don’t have anything lined up. So what usually happens is somebody invites me for something, and once we know the date they want me, we let the news out that I’m going to come, and then other people schedule things around my presence there already. So usually it takes one person setting up a meeting or something for me, and then once that’s on the calendar, the rest, typically a week’s worth of meetings, typically fill in by themselves in a way.
SPEAKER 03 :
Outstanding. Yeah. Well, see if I can’t stoke the fire and see if we can’t get that going, because it is such a treat to see you teach in person. God bless you, Steve. What you do is just a treat. Thank you.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, thank you. Is that it?
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s it. That’s it. Happy New Year, brother.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay. Okay, JC. Thanks for calling. Bye now. Interestingly, he was from Arizona, and so are our next two callers. We don’t usually get so many callers from Arizona in one show, but this is just the way it’s worked out. Brock from Scottsdale, Arizona. Welcome.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hey, Steve. How’s it going? Can you hear me okay?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes, sir.
SPEAKER 09 :
So I just wanted to ask, as a follower of Christ, Living in a household with family who I want to kind of experience Christ like I do, what is the best way to go about trying to lead them in a new direction? I feel like by my actions and what I tell them about Jesus, they’re intrigued and I can tell they’re open to taking a step of faith. I just don’t want to press the issue too hard and turn them away. So is that something that I should just pray about to God and let him introduce himself to them in his own time?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, are you, what’s your position? Are you the father in the household? Are you a son in the household?
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, I’m a son living with, I’m only, I’m 21 years old, 22 actually. I’m living with my parents and my brother. And they don’t know the Lord or they’re apathetic? They do. So, I mean, we go to church and they believe in Jesus, but I feel like It’s kind of just, you know, go to church, say you believe in God, and I kind of just want it to be something more in their lives where they’re taking up their Bible every day, praying every day, kind of just relying on God to give them answers in their life, just kind of submitting more in that way.
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, my wife just got up from her seat and walked over here and pointed out to me my book, Empire of the Risen Son, as if to suggest that. And I actually was kind of thinking that anyway. I don’t spend much time on the air trying to promote my book, but I do think, because of the mail I get and the emails I get, I do think that these books I wrote about the kingdom of God have helped a number of Christians make a transition from, I don’t know, a more shallow understanding of what it means to be a Christian or maybe even a more apathetic approach to it. The books are designed to… stir people up with a vision for the kingdom of God, which most people, if they’re Christian of any kind, when they learn about the kingdom, it does excite them. And are you aware of that book, Empire of the Risen Son?
SPEAKER 09 :
I’m not now, but I’ll definitely check it out. I appreciate it.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, well, there’s two books, book one and book two. And you can get them as book one and book two, or you can get them combined in a single volume. It’s available both ways. Now, If you don’t want to buy them, I don’t blame you because they’re not cheap. I think if you buy the two-volume work, I think it’s going to cost you something, maybe $40 or something from Amazon. But the audiobooks for these books are free at our website if you go to thenarrowpath.com. and click on the tab that says Books, you’ll see those two books, and you can just click on the audiobook and listen to them without charge at all. Now, if they prefer audiobooks, you might turn them on to that. If they’re more likely to read, you might want to pick up the hardbound book. I really do think… I mean, I do not spend any time selling my books. Frankly, I don’t sell them at all. If you asked to buy one from me, you couldn’t. I don’t sell them. But you can get them from Amazon or places like that. And I don’t promote my books very often on the air. But when you raise this issue, how do you get people who are kind of nominal Christians to be more serious about the things of God? I would say I would recommend these books. And, you know, if they prefer to listen to things, they can either listen to the audiobooks or even my lecture series on the Kingdom of God. I just think people who are nominal Christians… Somewhat apathetic, perhaps, but not totally disengaged. For them to get to understand the kingdom of God is what caused them to turn a corner in their Christian life in many cases. And that’s what these books are. I also have a lecture series on the subject. I would recommend that topic. And, yeah, if you want to get the physical books, again, you can’t buy them from me, but you can go to Amazon. Just look up my name. The books are called Empire of the Risen Son, Book 1. and Empire of the Risen Sun book, too. And I said you can get them separately or combined in one volume.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, thank you, Steve. I really appreciate it.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, and continue praying for them, too, because I don’t want to suggest that just giving someone a book is going to give them a spiritual revival. You know, you need God to work in their hearts. So, as you suggested, praying for them and, you know, putting good materials in their hands or whatever is probably the best thing I know to recommend.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, yeah, thank you, Steve. I’ll definitely check those out and keep praying, and I appreciate it. Thank you.
SPEAKER 11 :
All right, Brock, thanks for your call.
SPEAKER 09 :
Take care, Steve.
SPEAKER 11 :
Good talking to you. Well, I said we have another caller from Arizona, and we did, but that person has dropped off a line, so we’re now going to talk to Brandon from Linwood, Washington. Brandon, welcome.
SPEAKER 01 :
Good afternoon, sir. My question is about imagination and the purpose that it serves in life. In Romans 121, it talks about they become vain in their imaginations. 2 Corinthians 10 is casting down imaginations. Psalms 119, I hate vain thoughts. But I feel like creation and the whole redemptive story is like a picture of the imaginative genius of God. And what we spoke before, I’ve kind of come from an occult background, and I have all these… Things in my head I’ve learned about, like manifestation and using your imagination as sort of a catalyst for life change and, you know, visualization and stuff like that. And I’m just wondering if you have any insight on what purpose imagination serves, because I don’t see anything positive about it in the Bible. Yeah.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, well, I mean, the Bible does say some negative things about fallen man’s imagination. Although the passage you mentioned, 2 Corinthians 10, where it says, casting down imaginations, most modern translations think the better translation for the word there is arguments. Most translations say casting down arguments, though the King James said casting down imaginations. You know, it does say in Genesis chapter 3 that God saw that wickedness was great on the earth and the thoughts and imaginations of men’s hearts were only evil continually. I’m not sure exactly what the range of meaning is of imagination, even in English, and even less so do I know in Greek or Hebrew what the range is, but I do know that in the occult, the imagination is thought to have power. As you said, visualizing things, manifesting things, manifesting something in the universal provided because you can imagine it and believe it. These ideas, as I say, and as you said, are from the occult. And they have more to do with imputing a power concept. positive thinking or power of thought. If you can imagine it, you can make it happen. The Bible doesn’t teach anything like that. The Bible teaches that we don’t even make things happen by praying. But if we’re to be involved in major influence on powers beyond our reach, prayer is the way that we’re to be doing it, not simply by imagination. Prayer is looks to God and actually surrenders to his will because we pray, not my will but yours be done, as Jesus did, or even as the Lord’s Prayer, your kingdom come, your will be done. We submit our requests to God, Paul said, and then we leave them in God’s hands to perform them if that’s what he sees best or to veto them if he’s got a better idea. We’re not manipulating things by prayer. We’re simply coming to our Father as children praying, with a request, hoping that it might be a good request in his eyes and that he would do it, knowing that he will if it’s a good thing. No good thing will he withhold from those who walk uprightly. The Bible says twice in the Psalms. But there are things that we think are good that God doesn’t, and so when we pray for them, we pray obviously for what we think is good, and then we trust that God, who knows better than we, Whether it’s good or not, we’ll respond and do the good thing, even if something else is better than what we’re suggesting, that he’ll do the better thing. Now, imagination, using imagination as some kind of a power to influence things, is more leaving God out of the picture. I’ve heard people say, I believe in the power of prayer. Well, no. I guess I could say that. I’d rather say I believe in the power of God, and prayer is the way that we make our requests known to God, but it’s still God who’s going to do things. I’m not doing something to manipulate the universe by praying. And same thing with faith. Some people think, I think that faith, you know, you can change the world through faith. Well, it depends on what you mean by that, but certainly the Bible says, you know, you can move mountains if you have faith, but in the Bible, faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. So, Faith isn’t just optimism. It’s not just positive thinking. It’s not just strongly imagining and holding something in your imagination until it manifests in reality. Faith is believing what God says. Faith comes by hearing the word of God and then holding to that with complete persuasion and confidence. But prayer is the way that we activate that faith. That is, I believe that God… you know, answers prayers when he sees fit. And I believe this is a good thing according to what I know of his will. So I’m going to now present it to him. I’m going to put that on his desk in his inbox and see what he thinks of it. And if he likes it, I believe he’s going to do it. That’s what prayer is. But again, the occult idea, all occult practices, whether magic or witchcraft or whatever, or other kinds of occult things, They’re always, you know, you are in power. You’re the one making the determination. God is left out of the loop. the magician or the witch, they’re going to make things happen by their procedures, their methods, their incantations. That’s them at the helm. That’s them in charge of supernatural reality. And that’s how the occult is, no matter what branch of it is. It’s giving you power through certain procedures. Whereas in the Bible, we’re not supposed to be concerned about our having power God’s strength is made perfect in our weakness, so we’re quite glad to step down and let God have his way, which is even like saying what Jesus did, not my will, but yours be done, he said. And that was about a very consequential matter of Jesus being crucified or not, which Jesus had some preferences about, actually, that that cup might pass from him. But still leaving it in God’s hands is exactly what Christianity is. It’s surrender to God. It’s not trying to find ways to manipulate God or to manipulate the powers or the universe or anything like that. So imagination, if it’s seen in an occult sense of something that kind of gives you a handle on controlling reality by imagining it, that’s obviously not a biblical idea. Now, when the Bible talks about the corruption of people’s imaginations, I think they were always imagining things that were corrupt. I mean, when Jesus said, if a man looks at a woman to lust after her, he commits adultery with her in his heart. Well, that person is imagining something very corrupt and often carries it out, too. So, I mean, people’s minds will be filled with something, including their thoughts about the future, their plans. what they imagine they will do later today or tomorrow or in the next ten years. You hold something in your imagination because you don’t know it to be true yet that such and such things will happen. There’s nothing evil about that. That’s just part of the mental equipment that comes with being human. If we didn’t have any imagination, we couldn’t create. We couldn’t write stories. We couldn’t draw pictures. We couldn’t write songs. We wouldn’t, you know, that’s part of our imagination, doing things that can be good or not. I think imagination is just like intellect itself. It can be used for good. It can be used for evil. The times when the imagination is spoken of negatively in the Bible, on those occasions, it’s talking about when people are employing their imagination toward evil ends. But it’s not suggesting that imagination itself is always that way. But then again, you’ve got to be careful about attributing some kind of occult powers to the imagination. I don’t think most people do, but many times people in the occult do. And that’s the context of what you’re talking about, too. So that’s about all I can probably do for you on that.
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, thank you, sir. I appreciate your time and your ministry and wish you a great new year. Thank you.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thank you, Brandon. Good talking to you. Let’s see. Gary from Michigan is next. Gary, welcome.
SPEAKER 06 :
Happy New Year to you, Greg. Thanks for your program.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 06 :
Can you hear me good?
SPEAKER 11 :
I can.
SPEAKER 06 :
I can’t even hear you well. Go ahead. Okay, my volume went down. Well, number one, I don’t know if you know WMUZ in Detroit area. We had a ministry, and he was similar to the Assembly of God, and they took him out, and they replaced him with a once-saved-always-saved Baptist. So my question today is about Acts, the 14th chapter. Do you have a commentary on your studies about the book of Acts?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes. Yeah, I mean, I have commentary on every book of the Bible on my website. That is lectures. Audio commentary. I didn’t write commentaries. Now, you said he was replaced. Who’s he that was replaced? I don’t understand who you’re talking about. What did you say? You said somebody who held one position was replaced. I wasn’t clear on who it was you’re talking about.
SPEAKER 06 :
In the Detroit area. He had a prayer meeting on Mondays.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, in the Detroit area is not a he. Who are we talking about here?
SPEAKER 06 :
Chris A. Yelton in Detroit. I don’t know where he’s at, but they replaced him with one St. Louis Baptist.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 06 :
And a lot of people don’t like the change.
SPEAKER 11 :
Go ahead. What is your question for me?
SPEAKER 06 :
So, number one, what I’m saying, do you have commentary on the Book of Acts?
SPEAKER 11 :
If you go to my website, thenarrowpath.com. Look under verse-by-verse commentary?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, they’re on WMZ, and they come on the FM station. You’re on the AM.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, I’m familiar with the station, but I’m not sure what you’re asking me.
SPEAKER 06 :
What I’m saying is the theologies are different now. Okay. It was like the assembly of God. Is your teaching like the assembly of God? In some ways. So you do believe in the baptism of the Spirit, and you maybe have to continue in the faith. You have to believe the life. I do. It’s not just an idea of one thing to always say.
SPEAKER 11 :
You have to be obedient to the word. You’ve called me for years. I think you know where I stand on that, don’t you?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, I thank you. Do you have a teaching on the Book of Acts from your teaching?
SPEAKER 11 :
You’ve asked me that three times. I’ve given you the same answer each time. Thank you for your call. Yes, go to thenarrowpath.com. Okay, let’s talk to Jimmy from Jamesport, Missouri. Jimmy, welcome.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yes. Hi, Steve. Thanks for taking my call. Sure. Yeah, I’m putting together a Bible study on the kingdom of God using your book, which I’ve thoroughly enjoyed, and I’ve, in fact, ordered several of them and given them as Christmas gifts for the best gifts. Good call. I’m inviting – my goal is to invite as many – I’m inviting several individuals from different denominations in my local area. And I have a patient who is a Mormon. And I’ve been talking about the kingdom of God over the last year since I’ve read your book. And he’s so interested in it. And he’s excited about it. He’s asked me. I mentioned that I might be having a Bible study on it. And he’s asked me if he can come. And I was talking to my wife about it the other day. And she said, I just don’t know. about, you know, it’s one thing to have other believers there to talk about it, but having somebody who’s not a Christian, you might think about that. And I thought, well, I’ll just ask Steve about that.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, well, first of all, I wouldn’t have people in the home if your wife wasn’t comfortable with them there. I mean, that’s her home and her castle. And, you know, anyone your wife felt uncomfortable having, I wouldn’t. Now, on the other hand, I… If she were flexible on this, I would not have any objection to a Mormon coming to a Bible study because that gives me a chance to talk to them. They would come to me without an invitation to teach me their doctrine. If they’ll come and listen to my doctrine… That’s great. I’d be glad to talk to him. Now, I will say that this Mormon may have strong opinions that he would interject into the conversation, which if he did… I would tell him, well, you know, first of all, we don’t believe in Joseph Smith. We don’t believe in the Book of Mormon. We don’t believe in the specific things of Mormonism where they differ from evangelical Christianity. You’re certainly welcome to be here to study this with us. But, you know, we don’t want you to, you know, jump in and, you know, bring doctrines that are not scriptural and so forth that could confuse people. I mean, if the people you’re inviting are pretty strong Christians, they shouldn’t be very vulnerable to anything he has to say because he won’t have anything very scriptural to say. But if the people are kind of not very strong Christians, you don’t want to bring a cultist in there and give him some kind of a free reign to raise doubts or whatever to them. So, I mean, it depends on the stability of the people in their Christian walk that are going to be there. And, of course, it matters also whether your wife is comfortable about it or not. I mean, we have home church in our home. And there are people. We run into that we might think about inviting if we were in a church building, but we’re not sure we want to invite them to the home because they’re kind of, you never know. I mean, there’s a lot of different kinds of people who show up at churches. And some of them, we wouldn’t necessarily want them to have our address, you know.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, this won’t be in our home. It’s going to be at the local public building.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah. Okay. Then, I mean, talk to your wife about it, but I don’t think she should necessarily be overly concerned about that. In fact, I would be glad if an atheist came to my home church. I’d love to talk to an atheist or a Mormon or anyone else. I’m not afraid of them. So, if you’re the one who’s presenting the material, even if there’s an open discussion, you can certainly avoid having somebody who’s teaching non-Christian things, you know, you can put a clamp on that and say, you know, we don’t want you coming if that’s what’s going to be happening. Yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
Now, last thing, would that be something you think that I should mention to the other people about whom I know are strong disciples of Christ? Just mention to them that, hey, we’re having a This LDS fellow has asked to come and just a heads up. Right.
SPEAKER 11 :
We used to have a Muslim who used to come to our meetings. And, you know, we didn’t pretend he was a Christian. And we had lots of good dialogues with him. You know, at a Bible study, I guess the question is, do you want to have a hermetically sealed group of Christians who are all going to see things the same way or who do? Or do you want to have some aspect of outreach to it? I mean, when you talk about the kingdom of God, that is what the gospel is. So to allow somebody who’s not fully in the same camp, as long as they’re not hostile or disruptive, I would think it might be to their advantage.
SPEAKER 07 :
Amen. Yeah, I’m looking at it as an outreach, but also a way to kind of bring unity to various people in other denominations. So thank you for your answer. That’s been helpful.
SPEAKER 11 :
All right, Jimmy. Hey, good on you for doing that. God bless you.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right. Yeah, God bless you. Bye, Steve.
SPEAKER 11 :
Bye now. All right, Robert from Bernie, Texas. Hey, Bernie is a place that I like. I’ve been there, and this is probably my friend, Robert. Hi, Robert.
SPEAKER 10 :
We like you, too, Steve. We miss you, and we love you, and I appreciate you taking the call.
SPEAKER 11 :
I don’t know if you’ve ever called before, have you?
SPEAKER 10 :
A couple times, yeah, a couple times.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s been a long time then.
SPEAKER 10 :
Maybe not a real memorable question. This is more a family-related question. My wife and I will both listen and we’ll take the answer off the air. But our oldest just celebrated his 13th birthday, Christmas Eve. That’s when he was born.
SPEAKER 11 :
Wow.
SPEAKER 10 :
And we kind of, yeah, we tossed around the idea, how are we going to have the talk with him about the birds and the bees? I mean, I love… to see the innocence in him, that you can kind of tell he’s unaware, but you also see the cultural forces that are pushing in on all sides. And I don’t know, we’re just looking for some direction for some counsel on how do you broach the subject, or do you broach it at all, I mean, as parents?
SPEAKER 11 :
Right, right. Well, I think with my kids… When they began to ask about it, I thought they were a little too young. I mean, they don’t really need to know that. I mean, your kids are homeschooled. It’s not like they’re out there living the wild life where someone’s going to lead them down into some kind of immorality. I mean, if they ever are in that situation, then you’ll certainly want to talk to them. But generally speaking, if you’ve protected your kids and they’re not hanging out with kids who are you know, talking about sex, I don’t see why you would need to get into it early at all. I mean, I told my kids when they ask questions when they’re younger than I thought needed to hear it, I just said, you know what, I will tell you everything you need to know about that at whatever time I think is good. I mean, I hope you’ll trust me that I won’t hold back on anything you need to know, but, you know, I don’t think you need to know at this point. but I’ll be glad to tell you at some point in the future. Now, uh, a 13 year old boy, if he’s going to high school, might need to know that kind of thing. But if he’s homeschooled, he probably won’t be overly curious. He’ll be curious, but I, uh, just use your discretion. I don’t think there’s a, a standard way that could be recommended to everybody to tell their kids about the person of ease. But, uh, Dana is making motions. She says, call her. Okay.
SPEAKER 10 :
We love you guys.
SPEAKER 11 :
I guess she’s got some opinions about this. I miss you very much.
SPEAKER 10 :
Love you guys.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 10 :
Say hi to your kids. You’ve been listening to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 11 :
We are a listener-supported ministry. If you’d like to help us, you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.