In this episode, listeners call in with pressing inquiries about Christianity that delve into the weeds of doctrinal interpretation. Steve Gregg provides insights into God’s will, discusses the exercise of casting lots as a decision-making tool, and talks about the church’s creeds and their implications on denominational unity. The episode also explores the balance between material inheritance and spiritual stewardship, offering participants and listeners a rich tapestry of theological perspectives.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour as is normally the case on weekdays. This format is intended to allow us to have conversations in real time. If you have questions about Christianity, about the Bible, or maybe you’re not a Christian and you have reasons to challenge Christianity and the Bible, you’re welcome to call in. We have a couple of open lines as I speak. That will not be the case for the whole hour, so you might want to jump at the chance to call now. The number is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. And there’s nothing preventing us from going right to the lines and talking to Benjamin in Greenville, Ohio. First of all, hi, Benjamin. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 10 :
Good afternoon, brother. I’ve been reading the gospel accounts of the Triumphal Entry. Yeah, Triumphal Entry. And I’ve read them several times, but this time the word Hosanna is really sticking out to me, and I’m wanting to know if you can give me some more information on that word and the meaning and just what your knowledge is on that word.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, there’s not much to it. The word Hosanna means save now. And so as the people were shouting Hosanna to Jesus as he rode into Jerusalem, they were calling on him to save them. And this is basically, it was their way of saying that they saw him as the one who could save them, the one who was the Messiah. So it was simply a declaration. of their faith in him. It’s actually a quotation from Psalm 118, which is a very important messianic psalm. And so they were recognizing him as the Messiah. But it’s, for example, Psalm 118, verses 25 and 26. It says, let me turn there. It says, Save now, I pray, O Lord, O Lord, I pray, send now prosperity. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Now, you’ll recognize, for example, that in Matthew chapter 21, what they cried in verse 9 is Hosanna, which means save now. Hosanna to the son of David. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest. So they’re Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord comes directly from Psalm 118, and so does the word Hosanna, actually. So there’s no, as far as I know, no deeper mysteries in that word.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. I appreciate your insight, brother.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, Benjamin. Thanks for your call. God bless you. Patrick in Torrance, California. Welcome.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hey, Steve. Good afternoon. Question has to do with… I think in the Ecclesia, the called-out ones, in defining the church, right? There’s been a lot of buzz and talk on Israel and the church, and I was listening to one of your lectures, and I do hold to the belief that in the Old Testament and the New Testament, like in Romans 11, the olive tree is the people of God and covenant with God. Whether Old Testament or New Testament, God’s always had a remnant people. So my question is, given the fact that the Ecclesiastes The Ekklesia, as I called out once, is the church, and in the New Testament, Gentiles are grafted in, and there’s more Gentiles than there are Jews right now. When Jesus said in Matthew 16, I will build my church, it almost seems like it’s implied the church is now a new entity or something new. How would you comment, or what would you respond to that?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, yeah, it’s his church now. It’s not just the ecclesia of Israel. This is now Jesus’ ecclesia. But it’s made up of the faithful of Israel. I mean, obviously, the people Jesus was speaking to in Matthew 16 were his disciples who were, you know, they were the faithful Israelites. They were Jewish, and they believed in him. And there were others besides them, but they were kind of the leaders of the movement he was starting. And that movement he was starting was calling to himself the faithful remnant of Israel. If this had been a few centuries earlier, and let’s say it was Elijah, he would no doubt seek to call to himself the faithful remnant of Israel. I mean, the faithful remnant were always around. Sometimes they were not very visible anymore. Elijah didn’t even know who they were. And God had to tell him there’s 7,000 there who haven’t bowed the knee to Baal. Elijah wasn’t even aware of them. But Jesus was aware because when he began to preach, John the Baptist had already begun to preach. And he was priming the remnant with the idea that the kingdom of God was now coming soon. And so they were ready, looking for the Messiah. And when Jesus began to preach, and of course John the Baptist pointed him out, Then the people came to Jesus, and it’s always been that way ever since. The faithful remnant of Israel have always come to Christ, because you can’t be faithful to God and be rejecting the Messiah. And this would be particularly the case for Israel, who have been told that the Messiah has come, and have been looking for the Messiah, the faithful have. And so when the Messiah comes, for them to reject him is to reject God himself. So the true ecclesia, Christ’s ecclesia, is made up of those who are loyal to Christ, which is also the true Israel. That’s why Paul refers to them in Galatians 6.16 as the Israel of God. This is because there’s an Israel that’s not of God. They’re Israel, but they are not all Israel who are of Israel, Paul said in Romans 9.6. So in Galatians, he talks about the Israel of God. as opposed to the Israel that is not. And those who are not are people like Judas Iscariot and Caiaphas and the Jews that rejected and crucified Christ and the ones who still reject him. They’re not the Israel of God. Jesus said they’re of their father, the devil, even though they say we are God’s children. He said, no, you’re of your father, the devil. If you were God’s children, you would receive me. You’d believe me. So it’s very clear that Israel has always been made up of people Well, two parts. The nation or the ethnic Israel has been divided into two parts. Those who are the Israel of God, and this is true even going back to Abraham’s second generation or third generation. Well, even second, yeah, because Ishmael was the seed of Abraham, but he wasn’t the Israel of God. Isaac was. Now, of course, the word Israel was not used yet. But, in other words, promises were made to Abraham’s seed. Eventually, Abraham’s seed were identified with Israel about two generations later. But, you know, right from the beginning… the seed of Abraham, there were always more seed of Abraham than there were chosen ones. Abraham had eight sons, but only Isaac was chosen. So it’s true also of Isaac’s sons. There was Jacob and Esau, and only Jacob was chosen. And so in the New Testament, we find that only the faithful of Israel are chosen.
SPEAKER 09 :
I guess what I’m hearing is the dispensationalists, We know they’re seeing the church as a New Testament entity. And so I had a discussion with the guy, and he was saying, well, clearly Jesus began his church. I mean, you can’t say that there was a church in the Old Testament because he said, I’m building my church on the rock, right, the confession by Peter. He says, you know. On this, I will build my church. So the argument is he wouldn’t say that. He wouldn’t use those terms if, in fact, his church existed in the Old Testament. But I know then we get into the word game, right?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, the point is his church. You know, the church existed, but not everybody in that ecclesia, Israel, became part of Christ’s ecclesia. Only the faithful remnant did. And so he built his ecclesia on the faithful remnant. who believed. But it was still, I mean, the same people who believed in him had been part of the Ecclesia in the Old Testament. They were Jewish. They were part of Israel. It’s just that not all of those who are of Israel are truly Israel, the Israel of God, or the Ecclesia of Christ. Only some became that.
SPEAKER 09 :
Okay. All right. Thank you, Steve. Appreciate it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay. Great talking to you, Patrick. Thanks for your call. Steve from Alberta, Canada is next. Steve, welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 06 :
Good afternoon, Steve. I’m reading your book, Empire of the Risen Son, Book 2. I’m in Chapter 7, The Leading of the Holy Spirit. I’m at the end of the chapter where you talk about other considerations, and then you list five. I was impressed by number one and your comments on number five. And number one, if I can just read the paragraph, it’s very short. You said, it should not be discounted that the thing that is God’s will for you is also that which he knows will ultimately fulfill your deepest needs. Therefore, it should not be thought that God’s call will necessarily be at odds with your deepest desires. It is more likely that the Spirit has been placing desires within you that correspond to what he has in mind for you. Though it cannot be assumed that everything God wants you to do today will match up with what you would prefer to do today, it also should not be surprising if what He leads you to do conforms to the passion that has been growing in your own heart. And then you quote from Psalm 37, verse 4, Delight yourself also in the Lord, and He shall give you the desires of your heart. And I was just hoping that you would elaborate more on that point that you were making as well as point number five about casting lots or throwing the dice and so on, because I was taken by that too, because you seem to be open to that. So that’s my question, really.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay. Well, on the first point, remember the new covenant promise is that God will write his laws on our hearts and put his words in our inward parts. That means he’ll He’ll reorient us inwardly, which is the thing that the Old Covenant never did. The Old Covenant was imposed upon the Israelites, but it didn’t reorient them. I mean, it’s one thing to have someone say, you’ve got to do such and such a thing. It’s another thing for you to really want to. And for the most part, a lot of them didn’t want to. And that’s why Israel so often veered off into idolatry and disobedience and so forth. And so Jeremiah, God said through Jeremiah that God’s going to make a new covenant. It’ll be different in that he’ll write his laws inwardly on them. And that’s, of course, not literal. He’s not really inscribing sentences, laws on our blood pump below the fifth rib. This is a figure of speech. It means he’s going to reorient your heart to be agreeable with the law, to be agreeable with God’s will. Now, that means that the Holy Spirit works inside to orient us differently. That doesn’t mean that only his desires will come to our minds because we also have a flesh. And, you know, the Galatians says the flesh lusts against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh. And these two are contrary to one another so that you don’t do what you want to do. So, you know, not every desire that comes to our mind is going to be, you know, spirit-inspired. or even agreeable with the Holy Spirit because we also have a flesh which is at war with it. But as we begin to deny the flesh, our character changes. As we begin to embrace God more as our love, our first love, then, of course, our hearts are going to find that our desires change to be more like his. Just like when you’re in love with anybody and you’re living with them, you, you know, if you really love them, you start to see through their eyes more. You start to be, you know, sympathetic with their ideas. And you tend to want what you know they want and so forth. And that’s the same thing with what the Holy Spirit does within us. We change. We’re changed from glory to glory into the image of Christ as by the Holy Spirit, it says in 2 Corinthians 3.18. So we’re being changed. We’re not just… assigned a group of rules like the Jews were, and being a Christian means following the rules. Well, we are required to follow the rules, but those rules, if we’re born again and walking in the Spirit, are going to become agreeable with what the Holy Spirit changes us to become, like himself. Now, the leading of the Spirit in particular circumstances, I think, cannot be ruled out as the same kind of thing. I mean, if the Holy Spirit changes me in ways that makes me more generally amenable to God’s values and principles and desires, there’s nothing to prevent him from also making me agreeable toward or attracted toward the thing that God mostly wants in a particular decision that has to be made. So… if God leads me in a certain way, I can’t really, I shouldn’t really say, uh, well, this can’t be God because it’s too pleasant to me, you know, and this can’t be God’s will because, uh, I, I, I like it too much. Uh, well, I guess you’d have to say what part of you likes it is your flesh or your spirit. Um, if it’s your spirit, then why can’t it be what God’s leading you to do? Even if it’s very agreeable with you. Um, That’s what I’m saying. I’m saying that you shouldn’t assume that just because you like it, that’s not what the Holy Spirit wants you to do. It may be that the more spiritual you become, the more commonplace it will be for the Holy Spirit to lead you to do things that are very agreeable to you. As far as the casting of lots, of course, that’s a peculiar thing. The Bible doesn’t talk about it very often, but when it does… It generally talks about casting lots as if it works, as if God’s will is decided or discovered by the casting of lots. Now, that is like throwing dice or drawing straws. It’s like a game of chance, in a sense. It’s more like flipping a coin, probably, because generally speaking, it probably is related to yes and no decisions. They had those kinds of things going on when they had the Urim and the Thummim. The priest had two stones in his, what they called the breastplate on his outfit. And they would use these two stones to determine the will of God about things. And no one knows exactly how they were used. But there are at least some who believe. that there might have been a black stone and a white stone, and that you’d draw a stone to decide yes or no. And it’d be like drawing lots. It’d be like casting lots or drawing straws or flipping a coin. Now, of course, they had every confidence that the Urim and Thummim’s decision was a binding one and that it was guided by God, that God’s will was being discovered by it. We find that Joshua… divided the land among the tribes by casting lots. We don’t know exactly how that process went, but the assumption was that it was a binding. Even when Jonah was on the boat and the storm was there and the sailors cast lots to see who was responsible for the storm, it says the lot fell on Jonah. It actually revealed that he was the guy. How’s that work? I don’t know exactly. The casting of lots… We don’t know exactly how different people practiced it, but it’s very much a same kind of thing as flipping a coin or drawing straws or some other chance thing where it would be assumed that the divine mind is operating through that thing. You know, the disciples picked two men as possible candidates to replace Judas in Acts chapter 1, and they cast lots to decide between them. Now, what I suggest in my book is you can look at this a couple different ways. It can be that you’ve got two choices. They’re both good. That’s the point. It’s not like you’re choosing between good and evil. The two guys who were candidates to replace Judas were both good guys. They were both qualified. All the land that was distributed to the different tribes was good land. You know, so casting lots was not choosing between two things, one being good and one being bad, but two good things that were otherwise difficult to choose between. And one could see this as God intervening through the process to reveal his mind about it. Or another way of looking at it would be that God doesn’t care which one you choose. They’re both good options. And he’s just letting you do that to get off the dime and to not be paralyzed with indecision. Okay, here, just flip the coin and go the way that it comes out. Because both options are just fine and not a problem. So I don’t know exactly how we’re going to…
SPEAKER 06 :
You seem to be open to it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, well, I’ve never really used it myself, but I’m just saying the Bible teaches what it teaches about it. In Proverbs chapter 16, there seems to be a real endorsement of it. Proverbs 16.33, it says, The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord. That’s Proverbs 16.33, and so… You know, he’s saying when you cast lots, its decision is from the Lord. And again, it might be suggesting that God is supernaturally operating to make the outcome the way it comes out. Or it may be that, again, we are only casting lots about things where both outcomes are quite okay. And God’s just helping you choose between one and the other so that you don’t just get paralyzed there and not do anything.
SPEAKER 06 :
Right, right. Okay, thank you. I just wanted to hear what you had to say.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, Steve. Thanks for your call.
SPEAKER 06 :
God bless you.
SPEAKER 04 :
You too. Bye now. Okay, Kerry from Fort Worth, Texas. How are you doing, Kerry? Good to hear from you.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi, Steve. A couple questions if you have time. First, a couple weeks ago on the Facebook page, Neuropath, there was a A guy, he was an English guy, I guess, and he was really kind of given an all-millennial viewpoint and was talking about the fall of Israel, 70 AD. And he had a mention about the birds of prey gathering and kind of related that to The banners that the Roman armies carried had pictures of herds of prey. I just wanted to get your take on maybe his interpretation.
SPEAKER 04 :
I didn’t see the post, but that is a common interpretation. The Roman standards had carved eagles on the tops. They’d have their flag poles that had this golden carved eagle. eagle at the top, which is an emblem of Rome. And so when Jesus said, where the carcass is there, the eagles will be gathered together, many people think that he’s referring to the rotten carcass of corrupt Jerusalem that was falling to the Romans. And the Roman standards were gathered around it. So the eagles were gathered around the corpse. That is a reasonable suggestion. Now, Jesus’ statement that where the where the body is, the eagles will be gathered, is found in two different contexts in the Bible. One of them, which is in Matthew 24, seems to be talking about A.D. 70 and may very well, in fact, be talking about these, you know, it may be an allusion to what this post apparently said. Okay. Now, the other place is Luke 17, where Jesus was asked by his disciples, when he said one should be taken and the other left, they said, where, Lord? Meaning, where will they be taken? And his answer was, where the corpses are, the eagles will be gathered, which is a way of apparently saying they’re dead. They’re killed. And, you know, you want to know where they are? Generally speaking, that shouldn’t be hard to discern. There’s going to be eagles, corpses, draw eagles and vultures and such. So I believe personally that the statement that Jesus made on two different occasions, even applying to two different ideas, are probably, in my opinion, probably were a proverb, a common proverb, I’m thinking. Because It can apply to many things, sort of like our proverb, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. We know that basically you can apply that to many different situations, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. But also in Job, when it’s talking about the eagle, it says in Job 39, verse 29 through 30, From there it spies out its prey, the eagle does. Its eyes observe from afar off. Its young ones suck up blood. And where the slain are, there it is. That is, where there are dead bodies, that’s where the eagle is. So, I mean, that’s just an observation from nature in Job. But it’s like a proverb. And I think that Jesus, and probably Jesus wasn’t the only one. It’s very possible. We don’t have record of the conversations of very many people in Israel in his day, but it may well be that that was a commonly used proverb and that he was using it in different cases to mean different things, but it’s the same proverb.
SPEAKER 08 :
Great. My second question has to do with dispensationalism. And do dispensationalists come right out and say that – Christ failed to complete the promises in his first advent?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, they don’t use the word failed because that’s too insulting. But yes, they do believe he failed to bring forth the promises because dispensationalism teaches that Jesus came and was sent by his father to establish the kingdom of God. That that was his mission. And they also believe that when Jesus left, he had not done it. That that they believe that Jesus offered the kingdom of God, intending to establish it in Israel, but the Jewish people were not agreeable to it. And therefore, because they rejected the kingdom, it was postponed. He carried it away with him to heaven, and it will be established when he comes back in the millennial reign. Now, the idea that the kingdom was not established, even though Jesus came to do it, can hardly be explained any other way than to say that Jesus failed to do it. And he failed to do it because the Jews apparently surprisingly didn’t accept it. Now, I’m not sure why that would be surprising. If you look at Israel’s history, they rejected almost all the messengers of God. And so maybe it’s not all that unusual that they’d reject the Messiah too, who had the same kind of message the prophets had had, whom they had killed. So, you know, God would be very short-sighted if he thought, well, you know, when Jesus comes, they’ll certainly accept him. Well, I think God should have known Israel better than that. He knew them very well, in fact. So I don’t think that he sent Jesus with a plan that could be thwarted by the very probable outcome of the Jews rejecting him. In fact, I believe it was prophesied that they would. So if Jesus came to accomplish the setting up of the kingdom, then he did it. Because the Bible says in Isaiah 42, he will not fail or be discouraged. That’s Isaiah 42.4. And Jesus, at the end of his ministry in John 17.4, was praying. He said, Father, I have finished the work that you gave me to do. Okay, well, if you gave him the work of starting the kingdom of God and Jesus didn’t do it, then Jesus, in fact, had not finished the work that he was given to do. So dispensationalism, I think, is quite mistaken about that. And they won’t use the word that Jesus failed. They would say Israel failed. But the truth is, if Jesus came to do it, it didn’t happen. It was a failed mission. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. I’ll be back in just a moment. Stay tuned.
SPEAKER 01 :
If you’ve been listening to The Narrow Path for very long, you know how much it has enhanced your study and understanding of Scripture and possibly your whole Christian life. Don’t you think all your friends should benefit from the program as you have? You help to partner with us in impacting the body of Christ when you tell all your friends to listen to The Narrow Path. If you have not done so, visit the website thenarrowpath.com and discover all that is available for your learning pleasure.
SPEAKER 04 :
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, please call. We have a number open, a number of lines open for you, though most of our lines are occupied. The number to call is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. And our next call comes to us from Dallas, Texas. Brian from Dallas, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 02 :
Hello, Steve. Hi. I had the pleasure of meeting you a few months ago when you were here in Coppell teaching on Isaiah. Uh-huh. I remember being there. Yes. Good to hear from you. Yep. You probably remember my wife. Her name was Dana. I think you probably wouldn’t remember me. Anyway, I won’t tell you. I have a question. Okay. Well, I know you meet a lot of folks. I have a question. This is regarding money. Um, I think it’s in the Psalms or the Proverbs that says a good man will leave that inheritance to his children and his children’s children. And then in the New Testament, I think Jesus says, you know, don’t store up your money on earth, but store it up in heaven. I’m paraphrasing, obviously. I purely believe the Bible is the word of God, but it’s seemingly contradicting it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, it’s not a contradiction because the statement in the New Testament in Matthew 6, Jesus says, do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth where moth and rust corrupt and thieves break through and steal, but lay up treasures in heaven. So he says, don’t lay up treasures for yourself. Frankly, I believe that the attitude that Jesus enjoins elsewhere, like in Luke 14, is that we don’t do anything that’s strictly for ourselves, even our stuff alone. is surrendered to God, and it’s his, and we’re stewards of his things. So we are to steward everything that God has given us because it’s really his. And the idea is to make use of it in such a way that he’ll be glad that he entrusted us with it, that his kingdom has benefited, that the most good was done for the most good outcomes. Now, that stewardship is left up to us. And, you know, when Jesus says, do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, I think what he means is, you know, obviously you’ve got treasures. Let’s just say you have stuff and money. You have some degree of wealth. The best use of it is not simply to put it aside for your old age. because he said moths and rusts can corrupt it, and thieves can break through and steal. So if you’ve simply got your money under your mattress or laid up somewhere that’s just saying, well, this is from my old age, well, it’s not very secure there. Now, on the other hand, it may be part of your stewardship strategy that you do, You know, put some of the wealth into some form that is not only secure, but which tends to grow it. And your intention is that whatever is not used for your, you know, for your old age or whatever will be distributed successfully. in ways that are best. Now, ways that are best can include leaving money to your children. Now, you may feel that it depends. I mean, if your children are scoundrels and waste all their money and use it on drugs and squander everything, you might feel like since you’ve got God’s money under your management, that giving some of it to wasteful persons would not be a good stewardship. And that’s money that could be used to help people who are legitimately poor or people who are virtuous or people who are preaching the gospel or things like that. So I don’t think you’re required to put a lot of your money into your kids if you don’t think that that’s a good investment. If you’ve got good kids and you know that they will use it well, then to give them some of the money that you have at the end of your life is a sensible thing, I think. Now, when it says a good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children, it doesn’t mean that he’s so wealthy that, you know, even his grandchildren are, you know, receiving financial benefits from it necessarily, because this could be an obscure way of saying that a good man leaves his good testimony and his virtue as an inspiration to his children and children’s children. Now, I have not yet received any financial inheritance, I don’t think, from my father. I don’t know if I received anything yet. He died a few years ago. My mom’s still living, so I don’t expect to receive an inheritance from my father at this point. But I will say he has left a good heritage to me. He was a godly man. He raised me in the right ways. And I and my children benefit from that. And, you know, the benefit may not be financial. But, you know, in the Bible, a financial gain is not the only gain of value. Jesus said, do not labor for the food that perishes, but labor for that food that endures to eternal life in John chapter 6. So, I don’t think there’s any contradiction here. I think Proverbs is simply saying that a man who… is a good man, is likely to prosper. If so, you know, his family benefits from that, maybe generationally. But when Jesus says don’t lay up treasures for yourself on earth, I think that for yourself is an important qualifier there. You may lay up some treasures that you intend for your children to inherit, but unless they need it, I wouldn’t leave all of it to my children. or unless the children are going to be wasteful of it. If they’ve proven themselves to be wasteful people, I don’t know that I would entrust them with it. Not because I don’t love them, but because it’s not very loving to take what can be used to help real needy people and to give it to somebody who isn’t really that needy and will just squander it. So stewardship is really the issue here. And Jesus is saying just putting money aside for a rainy day is not always the best stewardship. It’s not a very good stewardship because it can diminish. But, you know, if you’ve got a management strategy, a stewardship strategy, And in your mind, this is not for you. This is for the kingdom of God. Obviously, you’ll benefit from it if you live long enough to need it. But you’re hoping that it will mostly be given to the needs of the kingdom because that’s what you’re going to be judged by. When the owner of the money comes back and tests and checks out how you’ve stewarded his stuff, well, you’re going to want to say, well, you gave me this much, but I’ve increased it. and it’s now your profits have increased because you trusted me with this. That’s what stewardship means.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s really helpful. My son is kind of like you said. If I leave him an inheritance, he’s going to waste it. But I have two granddaughters that I would like to leave something to. They’re both young, and I’m almost ready to retire. So that’s what I was asking for.
SPEAKER 04 :
And I’ll say this, too, that if you show generosity to your children and your grandchildren, at least the ones that are not unworthy of it, you’re also leaving them a good memory of you. And if you’ve been a Christian witness to them, it probably inclines them to be favorable in terms of the influence you’ve had on them in other ways, too. But obviously there would be some people who it would be foolish to leave anything to their kids because their kids are just going to burn it, you know.
SPEAKER 02 :
Exactly. Well, I appreciate it very much. I know you’ve got other people waiting. Thank you so much. I do.
SPEAKER 04 :
God bless you, Brian. Good talking to you.
SPEAKER 02 :
God bless you too, sir.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thanks for calling. Okay, we’re going to talk to Cole in Omaha, Nebraska next. Hi, Cole. Welcome.
SPEAKER 03 :
Hi, Steve. What are your thoughts on churches having very defined statements of faith or creeds? On one side of the argument, it seems like it could serve as guardrails to help Christians stay within orthodoxy, and then on the other side, that it’s an unnecessary point of division or contention.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, well, something like, you know, the Apostles’ Creed or something like that is a statement of faith that the whole church for centuries has embraced. And, you know, it’s not divisive. If anything, it’s defining, but it’s only defining some very broad outlines of what Christianity teaches. It doesn’t go into things like different ideas of religion. or different ideas of eschatology or different ideas of, you know, the cessation of the gifts. I mean, the kinds of things that are very controversial among denominations now are not even addressed in that statement, which either means that those kinds of controversies had not yet arisen when that statement was adopted, or that their attitude was, as long as people believe these things, they’re Christian brothers. You know, whatever they think about other lesser things is negotiable and okay. The second view would be my view. I think that if someone agrees with all the basic things that Christianity has always taught, then they are okay, and that there’s liberty where the Spirit of the Lord is. There’s liberty, the Bible says, to, you know, Study the scripture on your own? I mean, anyone in the Reformation, that is anyone who’s a Protestant, should never have any disparaging remarks about somebody studying the scripture on their own since the whole Reformation happened because Martin Luther was doing just that. The very thing that Catholics say shouldn’t be done, and no doubt the reason they think it shouldn’t be done is because things like Martin Luther happened when people do that. But anyone who’s benefited from the Reformation and is part of a Protestant, you know, a generic general Protestant denomination, they should be very encouraging of people to think on their own, which means, of course, when people do that, they will reach different conclusions about some things. But they won’t reach contrary conclusions about the things that are plain in Scripture. And those things are things that all Christians believe because they’re plain. You know, most Christians, I mean, cults would be different, but most Christian denominations believe what they do because they really believe that that’s what the Bible teaches. Now, the reason that denominations don’t all agree on everything is because what the Bible teaches about some issues is not that clear, and people have reached different levels. conclusions about what the Bible teaches on those disputed things. But no one who’s honestly studied the Scripture, I think, has discovered contrary doctrines to the most essential, central teachings of what makes a person a Christian. If they have, then there’s some question as to whether they’re Christians. But now, the reason that denominations or churches sometimes have statements of faith is because in our day, there are so many different opinions about things of secondary importance. I don’t know of any church that doesn’t have the same things on their statement of faith. For example, the ones that evangelical churches believe that the Bible is the final authority. It’s the word of God. It’s the final authority on all matters of faith and practice for the believers. I don’t know of any evangelical organization that doesn’t have that statement on their statement of faith. The idea that God, there’s one God who created all things, who’s also the judge of the living and the dead and the last day. I think every Christian who’s ever lived believes that. That Jesus is the Son of God, that he’s the Messiah, that he’s the Lord, that God has appointed for us to embrace him and worship. you know, be followers of his. I think that’s very clear in Scripture, and I don’t think that any evangelicals have ever failed to include that. Now, what isn’t as clear in Scripture are some of the things I mentioned, the details of eschatology. Apparently they’re not that clear. They seem clear enough to me in most cases, but there certainly are people who don’t find them so, and therefore people reach different conclusions. But the Bible never did make eschatology a test of faith. I mean, the details, I should say, of eschatology, certainly Paul called Hymenaeus and Alexander heretics because they denied that the resurrection was still in the future. But that’s a very general thing. I mean, the resurrection of the dead is even in the Apostles’ Creed, I believe. I’ve heard so many creeds, I don’t remember for sure. But the thing is that… You know, you can believe differently about a lot of those things. And if a church’s statement of faith means these are the beliefs that we are open to and that we welcome in this church, then it’s divisive if they go very far beyond the core beliefs. If they say we believe in the premillennial return of Christ and a pre-tribulation rapture, Well, they’re certainly entitled to believe that, but it’s very divisive if they’re saying, and these are the beliefs that we require people to believe if they’re here with us. If they’re saying, well, these are the views that our teachers have embraced, though we recognize that people may have other views and be good Christians, and that’s fine, then I don’t see that as divisive. But usually people don’t make those kind of statements in their statement. They just say, we believe this. And generally speaking, it says, and this is where we’re going to stand as a fellowship. And, you know, if people don’t agree with this, maybe you should move on and find some other place to be. That’s very divisive.
SPEAKER 03 :
Great.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you very much. I believe they can be divisive. Yeah. Okay, brother. Yep. Appreciate it. God bless you. Bye now. All right. Our next caller is Ben from Detroit, Michigan. Hi, Ben. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Hi, Greg.
SPEAKER 07 :
So I have a question. So I was thinking about this last night. So after we go up to heaven, will we have any worries like to worry about or like struggles? And the same question, Greg, It follows as, like, when we’re resurrected, will we have any worries, like, to worry about?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, I’m going to say no, because even in this life, we’re told not to have any worries. Now, if you mean, will we have any concerns about, for example, the well-being of other people, the safety of our children, things like that? I don’t know to what degree those things will be on our mind when we’re in the presence of God. We are told by Christ not to worry about anything because you can’t change anything by worrying about it. Now, you can change things by being concerned about something and acting constructively about it. That’s how problems are solved. When somebody is not apathetic about something that’s a negative thing, we shouldn’t be apathetic. We should have enough concern to activate us to do something constructive. That’s the opposite of worrying. Worrying is simply fretting over it. To be concerned about something enough to be motivated to make an improvement in the situation is exactly what we should do. But worrying is referring to something that you do that doesn’t change anything. That’s why Jesus said that no one by worrying can change one hair white or black. or by worrying you can’t add a cubit to your stature. He said you can’t change anything by worrying. Now, if what you’re doing is changing something, that’s not worrying. That’s being activated. That’s being actively seeking to improve something. Now, the motivation to do that may very well be a concern about how things will go if that situation is not corrected. And so you get up and do it, correct it. but to sit around and worry about something, which means simply to worry about it and not do anything about it. And sometimes there are things you can’t do anything about. You know, I’m worried that, you know, that North Korea is going to dump a nuclear bomb in my neighborhood. Well… They probably won’t, but they might. But worrying about it isn’t going to change anything. I can’t do anything about it. I’ll just have to leave that in God’s hands. And, you know, I’m afraid I’ll die of cancer. I’m afraid, you know, one of my children will be kidnapped or something. Well, I hope that doesn’t happen. But if it does, it’s not something that worrying about will have changed. I’ll have to deal with that when it happens. So worrying is not okay. And since it’s not okay, it’s not something we’ll do in heaven or in the resurrection. When we’re in heaven, there won’t be any misbehavior by anyone. In fact, when we pray, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven, we’re praying for a perfect circumstance and certainly a sinless one. So the way his will is done in heaven is absolutely. And therefore, if he doesn’t want us worrying, then we won’t be doing it. We won’t have any disobedience or any sin. And we will see more clearly at that time the reasons why worry is unnecessary than we do now. See, we can’t see God now. We are told that God is concerned and that God can work all things together for good. No matter how many bad things happen, God can redeem them. We’re told those things, but we can’t see him. We might have had the advantage of seeing him do this kind of thing in the past, turning a bad deal into a good deal. But even when we see that, it doesn’t prevent us from being at times prone to worry about whether he’s going to take care of stuff. When you see God himself, which we will when we die and be with him, we won’t even have any temptation to worry about stuff. You know?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 04 :
Because the reason we’re told not to worry, the reason we’re told not to worry is because God… is taking care of things to those who trust him. That’s the reason Jesus gives. And he says that those who worry are of little faith, meaning we’re not really trusting God. But when we see him, I don’t think we’ll have little faith then. I think we’ll be fully convinced that everything’s going to be handled as it should. Okay. Okay. All right. Well, that’d be my answer.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you. Thank you, Ben. Good talking to you. Anonymous caller in California. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hi. I was just wondering about… I’m not sure what book it’s in right now. I was going to look it up. And what you’re saying about concern over something you can’t change was pretty helpful. But… just like food issues going back and forth between how to balance some of these things.
SPEAKER 04 :
Now, realize that I don’t know what some of these things mean, so I can’t read your mind. Give me something to hang an awareness of what you’re talking about on.
SPEAKER 05 :
Sure. These people who in the last days come and it’s about marriage and about abstaining from certain foods, which God created to be basically food. What I’m gathering from the passages, yes.
SPEAKER 04 :
So are you wondering about the freedom to eat foods that the Old Testament would say are unclean? Or are your concerns entirely on a different subject, like whether we should eat the foods that are healthy or unhealthy? I mean, what are your concerns here about eating?
SPEAKER 05 :
I’m just wondering if they are not permitting it or – Like, what exactly is happening?
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, well, when Paul said, this is, of course, in 1 Timothy 4, he said that in the last days, he said there will rise people who have departed from the faith and they give heed to lying or deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons. and that among the things they teach are that they forbid marriage, and they also forbid the eating of foods, which Paul says God has given to be eaten and received with thanksgiving. And then he says every creature of God is good, meaning for food, and nothing is to be refused if it’s received with thanksgiving, he says, for it’s sanctified, he said, by the word of God and by prayer. Now… If that’s the concern, like are there reasons to avoid certain foods for the purpose of pleasing God, I don’t think there are. I don’t think there’s any foods that God calls unclean. Jesus said it’s not what goes into a man’s mouth that defiles him. Now, the Jews thought otherwise. The Jews thought if you ate pork or if you ate shellfish or any unclean thing, that would defile you. And Jesus said, no, it’s not that way. Nothing that goes into a man’s mouth is going to defile him. It’s just going to go right through him. It doesn’t have any impact on his spiritual life. It’s just a physical fueling of the body, sometimes not very wise choices of food, but they’re not morally an issue. And Paul, I think based on Jesus’ statement about that, which was in Mark 7 and repeated in Matthew 15, Paul in Romans 14, 14 said, I am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean of itself. That means no food is unclean of itself. Now, that doesn’t mean that all foods are healthy. And, of course, we hear a lot now about people saying we shouldn’t eat sugar or we shouldn’t eat, you know, processed foods or we shouldn’t eat things that have red dye number 75 in them or, you know, all kinds of things that, you know, make America healthy again. you know, movement would say we need to get some of this stuff out of our diet. Now, they’re not talking about it in the same way that Jews talked about forbidden foods. Their foods were forbidden because God had said they were unclean. And by unclean, he didn’t mean unhealthy. He meant they conferred defilement, ritual defilement on a person to eat them, just like touching a dead body would or just like having an issue of blood would or touching a leper would. So there’s lots of things in the law that conferred a ritual uncleanness. Now, none of those things are of concern now because we’re not under that kind of law. But there are still, no doubt, stewardship of our health kind of choices to make about food. I don’t know of any law that God made that says everything you eat has to be healthy and wholesome. It’s obviously wise to, and as I was talking to an earlier caller about stewardship, God has given us our bodies and our health, and we have to manage them. And if we destroy our health or shorten our lives, we’re simply robbing God of the service of those years that we will lose. God has a plan for us to use every year that he gives us to do more toward the promoting of his kingdom. And if we cut our lives short by five years because we made very stupid decisions Eating choices, well, that strikes me as bad stewardship, and there may be some answering for that if we knew better. Frankly, I don’t think we have to be obsessed with counting calories or carbs or fats or anything like that. I mean, the Bible does not put us on that errand of, you know, analyzing everything we eat that way. But we do know more about nutrition now than they did in ancient times, and although the Bible doesn’t concern itself with nutrition, as we do, we do have the stewardship issues. We’ve got time. We’ve got money. We’ve got our lives. We’ve got our health. God gives us every good thing to steward for his benefit. So I don’t know if you’re interested in that particular aspect. I wasn’t real clear on what your question was about food. But if you’re concerned about clean and unclean foods, then that’s not an issue for the Christian. If you’re concerned about healthy and unhealthy foods, That should be, in some measure at least, a concern for Christians. We shouldn’t destroy ourselves. You’ve been listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg. We are listener supported. If you’d like to write to us, the address is The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.
