Join Steve Gregg on The Narrow Path as we explore the nuances of Christian Zionism and its implications in the modern world. This episode traverses through historical, theological, and present-day views, helping listeners understand the many layers of this complex topic. Through engaging conversations with callers, Steve sheds light on various perspectives, driving home the importance of aligning theological beliefs with biblical teachings. Whether you agree or disagree, this episode promises to spark contemplation and discussion.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 05 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour each weekday afternoon. And the reason we’re live is so you can call in. And by the way, if you’ve tried to call in before and all the lines were full, or if you’re hoping to call in now, this is your lucky day. I’m looking at an empty switchboard. I don’t think that happens once in 100 days. So if you want to call in, the switchboard is wide open. You can get through if you call right now. The number is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. If you call now, you’ll get through. Later, who can say? I’d like to make some announcements, one of which I’ve been making for a while, and that is that starting, well, a week from tomorrow, I believe, I’ll be speaking in Michigan, and then I’ll be speaking in other venues throughout the next 11 days after that. From the 16th to the 26th, I will be in Michigan. I’ll be in… Indiana, I’ll be in Illinois. And so there’s quite an itinerary there, 11 days, different places. If you live in Michigan or Indiana or Illinois, maybe Ohio, one of the places I’ll be is just across the border pretty much from Ohio. So you might want to check out my itinerary and see if there’s someplace that you would want to come. You’ll find that information at thenarrowpath.com. And there’s a tab there that says – So if you go there and check out the dates that I just mentioned from the 11th to the 26th, you can find out when I’ll be there. It might even say what I’m talking about in some cases. So you can check that out. The other announcement I have is tonight is Theology Thursday in Huntington Beach at Two Brothers Pizza. Now, what is Theology Thursday? I’m not real sure. This is the first one. But they do hope to have it kind of regularly. And, of course, how regularly will be determined on a number of things, including how it goes the first time. The idea is I’ll be giving a short talk. It’s a pizza place. You can get food there. You can eat at the gathering. And it’s 7 o’clock, I think, 7 to 9 tonight. I’ve been saying 6.30, but I I believe it’s seven. Anyway, you can get food. You can listen to me talk for a few minutes. I say a few minutes. It’s 20 to 30 minutes. For me, that’s just a blink of an eye. So it’s a short talk. And then we have maybe an hour and a half, something like that, that we can discuss. You can discuss. You can raise questions. You can raise objections. We just have a theological discussion open to the public. and you’re welcome to join us. That’s tonight at 7 o’clock. You know, you might want to get there at 6.30 in order to order food or whatever, if you’re going to get food, because things will start at 7. All right, that’s tonight, and that’s in Huntington Beach at Two Brothers Pizza. If you don’t know where that is and you want the address, you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. And there you can just click on Announcements, and you’ll find tonight’s date and the information you desire. I have a third announcement, and that is my lines are full now, so I’m going to start taking the callers. Our first caller today is Christopher calling from Newmarket, New Hampshire. Hi, Christopher. Welcome.
SPEAKER 03 :
Hey, Steve. How are you doing today?
SPEAKER 05 :
I’m fine, thanks.
SPEAKER 03 :
Hi, Steve. It’s a blessing to be able to speak with you. I haven’t talked with you in a few years. I have a question, but first I want to give a little context to the question, if that’s okay.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, but not too much. We’d rather get to your question as quickly as we can.
SPEAKER 03 :
I was in a situation where some people in the Christian community were saying that I had some prophetic qualities. And in a book that I wrote, I actually jokingly said that Yes, I am a prophet because I prophesied Tom Petty’s death. Now, do you think that God will hold that against me as being a false prophet?
SPEAKER 05 :
Because you said you’re a prophet. It sounds like you said it mostly in jest. Is that correct?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, exactly.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah, well, then I don’t think you’re a false prophet. If somebody took you seriously and became a follower of yours and started hanging on your every word and saying whatever Christopher says is what God says, then I would be concerned. But I don’t think that that instance would make you a false prophet. It just makes you humorous.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Well, thank you for your insight. I appreciate it. God bless you. Have a nice day.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right. God bless you, Christopher. Thanks for your call. Our next caller is Mike from San Diego, California. Mike, welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thank you, Steve. Two questions, please. And a common thread is it’s about feelings or emotions. Number one, is there any scriptural evidence that Jesus had a sense of humor? I know he felt sadness, loneliness, and anger at times, but if he’s fully human and divine, did he ever laugh and feel a sense of humor?
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, I’m sure he did because, I mean, what is humor but an appreciation of the, you know, irony of a situation or… Or maybe, what should I say, the stereotypicalness of a situation. I mean, how many women make jokes about their husbands not being able to find anything in the kitchen or in the garage, and then the wife goes out and finds it instantly. I mean, that’s a stereotypical situation. It’s true. Many things that are funny. In fact, the things that are most funny are often things that are true, and everyone recognizes they’re true, and yet it’s amusing. I mean, if a person doesn’t see humor in life, I don’t know if they are fully human. Now, we might say, but we don’t ever read of Jesus laughing. Yeah, we don’t read of Jesus doing a lot of things that he certainly did. Most of the times he ate food, we don’t read of it. When he put on his clothes in the morning, we don’t read of it. You know, his conversations with his parents. you know, when he was young. They’re not recorded. There’s only 39 days of Jesus’ life are recorded and only special things which the, you know, the authors felt were important to let us know about what he said and did. None of them apparently thought it was important to mention him having a sense of humor, but I wouldn’t think that this would mean that they want us to assume he did not. Some people feel that the way Jesus phrased some things would have struck people funny. And we can imagine they would if we were hearing them for the first time. Some of them, we’ve heard them so much we might forget how funny they would seem the first time you heard them. Like, you know, don’t try to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye when there’s a beam hanging out of your own eye. I mean, that obviously is intended to paint a picture, which if you could picture that would be rather funny. And yet it’s very true, but it’s, you know, it’s making a true statement with a ridiculous image. Or when Jesus talked about the Pharisees, you know, strained at a gnat, but they swallowed a camel. You know, I can’t imagine there weren’t people in the crowd who chuckled at that imagery. So, or a camel going through the eye of a needle. I mean, these are some things Jesus said that were, I mean, if you actually endeavor to picture them at all, they’re ridiculous. I mean, you’d laugh. The only reason we’re not laughing is because we’ve heard them all our lives and we’ve forgotten that they’re funny. But, you know, when someone heard something like that the first time, I’m sure a lot of them laughed. Not because they were laughing at him, but because he evoked an absurd image, which is one of the things that are humorous. There’s a lot of different kinds of things that are humorous. Not all the same kinds. We might think of most humor, like comedians tell, is rather humorous. ribald, or crude, or maybe sexually inappropriate, or mean, mean-spirited. A lot of jokes are mean-spirited. Obviously, that kind of humor, I don’t think Jesus had or used. But there’s a lot of quite innocent things that are humor. I mean, have you ever seen those videos on YouTube of babies talking? I mean, they’re fake. They’re AI, but they’re hilarious. or babies laughing. You know, obviously, you’re going to laugh probably if you see those, unless you hate babies. But I think, you know, things, children do things, little animals, kittens and puppies do, things monkeys do. Now, God sees those all the time. And I can’t think that he doesn’t find them as, you know, amusing as we do. So to say Jesus didn’t have a sense of humor would be to say he really laughed. He really was a grumpy guy. You know, he really was a very unusually humorless individual. And although the Bible does say he was a man of sorrows acquainted with grief, I think we have all experienced sorrows and grief, and we’ve been acquainted with it. But that doesn’t mean we have no sense of humor. So I’m going to go with Jesus having a sense of humor.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hey, hello? Yeah, Mike. Oh, yeah, just real quick, a follow-up thread. So not just laughing at jokes, but I mean, at the end, they walked in everywhere, the disciples. So at the end of the day, when they’re around the campfire relaxing, there’s kind of a lighthearted mood. They were kind of, you know, not telling jokes necessarily, but just being lighthearted and enjoying life.
SPEAKER 05 :
I’m sure. Yeah, I mean, what? I mean, that’s true of every human being I know, except, like I say, the grumpiest sorts. And to suggest that Jesus was the grumpiest sort of man would be rather, I would say, insulting. So, I mean, yeah, I can’t imagine that those things didn’t happen.
SPEAKER 09 :
We’re on the same page then. Thank you very much, and keep up. God bless you. Okay, Mike, thanks.
SPEAKER 05 :
Same to you. All right, we’re going to talk to Rudy calling from Fallbrook, California. Rudy, welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 02 :
Oh, yes. Hi, Steve. Hey, I’m going to make a… I have this concern, and it’s with regards to Christian Zionists as opposed to just conventional Christians, because all around me there’s people, and they’re Christian Zionists, and they’re being… basically being made to just making hard decisions now with regards to the Palestinians and the Jews and supporting Trump. And so I just wanted to get your take on it, and I can… get off the phone and just hear what you have to say about that.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay. Okay.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right.
SPEAKER 05 :
Thanks for your call, Rudy.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Bye now.
SPEAKER 05 :
Now, when we say Zionists, what we’re talking about is a movement that suggests that Israel or the Jewish people worldwide should and may simply move back to the land that their ancestors lived in thousands of years ago, because they were driven out of it by the Romans in the year 70 AD. So it’s been almost 2,000 years since then. And that, of course, most of the Jews, or at least half, are still in the diaspora. They’re not in the land. But the Zionist movement encourages the Jews from everywhere to move back to the land of Israel and to repopulate it and And all of that. Now, some Zionists are secular. In fact, the Zionist movement began with a secular Jew named Theodor Herzl. He was not an observant Jew. He might have been an atheist. For all we know, most Jews are nowadays. But he was in the late 1800s. And he started a secular movement which had nothing to do with religion or God. And he got support, and the movement began to try to arrange for a land for the Jews around the world to come to and have their own nation again. Initially, they weren’t even thinking about the land of Israel in particular. I’m not sure why that wasn’t on their list initially. Different countries were considered. I think Venezuela, if I’m not mistaken, or Argentina. It might have been Argentina was considered as possibly being a place where they could get some territory. Uganda was definitely considered. Cyprus was considered. And eventually, you know, well, why not the land of Israel itself, you know, which was at that time called Palestine and occupied by the people we call the Palestinians. Now, these Palestinians had been there for 1,300 years. They were Arab in origin. And their ancestors had lived there for about 1,300 years. They had been under the control of various countries, especially Turkey in more recent years and so forth, and Great Britain eventually. But they broke free eventually. and were declared a nation by the United Nations in 1948. And so, you know, this kind of encouraged more of the Jews around the world to come back. And Zionism is that movement of the Jews back. Now, again, like I say, the movement began and in very large measure still is as a – a secular movement, not by religious Jews. However, there was a stream of evangelical theology called dispensationalism, which had for many years, long before this happened, before 1948, almost a century before 1948, dispensationalists had said that Israel needs to come back to their land. They thought this was prophesied in the Bible. And they felt like, you know, there’s a divine mandate there. for Israel to be in the land. In fact, they’ve considered it a precondition for Jesus returning. And, of course, if you think that the Israelites being in their land, the Jews being in their land, is a precondition for Jesus to come back, well, you’re going to be pretty enthusiastic about them doing that because we want Jesus to come back soon. So when Israel became a nation in 1948, the dispensations were very encouraged. I might say that if you study the history of the modern state of Israel, you’ll find that that the dispensational Christians had an influence disproportionate to their numbers on the United Nations, or more directly on the United States, Harry Truman, who pressured the United Nations, and there’s books about this you can read, to recognize Israel as a nation. Now, In other words, the dispensationalists predicted that this would happen, and then they essentially used their political clout over a period of many administrations to finally get the land of Israel to be recognized by the United Nations as a modern state. Now, some people think that’s a great miracle, and maybe it is. Other people think, no, it’s not really hard to explain. I mean, just like any other political things, powerful interests prevail upon the powers that be, and things get done the way they want them to be done in many cases. And so I won’t say that this was or was not a miracle, but I could say the events could be understood quite separately from any intervention of God in the matter. Most Christians want to, especially dispensationalists, want to believe that God was intervening and that he was fulfilling prophecy. Now, the problem is, of course, is there prophecy that says that the nation of Israel in its present form will come about in the end times? None that I know. Now, I don’t say that as one who hasn’t really checked. As a Bible teacher running a Bible college for 16 years, I taught through all the prophets and Psalms multiple times. In fact, not only at my own school, but other schools over the years. I’ve talked through all the prophets probably 20 times each, verse by verse, and I’m pretty acquainted with what’s in there. What I do find in there is a number of predictions, and especially in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, but some other places too, that God would disperse the Jews throughout the world, and then he would bring them back to their land, and their nation would be reestablished. They’d build the temple again. and they’d have, you know, a nation again. And it was specifically said they’d be a righteous nation. It was specifically said that he’d bring back the faithful remnant from all the nations where they’d been scattered, and they’d reestablish Israel as a righteous nation. Now, this actually did happen, but it was 500 years before the time of Christ. But this was still after the time the prophets predicted it. So the prophets predicted it, and it happened. The Jews were scattered throughout the world at the time by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians in the exile. And then, as God predicted in Isaiah and other places, Cyrus, king of Persia, conquered the Babylonians and allowed the Jews to go back. A remnant of them did. It says in Ezra 1.5, it was those Jews in exile whose heart God moved. God moved them. These were the righteous ones. These were the faithful ones. Most of the Jews in exile had no interest in God, at least not sufficiently to want to build the temple and worship God again. And so most of the Jews just stayed in exile, and most of them have been there to this day. But the faithful remnant, in fulfillment of the prophecies, they were drawn back from all the lands that God had driven them to. And they reestablished the temple. They reestablished the nation, a righteous nation. Okay, so that happened. It was predicted, and it happened. I want to say, because not everyone realizes this, after that happened, there never was another prediction in the Bible that this would happen. That is, there is no prediction that after the return of the exiles from Babylon, there’s going to be another prediction. not only dispersal, but regathering of the Jews. Now, they were dispersed again in 70 AD, and they’ve been dispersed pretty much since that time. But there’s no reference to a gathering of the people from all nations that is after the gathering that took place in 539 BC. And so, I don’t see a divine mandate for the nation of Israel to exist today in a modern state. Now, I’m not against Israel, but And frankly, if people talk like me, sometimes they’re accused of being anti-Semitic. The opposite is true. I’ve never known a Jew I didn’t love. I had a lot of Jewish friends over my life, and I enjoy them in some cases more than my Gentile friends, just because, as a previous caller, we talked about wit and humor. I find them very interesting. enjoyable to be around in many cases. So, I mean, I don’t have any dislike for Jewish people in any way. The opposite is true. But I’m just a Bible teacher. I don’t write the Bible. I’m required to teach what’s there. And I’m telling you what is there and what isn’t there. Now, there are teachers who also don’t write the Bible, but they apparently have decided that some things are there that aren’t. And they teach them as if they were. And that’s the dispensational teachers especially. Now, here’s where I stand. Israel is a secular nation. There is no reference in any part of the Bible to Israel, a secular nation. Israel was founded at Mount Sinai when God said, if you keep my covenant and obey my commandments, you will be a holy nation to me. They built a tabernacle at that point. And the center of Israel’s life was worshiping Yahweh at the shrine, the tabernacle, which was eventually replaced by Solomon’s temple. And even though Israel strayed and worshiped idols, sometimes they never stopped worshiping at the temple. The temple stood as still the center of their capital city, and they were not a secular nation. There was no such thing as a secular nation until modern times. Very modern times. Secular nations just didn’t exist. Every nation, Israel and the pagans, all had their state religion. And Yahweh… and the temple were the center of Israel’s state religion. They never existed without it, and there’s no such thing as Israel in the biblical terms where there’s no temple and no honoring of Yahweh. Now, what do we have in Israel today? Well, we have a nation that has the same name. The population is perhaps ethnically similar, but is it a religious nation? No. Is there a temple? No. It’s a secular nation. It was begun by a secular movement, and it remains a secular nation. Less than 20%, that’s one out of five Jews in Israel, less than 20% even are Jewish by faith, religious Jews, identifying themselves as Jewish by faith, one in five. What about the others? Well, most of them are secular, and at least as many, 20% or so, are atheists. The nation is not a religious nation, though there’s religious people in it, as there are in every nation, but it’s not especially a religious nation, and it certainly is not in a covenant with Yahweh. And without a covenant with Yahweh, there is no Israel as the Bible knows of it. The Bible has no knowledge of any kind of Israel that doesn’t have God as its center. Now, there are some teachers who’ve said, well, the prophets said that Israel would come back in unbelief, as they have now, and that then God will pour his spirit on them and they will come to faith. Well, the Bible doesn’t say that anywhere. There just isn’t any statement in the Bible there. I’ve had my debates with dispossessors. They always say this. They can’t produce a single scripture that teaches this. What you can find in scripture is the references to God bringing them back from all lands, which happened in 539 B.C., says that the ones who come back will come with weeping and rejoicing and repentance and all of that. The people who are predicted to return, like the people who did return in 539, are said to be repentant. They’re the faithful remnant. There is no scripture in the Bible that ever speaks of God restoring Israel as a secular, unbelieving nation. And that’s what’s there now. So the most I can say is I don’t know of any scripture that predicts that all the Jews are supposed to come back in the end times. All those predictions have been fulfilled long before Jesus was born. And he never repeated them. Paul never repeated them. No New Testament writer ever mentioned anywhere about Jews coming back to Israel in the end times. Not a hint. So, in other words, Zionism could mislead us, especially if we assume, and I think mistakenly, that there’s a divine mandate for Jews to come and take away the land of the Palestinians who were there 1,300 years before modern times. I’m not against Israel. I’m not against the Jews having their own land. I think every people, it’d be nice if they could have their own land. It’d be nice if the Uyghurs in China could have their own land and couldn’t be persecuted. It’d be nice if the Kurds could have their own land and wouldn’t be persecuted by Iraq. But, you know, not everyone has that luxury. Even the American Indians don’t have their own land anymore. I’m not saying that’s a good thing. I’m just saying that’s how things are. But if the Jews could have their own land without doing any wrong to any other people, I’m all for it. The people who are anti-Zionists, who are Christians, are saying, okay, well, if the Jews come back to Israel, what happens to the people who lived there before? Well, what has happened is many of them have been marginalized and herded off into lands where they’ve been badly treated. But I’m not making a pro-Palestinian argument. I’m just saying Palestinians are people, too. And by the way, a larger percentage of Palestinians are Christian than the percentage of Jews in Israel that are Christian. So that’s something to consider. So, you know, Zionism itself is not a Christian movement. It’s not even a religiously Jewish movement. It’s just a political movement. Am I opposed to Israel having their land? Absolutely not. I’d love for them to have land, but I would like them to have a land that they obtain without injustice, just like I wish that we could have had our country without injustice to the Native Americans. I think we have been unjust to Native Americans, but that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in America having the right to exist. I just think it’s a shame that so many times nations exist at the expense of others and through injustice, which has happened in many nations, including Israel. I don’t condemn Israel for that. I just say, hey, this is not necessarily what God had in mind. I need to take a break here. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. We have another half hour coming up, so don’t go away. I’m going to take a 30-second break. We’ll be taking more calls in the next half hour. Stay tuned.
SPEAKER 01 :
Is the Great Tribulation about to begin? Are we seeing the fulfillment of biblical prophecy unfolding before our very eyes? In the series, When Shall These Things Be?, Steve Gregg answers these and many other intriguing questions. The lecture series entitled, When Shall These Things Be?, can be downloaded in MP3 format without charge from our website, thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 05 :
Welcome back to The Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’re live for another half hour taking your calls. We have a few lines open if you want to call now. By the way, I’m sure that a very large number of people who were listening to the first half hour heard some things they didn’t agree with, and I always welcome you, if you don’t agree with the host, to call in and balance comment. I’d love to talk with you. I’m not a controversialist, but sometimes things I say are controversial in certain circles. Not intentionally, but just because truth can be controversial. And so, I mean, you’re welcome to call. We have some callers waiting, but we have a few lines open. If you want to join us, the number to call is 844-484-5737. That number again is 844-484. Our next call, it comes from Michael in Englewood, California. Michael, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 06 :
Thank you, Steve. Last week I called about a discrepancy I kind of found with Luke. talking about Stephen. And then someone called yesterday with another kind of discrepancy. And I want to ask you about this question about the Lord’s Prayer, where Jesus taught his disciples how to pray. In Matthew 6, of course, it ends with for thine is the power and the glory, however it ends. And it also says amen. But in Luke, it doesn’t have that last sentence, and it doesn’t say amen. So why would it kind of Where does that discrepancy come from?
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay. First of all, I don’t think there’s a discrepancy. I’ll get to your point. I was wondering how it was that your reference to the Book of Acts in your introductory comment was relevant to this. You’re not going anywhere with that? That’s just something you wanted to mention?
SPEAKER 06 :
Sorry, yes, sometimes I… Okay. Yeah, sorry.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay. Well, at the end of Matthew’s version of the Lord’s Prayer, which is in the sixth chapter of Matthew, right in the middle of the Sermon on the Mount, in many manuscripts, including those that were used by the King James Version and the New King James Version, some of the manuscripts have the line, for yours is a kingdom and the power… and the glory forever. This is not found in Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer. And it’s not even found in Matthew’s version in the oldest manuscripts. So in the oldest manuscripts, Matthew’s version looks more like Luke’s version than it does in, say, the King James or the New King James. So, you know, it’s not really a discrepancy. If Jesus actually did include the line, for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, it’s not a discrepancy with Luke’s version, which leaves it out. There’s lots of times when one statement recorded in Matthew or Mark is quoted a little differently, or there’s something omitted in Luke, or frankly, vice versa. When you read the three Gospels, I’m talking about the three synoptic Gospels, which does not include John, because John doesn’t parallel them as much, but Matthew, Mark, and Luke parallel each other a great deal. There are things that Jesus said and did that are found in all three of those Gospels. And some things that Jesus said and did are in two of them, not always the same two. So you’ve got a different selection of statements of Jesus that are either found in one Gospel or sometimes it’s found in two or three. But even when it’s found in two or three, it is rarely verbatim. And in some cases, one Gospel will have a more complete version of it. Now, if Jesus did say, when you pray, say, and then he closed it with, yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, that’s fine, even if Luke left that out. If he didn’t say it, then Luke and Matthew are quite in agreement. And that’s a manuscript difference. But differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke aren’t always manuscript differences. These men were, in many cases, paraphrasing what Jesus said. they are, of course, translating from the language he spoke in, which was Aramaic, into Greek. And when you translate from one language to another, another person translating the same thing from the same language to the same language as the other person, they don’t always use exactly the same words to render the same sentence. I mean, you can see this if you take any verse in the Bible, especially in the New Testament, for example, and compare it in the King James Version, the New King James Version, the New American Standard Version, the NIV Version, You know, the New English Bible or the English Standard Bible, you know, look at the same verses and you’ll see, although the information is the same, often the exact wording is not the same. And that’s because different people who are equally competent translators working independently of each other, will not always choose the same words in the receptor language that adequately translate the original. So that’s what the gospel writers were doing. They were taking statements Jesus made in Aramaic, and independently they were translating them into Greek, and sometimes they chose different Greek words. to get the thought across. However, it’s not the case that you find significant problems or differences in the way they did it. But you do find that these three gospels are not going to be verbatim the same. even when they’re recording the same information usually. And that’s fine with me because if they were all exactly alike, I guess two of them would be redundant. But these are independent records of what Jesus said and did by different people who knew what he said and did and who rendered it the way they understood it or the way that they felt it would be best understood. by their readers. And if that bothers us, we just need to come get in touch with reality. This is the way it happened. This is what they did. So you’re not going to find Matthew’s version of something exactly the same as Luke’s in many cases. This is not a contradiction. This is just a result of each man working separately and translating independently from the others.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay. Thanks, Steve.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, Michael. Thanks for your call. All right. If you’d like to be on the program, again, the number is 844-484-5737. Our next call is from David in Gila River, Arizona. David, welcome.
SPEAKER 12 :
Good evening, Steve. I’ll give you a quick question, and then I’ll take the answer off the air. Could you elaborate on John 17, verses 1 – through three. I’d just like to know, have a clear explanation of what Jesus was actually doing in that point of time.
SPEAKER 05 :
John, 17, one through three, when he’s praying?
SPEAKER 12 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, I’ll talk about it. Is there anything in particular that rubs you the wrong way and you need explained?
SPEAKER 12 :
Well, what would be the reaction? What do you think the reaction of the disciples were, given everything that they’ve been through? And now he’s asking for this, you know, to glorify him. How do you think that the disciples would be reacting at that point in time?
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, okay. I mean, thanks for your call. You know, you never know how the disciples reacted to anything Jesus said unless we read of their reaction. And sometimes we do. Sometimes we read they were perplexed. Sometimes we read they’re astonished. Sometimes we read that they were, I don’t know, alarmed or whatever, fearful. But, you know, I think most of the time we’re not really told how they reacted. And I think we’re supposed to assume they did. They reacted as a devout person would do. I mean, first of all, they weren’t there to criticize what Jesus said. So they’re there to learn. And so I assume that they tried their best to understand what he said. John, in particular, recorded it. For those who don’t know the verses, it says Jesus spoke these words, lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may also glorify you. Now, what did the disciples think about that? I don’t know. I don’t know. I’m not sure how much they understood what it means to glorify. Jesus was talking about his being crucified and being resurrected and ascending to heaven and being seated at the right hand of God. That’s all part of what it takes for him to be glorified. I don’t think they understood all that. They may have understood him to be saying, you know, give me the respect I deserve among these people. That is to say, he’s the Messiah. The Jews in general, as the apostles knew well, were not receiving him unanimously in the way they should. And they were not respecting him. So, you know, maybe they thought it meant God, you know, caused the people to respect me, probably glorify me, give me a favor in their eyes. That’s not what he meant, but it’s possible, I suppose the apostles might have understood him to mean that, since they didn’t know quite yet that he would die and resurrect. Now, it’s not like he hadn’t told them. He had told them three times that he would die and resurrect on the third day, but we were told that they didn’t understand what he meant. Their ears were dull, the Bible says. His next words in verse 2 are, as you have given him, meaning Jesus, authority over all flesh. He speaks of himself in the third person here. you’ve given authority over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him. Okay, so I think that he has authority over all flesh would be something that might be newish to the disciples because, I mean, they knew that he was the king. They knew he was the Messiah, so they wouldn’t be surprised that he had extensive authority. At least in Israel, God was making him the king. but that he had authority over all flesh, including, say, Gentiles, that might have sounded strange to them, or they might have interpreted all flesh in the sense that it is often used in the Bible to refer to all flesh in a certain territory or whatever. For example, when the Spirit was poured out in Jerusalem in Acts 2, and Peter said, this is what Joel said, that God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh. Well, Jerusalem wasn’t all flesh, literally. But he put out on indiscriminately, it says on men and women and, you know, high class people and low class people, servants and masters and so forth. All flesh in that case didn’t mean all the people in the world, but it meant people of all kinds in that one place. So they may not have understood all flesh when he says that, you know, that you’ve given me, you know, equal. authority over all flesh. Now, when he came out of the tomb, he said it more clearly. He says, all authority in heaven and on earth belongs to me, which is obviously and unambiguously a reference to all people in the world. But they may not have understood him that way here. Verse 3, it says, and this is eternal life. Now, he’s just said in verse 2 that God has authorized him to give eternal life to as many as were given to him by God. He says, this is eternal life that they may know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you’ve sent. So how would they have understood that? Eternal life is to know God and to know Jesus. Now, I’m not sure if the disciples had the trouble with this, that some people do. But I commonly read people say, see, Jesus did not claim to be God. He said that there’s only one God. And he says that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you’ve sent. So some people get stumbled over the fact that Jesus distinguishes between his father as the only true God and himself. Because, you know, our Trinity doctrines, tells us that Jesus and the Father are both in their own way God. But on the other hand, our Trinity doctrine also tells us that the Father and the Son are also distinguished. And this is especially so and emphasized when Jesus was on earth. You know, his Father in heaven, he prayed to, like he is in this passage. He is on earth. He is God manifested in a human being. And that human being is dependent on God. God the Father. Did the disciples understand that? You’re asking what their reaction was. I don’t know. They might have thought that was pretty strange. In fact, they might not have thought it was strange because I don’t think they thought of Jesus as God at that point. We do know that later, after the Holy Spirit came and led them into all truth, that they speak of Jesus as if he is God. But at this point, I’m not sure they understood that fully. So when he says that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, I don’t know if they would have thought, okay, wait a minute, is Jesus God or is he not? I’m not even sure they had thought he was God until that point. So I don’t know that they’d had that problem that sometimes modern people exposed to Trinitarianism have sometimes had. So I’m not really sure what you’re asking. You just asked me how would the disciples react to these verses. I’ve kind of gone through the verses and thought how they might have reacted. but I’m not sure because I wasn’t there and I didn’t talk to them, and their reaction is not actually recorded. I know how some people react to them today, so that’s kind of guided some of my answer to your question. We’re going to talk to Bob calling from Las Vegas, Nevada. We have some lines open you can access. We only have, what, 12, 13 minutes left. You can still get through. The number is 844-484-5737 if you’d like to call. Bob in Las Vegas, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hey, brother. Bob and Jen here.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hey, I thought it might be you.
SPEAKER 08 :
Good to hear from you. Yeah, you too, brother. Hey, we just finished listening to your explanation about Israel, and I have to say that was concise, accurate, and, boy, it was spot on.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, it’s what you have come to expect from me, except the concise part.
SPEAKER 08 :
That’s what I thought. You know, you were up against the clock there at the bottom of the hour, and I’m thinking he’s doing a really good job to really make this concise and to the point. So, good job. Thank you. You know, Jen and I have been really digging deep into all things eschatological and where Israel plays in on this, and I’ll tell you, you did a great job. And I understand, like what you say, that People will find issue with it, but if they would only take the time to really, really study eschatology and the differences between the dispensation and the other views, they would find the truth. It’s been so enlightening for Jen and I. And it’s just like a burden’s been lifted off of us. It’s just wonderful. Well, thank you. I just wanted to commend you, brother. All right. You don’t have a question today? I don’t have a question. I just wanted to commend you. Okay, Bob. Great to hear from you guys. You too. All right, brother. God bless you.
SPEAKER 05 :
Bye now. All right. We’re going to talk next to John in Phoenix, Arizona. John, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, hey, Steve. I got a question for you. It’s kind of similar to a previous caller. When Jesus said in, I think it’s John 6-4, I think he said in John 6-4, my father is working up till now, and I am also working.
SPEAKER 08 :
Then the Jews… That’s actually John 5.
SPEAKER 05 :
That’s actually John 5-17. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, how would the Jews have… limited understanding of just the Old Testament. How would they have equated Jesus to him calling himself God Almighty?
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, they didn’t like it at all. As we read, they took up stones to stone him when he said that. So they thought he was blaspheming. You see, he was working on the Sabbath. Now, the Sabbath law that the Jews were under, had been in the time of Moses and ever since, although Jesus said he’s the Lord of the Sabbath, which means that he’s not under the Sabbath, he’s over it. But the Sabbath law had said people had to do their regular work six days of the week and not do it at all on the seventh day. That was the Sabbath law. Well, Jesus’ regular work was preaching the gospel and teaching the people and healing people and all that. That was his regular work, and he did it on the Sabbath too. And that’s what bothered them. You know, they even had the rabbis that come up with a rule that even a doctor can’t heal somebody on the Sabbath unless the patient is somebody who would die before the Sabbath ended. That is to say, they don’t think you should let someone die just because it’s the Sabbath. But if they can be healed the next day instead, you need to leave it until the next day. You’re not supposed to work on the Sabbath. So that’s how the Jews felt about it. Now, most of the people Jesus healed, including the ones he’s being criticized for in this chapter, had been sick for a long time. They’re criticizing him because there was a man at the pool at Bethesda who’d been there for many years. paralyzed, and Jesus healed him, and he got up, and it was the Sabbath day, so that’s where their criticism. Now, obviously, he could have waited until the next day, or done it the day before. He didn’t have to do this on the Sabbath. The man was not in an emergency. He’d been in that condition for years, and therefore, he did precisely what they thought You know, doctors should not do, shouldn’t do that on the Sabbath day. And, of course, it was the regular work that Jesus did all the days. So he was definitely not observing a Sabbath. The observance of the Sabbath specifically means to stop working and don’t do your regular work on the Sabbath. But Jesus ignored the Sabbath in that respect and just did the same thing. Now, when they criticized him, he said, well, my father works every day. And I do what he does. He went on to say, you know, a son, and I think this is sometimes called the parable of the apprentice son. Jesus had been an apprentice to Joseph in the carpentry shop, and he knew this. But this was true of almost all tradesmen and their sons. He says, son doesn’t know what to do. Instinctively, his father has to show him. And whatever the father does, he shows his son because he loves the son and wants him to do the same business, wants him to know how to do it. And so the son watches the father and does, imitates the father. Now, this is what apprentice sons did in every trade, but he’s saying, my trade is my father’s business. He said elsewhere, when his parents found him at 12 years old in the temple, he said, I must be about my father’s business. And what Jesus was doing seven days a week and ignoring the Sabbath, not taking the Sabbath off, he says, well, that’s how my father works. You know, I’m his apprentice. I’m learning to do what he wants me to do, and I just imitate him. He works every day. I work every day. Now, this infuriated them. It says, because he called himself God’s son. But more than that, it says, by doing so, he’s making himself equal with God. Now, we who emphasize the deity of Christ like to use that verse to point out that, see, he’s equal with God. He’s God, too. Now, I do believe Jesus is God. I believe in the deity of Christ. But I think what they’re suggesting here is not so much that he’s calling himself God, but that he’s saying he has equal privileges as God does. They knew that God could work seven days a week, and God didn’t have to take a Sabbath. But Jesus was saying that because God can, I can. And that was what made them feel like he was making himself equal in privilege and prerogative to God, which is something that man should not do, they felt. And so they took up stones to stone. So, yeah, it says in verse 18, after he said this, therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill him. They all already wanted to kill him for breaking the Sabbath. But it says now they wanted all the more to kill him because he not only broke the Sabbath, but he also said that God was his father, making himself equal with God. And so that’s why they wanted to kill him. And so you asked how they reacted. Actually, we’re told how they reacted. I’m just trying to explain a little bit how, you know, the way they were looking at the situation. All right, let’s talk to, let’s see, it’s going to be Jeff in Springfield, Massachusetts. Jeff, welcome.
SPEAKER 10 :
Hi Steve. How are you?
SPEAKER 05 :
Good. Thanks.
SPEAKER 11 :
I have a quick question. Um, in the Lord’s prayer where Jesus says, if you, if you forgive men, their sins, you know, God will forgive you. And if you do not, your heavenly father will not forgive you. Now, you know, the standard thing I hear in churches is that’s, you know, forgiving others isn’t like a prerequisite to be safe. And what, what is your, what are your thoughts on that? You know, um, Because people say once you’re saved, you know, you’re saved no matter what. So I’ll take your answer off the air. Thank you.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, thank you. Yeah, people sometimes do say once you’re saved, you’re saved no matter what. But Jesus never said that. Paul never said that. Peter never said that. The Bible never said that. The Bible doesn’t say that no matter what you do, you’re saved. Paul said fornicators and adulterers and idolaters and drunkards. He says they will not inherit the kingdom of God. So it sounds like he’s not saying you’re saved no matter what you do. He said that in 1 Corinthians 6, verse 9 and 10. He also said in Galatians 5, Paul said the same thing. He listed a bunch of things of the same sort, sins, and says those who do these things will not inherit the kingdom of God. So it sounds to me like neither Paul nor Jesus ever said, no matter what you do, you’re always saved. No, salvation is abiding in Christ. Remember Jesus said, I’m the vine, you’re the branches. If you abide, that means remain in me, you’ll bear much fruit. And that is what is expected, that we should remain in him. Why wouldn’t we? Why would you come to him in the first place if you’re not going to stay in him? You know, are you fickle? But he said that if anyone does not remain in me, he’s cast forth as a branch. He says he’s no longer attached to the vine. And what happens to a branch when it’s not attached to its stalk? Well, it dies. It has no life in it. The life of the vine is in the branch as long as the branch is connected and drawing on that life. But you take that branch away from the vine, and that life supply is cut off. He says they wither, and they gather them and burn them. Now, this is, of course, John 15, verses 1 through 6. Now, that being so, Jesus did indicate that if you don’t remain in him, he actually gave the case that if someone does not remain in me, he’ll be cast forth. Now, you can’t cut somebody off from the vine if they never were attached. You know, they won’t wither after being cast forth unless they were once attached and weren’t withering before that. He’s talking about a very obvious thing. When you are attached to the source of life, you live. You become disattached from the source of life, you don’t live long. And that’s the whole New Testament teaching. To abide in Christ is salvation. Now, abiding in Christ means we He’s our king. He’s our Lord. We’re making every effort. It’s our full intention to do what he says. And he tells us to forgive other people. Now, if we don’t do that, we’re not obedient. Are we still abiding in him when we’re being disobedient? Well, I’ll let God be the judge of that. But I wouldn’t count on it, you know. I wouldn’t count on it. I’m not saying that Christians obey Jesus perfectly. But ones who don’t, that is to say Christians who disobey, they also repent, which is because they are determined to follow Jesus. When you realize you haven’t done what Jesus commanded, you’re sorry because you wanted to follow Jesus, and that was a weakness or a foolishness or stupidity on your part. But you change. You go back. You repent, and you begin obeying again. Jesus commands us to forgive people who’ve, you know, offended us. Well, anyone who really wants to follow Jesus, they’ll do that. If they don’t do it immediately, they’ll do it as quickly as they, you know, feel convicted about it. And they’ll repent. And when they repent, they will forgive. So Jesus is not saying, you know, there’s one thing that will keep you from being forgiven, and that’s if you don’t forgive. He is saying, if you don’t forgive, the implication is you’re not following me. I’m telling you to forgive. You don’t do that, you’re going your own way, not mine. You’re not abiding in me. There’s no forgiveness you can have from God except through me. And if you don’t follow me, there’s no access to that. I don’t think it’s just a matter of forgiving others, just a condition of being saved. I think being a Christian is the condition for being saved. And forgiveness is required of Christians. That’s how I see it. You’ve been listening to the Narrow Path Radio Broadcast. We are listener supported. You can find out how to help us out by going to our website, thenarrowpath.com. And let’s talk again tomorrow. God bless.
