In this episode, we stretch our understanding of Revelation and the events that surround the end times. Gregg tackles the sequence and symbolism found in these dynamic biblical prophecies, helping listeners to discern the eschatological beliefs embedded within Scripture. Alongside these discussions, Gregg answers calls about the broader aspects of Christian life, offering thoughtful perspectives that resonate with biblical teachings. Whether a curious follower or seasoned scholar, this episode provides rich insights for anyone eager to deepen their understanding of Christianity.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 03 :
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, taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith, we welcome you to join us on the air today. We have some lines open right now. That may not be true, say, five minutes from now. This is a great time to strike while the iron is hot. You can get through if you call right now. This is number 844- That number again is 844-484-5737. And I need to announce a couple things. One is that we had Theology Thursday scheduled in Huntington Beach this Thursday, but that has been canceled. I canceled for now. We’re rescheduling it. Uh, we, uh, we learned that, uh, the first game of football season is on that night. And, uh, While, of course, Theology Thursday is far more important than football, this event is held at a pizza parlor where there’s televisions. And so, obviously, a lot of the customers would be there to watch the game and make a lot of noise. So we’re going to have to pick another night, at least until football season is over. Anyway, but then this Wednesday night, we still have our regular Zoom meeting. which we do the first Wednesday of each month, and you’re welcome to join us for that. Not this weekend, but the following one I’ll be in Minneapolis area. I’ll be speaking three times, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Actually, I think maybe four times in those three days, if I’m not mistaken. And if you’re in the Minneapolis area, you might be interested in learning about that. I’m going to Oregon for about 10 or 11 days to speak various places in Minneapolis. what, October. And I just learned that in November I’ll be in the Dallas-Fort Worth area teaching, or not teaching, but debating Dr. Michael Brown on the subject of Israel. So a lot of things coming up here. This Wednesday, that’s actually tomorrow, we have the Zoom meeting. Then the middle of this month, actually the 12th through the 14th, Minneapolis area, October, a long itinerary in Oregon. and then November 7th and 8th, this debate with Dr. Brown in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Anyway, more about those things soon. But if you’re interested in logging on to the Zoom meeting tomorrow or learning about any of those events, they will always be posted at our website. thenarrowpath.com, under the tab that says Announcements. If you go there, you’ll see how to log in to the Zoom meeting tomorrow, and you’ll find all the other announcements that are nailed down and that we have the details for. All right. We’re going to go to the phones now. And, again, if you’d like to call, the number is 844-484-5737. And we’ll talk, first of all, to Yossi, I guess it is, in Knoxville, Tennessee. Welcome to The Narrow Path, Yossi.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hey, Steve. Yeah, it’s Yossi. Yossi, okay. I had, yeah, I had a question for John 14. I’ve always wondered, kind of confused me on how to view this and talking to Philip and saying he was seeing me as seeing the Father. And, yeah, just being confused on how, like in what sense to take that spiritual, literal, because on one sense, on the surface, I’m like, Jesus is the exact imprint of God the Father. but also, like, in another sense, like, does that mean everyone who has physically seen Jesus has seen the Father, or everyone who reads the Bible has seen the Father in the sense, or is that different than, you know, in John 17 where he talks about eternal life? Yeah. And knowing the Father, like, is that different?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, when Jesus said that, he was answering Philip’s question. Philip said, Lord, show us the Father, and that’s sufficient for us. Now, apparently, he’s asking to actually see God. Now, obviously, the Bible says numerous times that God is invisible. No one has seen God. God told Moses, who asked to see his glory, he said, no one can see my face and live. So, I mean, Philip is making a rather unusual and maybe unreasonable request to actually look at God himself. Now, if someone says, well, wait, didn’t some people see God in the Bible? Yes, he appeared in visions. He appeared in theophanies. He appeared in dreams and so forth. But no one had ever really looked upon the invisible God. With their eyeballs, it’s not possible. God told Moses, no one can see me and live in that respect. Now, but they had seen Jesus. And I don’t know if Philip was saying, you know, you tell us you’re from the Father, but, you know, really we haven’t, you know, how can we be sure of that? Can you show us the Father? I’m not sure if he’s saying that or if he’s just hungry to see if he can get a glimpse of something that nobody has ever seen, like God the Father. In any case, Jesus kind of showed disappointment with Philip, saying, you know, have I been with you so long, Philip, and you don’t know me? Now, that’s an interesting thing to say. I mean, some people say that Jesus is not God. But what a blasphemous thing or an impertinent thing it would be for Jesus to say that to that question, if he’s not God. Because if someone says, listen, just show us God. And Jesus says, don’t you know who I am? Why do you need to see any more than me? In other words, you have seen God. You’ve seen me. Now, you’re asking what he meant by that. Well, he went on to say, don’t you know that I’m in the Father and the Father’s in me? And if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father. So, you know exactly what does that mean? It’s very mysterious, obviously. It says in Colossians 2.9, that in Christ dwelt all the fullness of the deity of God bodily. So in some sense or another, God fully manifested himself in Christ in a bodily form, but not in a disembodied form. In fact, the disembodied form, Jesus later in the very same chapter, of course we’re talking about John 14 here, he said, the Father is greater than I. So, you know, that’s an interesting thing. That’s in verse 28 of the same chapter. So he said, if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the father, but the father is greater than I am. What’s that mean? Well, it must mean something. Obviously, Jesus was rational enough not to contradict himself. So he’s saying there’s a sense in which the father and I are one. And that if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father. There’s another sense, which the Father is greater than I. Now, nobody knows exactly how that works. But I think he is saying that no one needs to see more than me in order to get a glimpse of what the Father is like. I personally think it may be like, and I give different kind of illustrations. I came up with these when I had kids who wanted to know that kind of stuff. And so, you know, I told my kids, you know, it’s like if you stick your finger into a fishbowl and your pet fish is in there and they’ve never seen you. The only part they can see is the finger. And so if that finger could communicate with them, say, I am, if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the person who owns you, the person who cleans your water, the person who feeds you. You know, I’m the one who takes care of you. But there’s more of me than that. In other words, my finger is indeed my intrusion into their world. But there’s a lot more of me that’s not made visible to them in the world. There’s two concepts there. about God’s presence that we need to be aware of. One is about God’s universal presence, and one is about his manifest presence. Now, God is universally present in all the universe. Now, you can go up in a rocket ship and you won’t see him. You can use a telescope and you won’t see him because God’s invisible. But there’s another aspect of God’s presence besides his universal presence, and that is his manifest presence. When he makes himself manifest, that means he appears in some form. He appeared in a pillar of cloud to the children of Israel. He appeared in a burning bush to Moses. He appeared like a man who wrestled with Jacob all night long, or as a man who visited Abraham and had a meal with him in Genesis 18. You know, God has appeared. That’s the manifest presence of God. But when God appears in a certain place, that doesn’t mean that he has ceased to be everywhere else, too. It’s just that this is the only place he’s manifesting himself in a certain form while he exists throughout the whole universe at the same time. Now, in my pea brain attempt to understand what Jesus is, I believe he’s God’s manifest presence in a human being. that he was born among us as a son of Adam, and God was in him. The Bible says God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, 2 Corinthians, and other things like that. Hebrews 1.3 says that Jesus was the bright shining of his glory and the express image of his person, that is, God’s person. You know, in John 1.14, it says the word, who is God, was made flesh and dwelt among us, And we beheld his glory in 1 Timothy 3. It says that God was manifest in the flesh. Now, manifest in the flesh, that’s a manifestation. That’s the manifest presence of God. Now, Jesus could say, I am God manifested in the flesh here, which is we know John who recorded these words. We know that’s how he understood them because he had said it back in John 1, verse 14. The word was made flesh. and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father. So, full of grace and truth, he says. So Jesus was, you know, God appearing among us in human form. If you say, is Jesus God? The answer is technically yes, but the Bible never, well, I’m not saying the Bible never does, but it’s not the most common way to speak about it. And people get confused when we say Jesus is God, because, of course, he prayed to the Father, and sometimes God or the Father spoken of as in addition to jesus or you know distinct from jesus but that is true i mean the finger in the fish tank is distinct from the rest of the whole person but it is him manifesting himself in the world of those fish and jesus said he was casting out demons by the finger of god which is an interesting statement i’m not sure why he chose that term but I believe that Jesus is God sticking his finger into our world to manifest himself to us where we live. He lives in an invisible realm elsewhere, but he manifests himself among us. Now, of course, Jesus could say, yeah, so you’re seeing the Father. You’re seeing God. But the Father is a lot bigger than this. There’s more to God than meets the eye here when you look at me. And I think that that’s how we, it’s one way, at least we can reconcile those two things that seem otherwise to be somewhat contradictory. All right, let’s talk to Donald from Las Vegas, Nevada. Donald, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi, thanks for taking my call. I have a question about Revelation chapter 11 and 15, the seventh trumpet. And I think I understand your view is this is the end of the world, the second coming. Is that correct? That is how I take it. Yeah, and then how do you reconcile verse 14 when it says the third woe is coming soon?
SPEAKER 03 :
The third woe is coming soon? Well, that’s before the trumpet is sounded, right?
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, but it’s right after the second woe, so… Are they in line right with each other, or is this a span of 2,000 years, so to speak, before the second world and the third world?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, I believe that when you get to chapter 11, verse 15, and the seventh trumpet, that is, of course, picking up where chapter 9 left off. You had the first six trumpets through chapter 9. Then chapters 10 and 11 through verse 14 are, in my opinion, a parenthesis. And so, I mean, my lectures, my verse-by-verse lectures on Revelation go into this, that I believe that chapter 10 gives us the information that John was going to prophesy again. There was a little book that he saw in the hand of an angel. He had to eat the book, and then he had to prophesy it. And I think that we’ve gotten through six of the trumpets when you get through chapter 9. But then there’s this interruption. Now, that’s not too strange because when it comes to the seven-sealed scroll, earlier in the book, there were six seals broken. And then instead of the seventh seal being broken, you had an interruption for a whole chapter, chapter seven. And then you had the seventh seal broken in chapter eight. So you had a break there. The first six seals were broken in chapter 6, and then chapter 8, verse 1, the next seal is broken, or two. But chapter 7 is in between the sixth and the seventh seal. It’s like an interval. And I think you have kind of the same thing between the sixth and the seventh trumpets. There’s an interval, and that interval is chapters 10 and the first 14 verses of chapter 11. So the statement, the second woe is past, behold, the third woe is coming quickly. I don’t know exactly how that fits chronologically with the earlier part or with the later part. But it is possible that, I mean, that it belongs to the thing about the two witnesses in chapter 11, verses 1 through 13. It talks about them after they are caught up in heaven. There’s, you know, the city fell, a great earthquake, and so forth. There’s a lot of things in Revelation that I do not know how they fit chronologically with each other because I don’t think it’s written… as a chronological narrative. I think when John says, then I saw this, then I saw that, then I saw that, in most cases he’s just saying, this is the order I saw these visions in. I don’t think he’s necessarily saying that the thing I’m seeing now will be fulfilled later than the thing I saw earlier. It’s like, you know, in Daniel, in Daniel chapter 2, you’ve got Nebuchadnezzar’s dream where he saw an image with a head of gold, chest of silver, belly of bronze, legs of iron, and so forth. And they represented the Babylonian, immediate Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires. Well, then Daniel, five chapters later in chapter 7, he sees four beasts coming out of the sea, and they represent the same time period. So they’re parallel to it. And then when you get to chapter 8, he sees a ram and a he-goat fighting it out, and they represent the second and third of those kingdoms. So they overlap chronologically, those other visions, too. So even though Daniel has these visions in a certain order, it doesn’t mean they don’t overlap each other. And Revelation is very much like Daniel in that respect, in my opinion. So it is true you would expect there to be some sequence when we’re told there’s seven seals and there’s seven trumpets and there’s seven bowls of wrath. You’d think, well, they should be in the right order. Well, maybe they are, maybe they’re not. Again, this is what he sees. We’re not told specifically if they occur in the order that he reports them. And that makes it very difficult. I find it very difficult. I always have found it very difficult to know the exact order that some things fall in relation to others. But you make a good point. I mean, if, you know, the second woe is past, behold, the third comes. coming quickly if that means you know that that there’s a third woe you know that that is the seventh trumpet well that that would seemingly mean the third woe is the second coming of Christ in my opinion now of course there are people who are preterists I’m a partial preterist but I’m not a full preterist But there are people who do believe that all of chapter 11 and 12 and so forth were fulfilled before 70 A.D., and therefore they would see the seventh trumpet as apparently the fall of Jerusalem. But even they would have to say this is not the end of the story, and they see the fall of Jerusalem in later visions, too. So there’s issues. There’s issues with the chronology of Revelation. And I don’t think we’re supposed to make as much of the chronology as some people do. Now, the futurists… you know, who are trying to see this as a panorama of a future tribulation, they typically try to take things more or less chronologically as, okay, this early part is the first half of the tribulation, this later part is the second half of the tribulation, and so forth. I’m not really sure that works as neatly as they’d like it to, but I’m not a futurist anyways. So, you know, I will not make any kind of commitments about the order of things in terms of their fulfillment. These different visions are often independent from each other in their own chronological, you know, features. Thank you so much. I do appreciate your time. All right. God bless you, man. Good to talk to you. All right. Let’s talk to Peter in Woodburn, Oregon. Peter, welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hi, Steve. How are you doing? Good. So I have a question, but kind of along the lines of what you just answered for him. It’s not the same part of Revelation, but listening to you give the answer to him kind of means you might give me the same answer, but I’ll just run it by you. Reading in Revelation, it’s just King James Version. At the end of 19, chapter 19, we’re told that, you know, Christ comes back and slays everybody with his sword from his mouth. And, you know, then the birds come or whatever. But then when 20 starts, it’s talking about Satan being bound for a thousand years. And this is just so confusing to me. And I just listened to what you said about the timeline and how that fits. And so to me, this is confusing because it makes it sound like at the end, after Jesus, you know, judges, you know, the great throne or, you know, everyone’s, you know, Christ is on the world now and he’s ruling the world with an iron scepter. And apparently Satan is bound during that time for a thousand years and then he’s released for a short amount of time and that just seems out of place i don’t know if that seems out of place to you i was i would think that maybe we’re in the time right now satan’s being bound yeah yeah well i yeah i believe revelation 20 is symbolic for the church age
SPEAKER 03 :
And so I do believe that chapter 20 begins earlier than what chapter 19 ends at. Now, let me just make a few points about this. Revelation 20 does not mention anywhere that Jesus is on earth during this time. Premillennialists understand Jesus to be coming back at the end of chapter 19 and then setting up a thousand-year millennial kingdom on earth, beginning at chapter 20. So they see a chronological movement from chapter 19 to 20 in its fulfillment, and that’s just what they’re committed to. There’s a couple of things to be questioned about that. One is not everyone would agree that the end of chapter 19 is describing the second coming of Christ. Now, I realize that John sees him on a white horse, And his name is called the Word of God, and there’s a sharp sword coming out of his mouth. This is all in chapter 19. And he strikes the nations with the word out of his mouth and slays them. Now, there are some who believe, and I’m not saying I do, but there is a case to be made for the idea that this is very symbolic, not of the second coming of Christ, but of Christ carried by the church. His word, you know, he is in the church. They’re his body. And he’s carried by the church to all the nations, conquering the nations with his word, that is with the gospel. And that that is simply describing what’s been going on for a couple thousand years now since Jesus came, that this is describing his victories over the… That his name is said to be the word of God. he’s striking the nations with the sword out of his mouth, which I think almost everyone would agree the sword out of his mouth is his word. So the nations are being struck by the word of God and conquered by the word of God. This could refer to them being converted. Now, I realize it’s described like it’s a bloodbath. And, you know, the spiritual warfare of the last 2,000 years has been a bloodbath. But also, it’s a spiritual bloodbath for the enemies of Christ. That is to say, for the devil and the demons. But there’s also been a lot of bloodshed. Unfortunately, some people who call themselves Christians have shed some of that blood. But even if they didn’t, you know, it’s been a period of time where a lot of people have died, Christians included, as martyrs. But the thing is, I’m not advocating that, but the thing that the prophecy depicts is is the nations being conquered by the sword that comes out of his mouth, which is his word. And so there are people, I think post-millennialists would take this view, but I’m not sure they’re the only ones. Maybe some amillennialists do too. that this is not really the second coming of Christ described him on the white horse, but it’s really his conquest of the nations through the gospel. Now, against this being a reference to Christ’s second coming, we’re told in Acts 1.11 that when he comes back, he’ll come back in the same manner as his disciples saw him go. But he didn’t go away on a horse. And so that would raise questions as to this. The only place in the Bible speaks of Christ riding a horse in Revelation 19. And therefore, you know, the whole idea that Jesus will come back on a horse comes from that interpretation of this passage. But what if he’s riding victoriously through the earth conquering? You see, for example, when the first seal is broken in chapter 6, there’s a rider on a white horse who’s going forth conquering and to conquer. Some people think that’s Christ. Interestingly, dispensationalists usually think that’s the Antichrist. But dispensationalists usually have the opposite view of what Christ is. what historic Christians have thought about things. Zechariah 10 is talking about the Maccabean Wars, in my opinion, which took place between the Old and New Testament times. And it says this in verse 3, Zechariah 10, 3, My anger is kindled against the shepherds. I will punish the goatherds, for the Lord of hosts will visit his flock, the house of Judah, and will make them his royal horse in the battle. Now, this is not talking about Revelation 19, but the imagery. of God making his people, Judah, his horse in the battle, is not very different from the imagery in Revelation 19 of Christ riding a horse to the church. and it is the church that carries his word, the sword out of his mouth, to the nations. So maybe that’s the second coming of Christ, and maybe it’s not. If it is, that doesn’t mean that chapter 20 must follow chronologically after chapter 19, because as I said, separate visions in Revelation are not always chronological in their fulfillment. And I would point out, for example, we were talking about chapter 11 earlier, Chapter 11, I believe, has the end of the world and the second coming of Christ. But chapter 12, the next chapter, in verse 1, it’s got the birth of Jesus. So it goes back from the end of the history to the beginning of it again, as you move from chapter 11 to chapter 12. And I think it may do that here too. If this is the second coming of Christ in chapter 19, I believe chapter 20 goes to the beginning. the beginning again to start telling the story from another angle that’s my understanding we’re out of time for this half hour we have another half hour coming don’t go away our website is thenarrowpath.com I’ll be right back don’t go away
SPEAKER 05 :
Are you aware of the wide variety of teachings available without charge at the Narrow Path website? In several hundred lectures, Steve Gregg covers every book of the Bible individually and gives separate teachings on approximately 300 important biblical topics. There is no charge for anything at our website. Visit us there and you’ll be amazed at all you’ve been missing. That web address again is www.thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 03 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’ve got another half hour ahead of us to take your calls. We have some lines open again if you’d like to get through. The number to call is 844-484-5737. Now, if you’re not familiar with the program, this is a Bible question and answer program. So if you have questions about the Bible or about some passage in the Bible or about your Christian life, about Christian doctrine or whatever, you can call about those things. And if you don’t believe in the Bible and you don’t believe in Christianity, you can call about that, too. I’d love to hear that. from you, and you can bring, if you have them, objections to the Bible. You’re always welcome to do that here. The number is 844-484-5737. 844-484-5737. And we’re going to talk next to Ron, who’s calling from Miami, Florida. Ron, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thank you, Steve. I think we just went on the air in Miami just recently.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yes, you did. It’s a great station. Wonderful. Wonderful. Yeah, I appreciate it. And what I want to tell you is something that is extremely important. I hope every listener will take note of this and pass it on to their pastors. It’s dealing with Genesis chapter 37, verses 12 through 36. Joseph, if you can turn there, Joseph… And he’s put into the pit. And that’s the main focus of the problem that every preacher I heard, except two, I heard about a hundred sermons on this because I’m old. And they mistake, they don’t read the passages, especially… What is your question for me today? Well, the question is, I’d like… everyone to look at verses 29 to 30, 29 and 30, where what happened was… I’ll tell you what, we don’t have a lot of time for you to give a Bible study.
SPEAKER 03 :
Can you just tell me what you’re interested in saying in a nutshell?
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay, I’m interested in saying all the preachers, they don’t read the Scripture… because the important thing is Joseph is a type of Christ, and he’s put into the pit. And then when Reuben goes back to the pit, the pit’s empty because the Midianites took Joseph out of the pit and sold him to the Israelites.
SPEAKER 03 :
All right. Well, I appreciate your call. I’m not sure the pastors don’t talk about that. I’ve heard many pastors talk about Joseph being a type of Christ. But, yeah, thanks for sharing that. Let’s talk to Brian in Riverside, California. Brian, welcome.
SPEAKER 06 :
Hey, Steve, how you doing? Good. So my mom, she gave her life to Christ about five, six years ago, very deep in the faith. But my dad, my dad not so much. And I just found out not too long ago that they’re not even married. They never got married. They’ve been living together for about 37, 38 years. And you just learned that, huh?
SPEAKER 03 :
Interesting. Yeah.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, I always thought they were married. They never did get married. They’ve just been living together. They never got married, like blessed by God or something.
SPEAKER 03 :
So what’s your question for me?
SPEAKER 06 :
Is she living in sin?
SPEAKER 03 :
She and your dad are still living together? They’re both healthy? Okay. Well, why didn’t they get married?
SPEAKER 06 :
She brought it up to him. Now she said that he doesn’t see the point in it.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay, well, here’s the thing. They’ve been together 30-something years. In most states, I think that would be considered common law marriage. Now, I don’t understand why someone would want to live together that long without taking any vows because that’s what makes people married. People are married because they vow to be faithful to each other for life. And it sounds like your parents have intended to be faithful together for life. I mean, they’ve given each other the best years of their lives. I doubt that they’re seriously considering leaving each other and finding new partners at this point. So, you know, they probably think of themselves as essentially married. Now, the Bible doesn’t say what constitutes a wedding ceremony. They obviously didn’t have any ceremony, but In the case of Isaac and Rebekah, we simply read that they agreed to be married and they just moved in together. And so back in the ancient times, they didn’t have elaborate ceremonies for that. In fact, there was a time when the Mesopotamian culture, where Abraham came from, If a man, and when we’re getting married, he would simply say to the woman, you’re my wife, and she’d say, you’re my husband, and that was it. They were married. So, now, I don’t know. It sounds like your parents having kids together and living together for 30-something years, sounds like they were seeing themselves as married without the hassle of a ceremony. Now, I would consider that if they consider that they are not able to, to betray each other and not able to ever leave each other, that they are married. That is common law. I mean, there’s lots of ways to get married, I guess, in different cultures and stuff. But in our culture, if someone’s living together for a long time, they usually can be regarded as common law married. But it seems it would be better, obviously, for them to have made vows. But, I mean, in a sense, like I said, if there are implied vows that they both are assuming – That may not be very much different than what happened with Isaac and Rebecca. There were implied vows that they were getting married and they were going to be together for life. Now, your parents might never have had that idea that, well, we’re going to be with each other for life no matter what. But it just happened that by default they ended up staying together. So, you know, I’m thinking they’ve got a pretty lifelong commitment. It looks to me like they’re probably not. Not living in sin, but because, again, common law marriage is as legal as any other kind of marriage, I think. But they weren’t Christians either. So, I mean, if your mom became a Christian only a few years ago, you said, and your dad, maybe not. They were married for 20-something years before they were, I mean, without either of them being Christians. So I would say that just by the common law marriage, They’re married now. But that’s hard to say. I mean, God will have to judge that. But I’m thinking that they see themselves essentially as married, even though they never went through the ceremony. And since they weren’t Christians when they got together, I’m not sure how their vows would have made that big a difference because they weren’t really doing it before God. They’re just kind of making some kind of agreement to each other. So that’s an unusual situation that you didn’t even know about until recently.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah. Okay.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, but I would say, you know, if your father wanted to be right with God, I know your mom wants to be, that they should make some kind of vows to each other. I mean, that’s what would make them, you know, undoubtedly married. And, you know, do you have siblings? Yes.
SPEAKER 06 :
I do. I have a younger brother.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, they started a family, stayed together. I mean, to my mind, that looks like intention of marriage. But I don’t know why they wouldn’t have formalized it. Anyway, I believe that if you’re – I don’t think your mom is in sin because she’s still with the man she’s been with for 30 years and essentially in a marriage relationship. All right. That’s an unusual story. Never heard that kind of story before. All right, Brian, God bless you.
SPEAKER 06 :
God bless you.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thanks for calling. All right. Mike from Whidbey Island in Washington, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 07 :
Hey, Steve. Thanks for taking my call. I was listening yesterday, too, and I was shocked that you didn’t – this lady brought up that we all have sin nature, and that you brought up was – from Augustine, that he created this. But it’s obvious that every human being has a sin nature, isn’t it? I mean, we have a nature bent towards sin. I mean, I don’t think anybody can deny that unless you’re an unbeliever. Well, we are. I would have thought that you would have believed that.
SPEAKER 03 :
So I have believed it all my life. I’m just saying that it’s not stated in the Bible very clearly. We got it from Augustine. But I mean, a person can certainly believe it, can believe Augustine with or without clear scriptural support. But you’re right. I mean, we all I think I mentioned. We all are in bondage to sin until Christ sets us free. In bondage to sin means we can’t stop sinning. So, I mean, if you want to call that a sin nature, that’s fine. I believe that, as I explained it, at the very least we can say people are born self-centered. And, you know, they don’t live very long before they do self-centered things at the expense of others, which is what sin is. And Jesus said whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. So I believe people are slaves of sin. I don’t think we need a term, sin nature, to describe that when being a slave of sin would look exactly the same. And the Bible does use that language. The Bible doesn’t use the term sin nature. Now, you’ll find some translations do. But they’re not translating Greek words that mean sin nature. In the Greek New Testament, Paul sometimes uses the expression sarx in Greek, S-A-R-X. It means flesh. And flesh, sarx, is translated a lot of different ways in the Bible. King James and New King James always translate it as flesh, I believe, but some modern translations try to clarify it, and some of them have changed it to sinful nature. I think the NIV does that, and I’m not sure how many others do that, but they translate sarx as sinful nature. Now, sarx doesn’t literally mean sinful nature. It means flesh. But many people believe that Paul is saying that we have a sinful nature, which he calls the flesh. Now, maybe he did or not. That’s an interpretation. It’s not a translation. So, I mean, I’m not, I have no interest in denying that man is. sinful by nature. But the question is whether we’re born sinful or simply born with a self-interest. I mean, animals are born self-interested. They want to eat when they’re hungry. They want to mate when it’s time to do that. They want to sleep. They want to avoid dangers. I mean, that’s self-interest. And yet animals are not sinners. I mean, that’s how God made them. I think human beings are born self-interested too, but the thing is that there are ways you can express your self-interest that go against God’s commands. For example, to run away when you should stand and be a hero for God would be sinful. But running away from danger is a natural tendency. Is it sinful natural tendency or is it just a natural tendency which becomes sinful when we shouldn’t run away, when we shouldn’t be cowardly? And at other times, it’s not wrong to do it. Same thing with sex or food. I mean, animals have sex drive and hunger for food, just like we do. There’s nothing wrong with those drives, except there are times when God tells us we shouldn’t be using them. And we have a tendency to want to anyway. But that’s the drive, that we have to govern it by God’s commands. And we don’t. We don’t always. At least when we’re young, we don’t. So we sin. We commit sin. Now, did we sin because we have inherited some kind of a gene for sin, a chromosome for that? I don’t know. I don’t know enough about genetics. I don’t even know if you can have a chromosome for that kind of a thing. All I’m saying is I don’t read of the subject in the Bible. I do read of it in Augustine. So, you know, if someone wants to call that phenomenon a sin in nature, that’s okay with me, but it’s not a term in the Bible. That’s all I’m saying.
SPEAKER 07 :
Now, Can I make a comment on the second coming of Christ in Revelation 19? I mean, my Bible says Christ on a white horse is the title. And then it says the king of kings and lord of lords. He’s coming and he defeats Satan and the armies that are against, you know, the gathering armies that are against Christ. He defeats them. So, I mean, and then Satan is bound for a thousand years. I mean, have you ever been to a Bible study fellowship class? Have you ever been in one of those studies?
SPEAKER 03 :
No, I’m not a dispensationalist, and they are. But I’ve certainly been at Calvary Chapel, which teaches exactly the same thing Bible study fellowship teaches about revelation. I’ve been through the Bible, what, two or three times with Chuck Smith when he was alive, verse by verse. And I’m certainly familiar with it. Now, the fact that your Bible has a title that says Christ on a white horse, well, that’s just noting what he sees. He sees Christ on a white horse. The question is, what is it referring to? What is Christ doing there? Is it his second coming? Or is it symbolic of his conquest of the world through his word? And, you know, I pointed out that in Zechariah 10.3, God said he made Judah his mighty horse in battle. Now, God wasn’t literally riding on Judah as a horse, but that’s symbolic. And apocalyptic literature is symbolic, Revelation is symbolic. So the question is always going to be, what is this symbolism referring to? Yeah, I’m very much aware of the view that that is talking about the second coming of Christ.
SPEAKER 07 :
I mean, I have to take this literally, that Christ is really on the white horse, and he’s coming back, and also the saints will reign a thousand years with Christ on the earth, and then he’ll bring in the new heaven and the new earth. I mean, I have to see it just the way the Bible… I mean, these titles are there for… for a purpose, and I think Reformed theology is the correct form of understanding Scripture. But, I mean, I’m surprised you’re so far from what I consider true biblical understanding.
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, you say you have to take it literally. So I’m curious. Do you believe that the world will literally be ruled by an animal? that has the mouth of a bear and the feet of a bear, mouth of a lion. It looks like a leopard has seven heads and ten horns. Do you think there’s an actual animal that will be ruling the world like that?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, I think that’s a symbolic. Isn’t that the Old Testament? What book are you talking about?
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s Revelation 13.
SPEAKER 07 :
Revelation 13. Let me know. I got it right here. So 13.
SPEAKER 03 :
I just described what it says. I’m just wondering, do you think that’s literal? Do you have to take that literally?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, it is going to be, I believe that the Antichrist who rises out of the sea will be a literal person. Well, that’s not what it says.
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s not what it says. That’s not literal. That’s not a literal interpretation of that vision. First of all, you think the Antichrist is going to literally come out of the ocean? Like from underneath the ocean, like a man coming out of the sea? Is that what you believe? And where does the word Antichrist appear? There’s no Antichrist mentioned in Revelation. The word doesn’t appear there.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, let me back up. Satan is thrown out of heaven in Revelation 12.7. A woman is persecuted. That is Israel.
SPEAKER 03 :
Wait, wait, wait. Is Israel literally a woman?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, I believe David Hocking would consider that woman to be Israel.
SPEAKER 03 :
But let’s not worry about what David Hocking or even what I think. I’m wondering what you think. Do you think Israel is literally a woman, or is it a nation? Nations and women are not the same thing. I’m looking at a woman right now in my office. She’s not a nation, and the United States is not a woman. So is Israel a woman?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yes, Israel is a woman in Scripture.
SPEAKER 03 :
No, no, no. A woman represents Israel in Scripture. It’s symbolic. Israel is not literally a woman. Okay, so why don’t you take it literally when you have to take Revelation 19 literally?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, I do. I take that this It says now the dragon saw he had been cast down to earth. That’s Satan. He’s being cast out of heaven, no longer able to see. You’re not thinking about what I’m saying.
SPEAKER 03 :
I don’t want you talking over me. We don’t have that much time left. There’s a lot of people waiting. But let me just ask you this. Do you not realize that the woman in Revelation 12 is symbolic for Israel? Israel is not a woman. The devil’s not a real dragon, by the way. Sometimes Revelation calls him a dragon. Sometimes it calls him a serpent. A serpent is not a dragon. A dragon is not a serpent. And the devil is neither. Literally, he’s a spirit. He’s not a reptile. And Jesus, in Revelation 5, 6, is described as a lamb with seven eyes and seven horns. And then he’s called a lamb 27 other times in the book of Revelation. Is he literally a lamb? See, you don’t realize you’re taking some things literally literally. for some reason because David Hawking told you to, I guess. But other things, you don’t take literally, but you’re not noticing that you’re not taking them. You think you’re taking them literally, but you’re not. Jesus was not a literal lamb with seven eyes and seven horns, is he?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, just getting back to the woman.
SPEAKER 03 :
I can’t go through the whole book of Revelation if you’ve got lots of people waiting. I have less than ten minutes left. Will you just answer my question? Is Jesus literally a lamb with seven eyes and seven horns, in your opinion? Yes, he is.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, well, that’s your opinion. He didn’t come back as a lamb.
SPEAKER 03 :
With seven eyes and seven horns. But wait a minute. You told me he was riding on a horse. So in Revelation 19, there’s apparently a man riding on a horse. And you said that’s Jesus coming back. And now you’re telling me he’s coming back as a lamb with seven eyes and seven horns?
SPEAKER 07 :
You’re not believing Revelation 14.1. It says a lamb standing on Mount Zion and with him 144,000. Having his father’s name written on their foreheads. That’s going to be a literal interpretation.
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, no. Jesus is not literally a lamb. Do you know that in John chapter 1, John the Baptist pointed out Jesus and said, there’s the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. Now, Jesus was not a lamb. He was a man. Nobody saw an actual lamb. But Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world is a symbolic name for Jesus. His real name isn’t that. And he’s not really a lamb. So I’m afraid what’s going on here is dispensationism has taught you to take everything literally. But you don’t. I mean, you don’t think Jesus is… If you saw Jesus right now, do you think you’d see a woolly lamb with seven eyes on his face and seven horns on his head? If you think so… then you’re just taking things far more literally than I do. If you think that’s a good thing to do, then do so. You have my blessing. But I certainly don’t do that, and I don’t think anyone with good sense will do so. All right, let’s talk to Judy from Vancouver, B.C. Hi, Judy.
SPEAKER 02 :
Hi there.
SPEAKER 03 :
How are you doing?
SPEAKER 02 :
Hi there. Thank you for taking my call. I called about two weeks ago to get wisdom around what God expects of me being in a situation of domestic violence and now separated from my husband with a healthy RCMP. And now I’ve been praying about wisdom around what to tell our children as to why their father hasn’t been permitted to see them. And I came across the words that six years old and nine years old.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay, okay.
SPEAKER 02 :
And so it’s the Ministry of Children that has prevented them. I have not asked for that, but that’s what the ministry has deemed for their safety.
SPEAKER 03 :
I’m sorry, what ministry is that?
SPEAKER 02 :
What ministry? The Ministry of Children and Family Development, so the government.
SPEAKER 03 :
I got you. Got you. Okay.
SPEAKER 02 :
So I’ve been praying for wisdom around that. And I came across 1 Corinthians 6.19 where our body is the temple of God and how we need to respect that. And they have in the past asked me about where did I get that cut from? Where did I get that bruise from? Why do I have a cut on my face? Why is my lip swollen? Things like that. And I’ve never answered the question to them. I told them that I’m not ready to answer that question. Okay. And maybe in the future. And they have, again, brought it up. And my question is, can you elaborate more on our body as a temple of God and how that relates to us being respectful of our bodies and not
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, I don’t know. I’m not sure how it applies to your situation where you’re not telling your children why you’re bruised and your lip is split and things like that. Your body’s temple of the Holy Spirit. Paul says that in 1 Corinthians 6 to say that we shouldn’t commit fornication because he said all other kinds of sins are outside the body, but he commits fornication, sins against his body and causes Christ death. to commit fornication. Not that Christ literally does, but we’re joining Christ to a harlot if we do that because we are his body and his temple. So Paul’s just saying we need to make sure we don’t spiritually or morally defile ourselves with our bodies. And he’s thinking primarily of fornication. So he’s not really talking about physical health or anything like that. I’m not sure. how you’re applying that. All I can say is it seems strange if the Ministry of Children’s Services tells you you can’t tell your children why their dad can’t see them. Well, I don’t know. What do they want you to say? I mean, you live with your kids, I assume. And, you know, I guess you should contact them and say, what am I allowed to tell my kids and what am I not? Or else, I would just tell them the truth and who cares what the ministry says. I mean, you could say it in a… In a gentle way, just say, you know, Daddy can’t really, you know, control himself that well right now, so he’s got to be away for a while, something like that. I mean, there may be a better way to say it. I’m not in the situation, so I’ve never given a moment’s thought of how to say something like that. But if the government is telling you you can’t tell them the truth, you know, Why don’t you ask the government? What am I supposed to tell them? I live in their house. They’re asking me questions. What am I supposed to say?
SPEAKER 02 :
Sorry, just to clarify, the ministry hasn’t told me I can’t tell them. Oh, okay. I’m just trying to – I’m seeking wisdom around what I should tell the children. Yeah, just say – My husband cannot contact me and the kids. That’s what’s going on.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay. Well, yeah, then you could just say something very generic and maybe you already have. I don’t know to your children. I just say, well, you know, daddy’s going through a hard time right now and he’s, you know, he’s not completely in control of himself. So, you know, we have to not see him for a little bit. I mean, that’s the truth. That’s not too revealing. I would say that’d be something you could say without being too hard on it. Anyway, I’m out of time. Okay, God bless you. I’m sorry about your situation. You’ve been listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’re live Monday through Friday, usually, at this same time, taking your calls. We are a listener-supported ministry. We pay for a lot of money to be on the radio. We have no other expenses. So if you’d like to help us stay on the air and want to help us out, you can write to us at thenarrowpath.org. P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Let’s talk again tomorrow. God bless you.
