We then shift gears to a thought-provoking discussion on Halloween and its place within the Christian faith. How can certain traditions align or conflict with biblical teachings? Engaging with listener calls, Steve provides insights into the diverse convictions within the Christian community on observance and celebration, exploring nuances of conscience and cultural participation.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you. Thank you.
SPEAKER 02 :
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, you are welcome to join us and ask them here. We’ll talk about them together. If you have objections to the Bible, objections to Christianity, or simply objections to the views of this host about anything, feel free to give me a call and tell me what those are. We’ll be glad to have that discussion as well. The number to call is 844-484-5737 That’s 844-484-5737 A couple of announcements. One is that we’re less than a week away from our monthly Zoom meeting. That’s going to be on the 5th of next month, which is Wednesday of next week, the first Wednesday of every month. We have a Zoom meeting in the evening. You’re welcome to join us from all over the world. If you want to be part of that, you go to our website and you’ll see The login information will be on the Zoom meeting, and that’s a Q&A session, usually for about an hour and a half, maybe a little more, on a Wednesday evening, beginning at 7 p.m. Pacific time. The other announcement is the one I’ve been making for a little while, and that is this. It’s actually a week from tomorrow that I’ll be having this debate in Dallas with Dr. Michael Brown on the subject of whether Israel today Is a fulfillment of biblical prophecy or not? My position is I don’t know of any prophecy that is fulfilling, and Dr. Michael Brown feels that he does know of prophecies that’s being fulfilled, so we’ll be discussing those. We’re actually having three debates in one weekend. We’re both flying to Dallas. He’s flying from the East Coast. I’m flying from the West Coast. And so we’re meeting kind of in the middle, and so we wanted to get the most bang for our traveling buck, So we’re having three debates on the same weekend, Friday night, not tomorrow, but a week from tomorrow. Also, there’s Saturday morning and Saturday afternoon. So there’s three debates that weekend. If you’d like to come, you’re certainly welcome to do so. It doesn’t cost anything to come, except whatever your travel expenses may be. But you can get in, obviously, without charge. However, they do want people to register in advance because that gives them an idea of how many people to expect, how many chairs they need, and so forth. If you would like to come, again, you don’t have to pay anything ever, but you will need to register. And to do that, I recommend you go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Look under announcements. That’s the same place that you’ll look for the Zoom meeting logins for next Wednesday night. So thenarrowpath.com under the tab that says announcements. If you want to go to the Dallas thing, of course, there’s not really any limits on the Zoom meeting, but the Dallas thing, I think last I looked, it’s just a little over 100 seats left available. And if you’d like to go to that, I suggest you register today for that. Don’t wait, because I’d hate to have you wish to come and then find the seats are taken. All right, thenarrowpath.com under announcements is where you find that information. Now, before I take calls, I received a card today from New York State. City, New York City, New York, which has not quite become communistic yet, so there’s still freedom of expression, I suppose. And this young man, or he might be an old man, could be an old man, Charles from New York, wrote this brief message. He said, I never miss your program. Please explain to me 2 Kings 3, verse 27. Why did the three kings withdraw their army after King Misha sacrificed his son? This is a very curious passage and not at all self-explanatory, but there is a cross-reference in the book of Amos that may help to understand it. The passage itself is about a battle that took place in the Old Testament times, of course, where the king of Moab, whose name is Misha, rebelled against the king of Israel, who he had been paying tribute to before that, And so the king of Israel wanted to go and, you know, basically restore his authority over Moab. Now, Moab must have been powerful because the king of Israel needed two other kings and their armies to help him. And one was the king of Judah and his armies, and the other was the king of Edom. and his armies. So these three kings were confederate, Israel, Judah, and Edom, and they attacked Moab. Now, eventually the battle went poorly for Meshav, the Moabite king, and we read in 2 Kings 3, 26 and 27, it says, when the king of Moab saw that the battle was too intense for him, he took with him 700 men who drew swords to break through to the king of Edom. But they could not. Then he took his eldest son, who would have reigned in his place, and offered him as a burnt offering upon the wall. And there was great indignation against Israel, so they departed from him and returned to their own land. Now, most people who read this, myself included, would naturally assume that it is saying that the king of Moab sacrificed his own son on the wall of the city, and that caused the invading armies to withdraw in disgust. And I could see how it would be disgusting, although I’m not sure why that would be considered a victory on the part of Moab unless of course he was I mean they just couldn’t stomach that and they might have even had superstitions about what a sacrifice I mean if he sacrificed him he sacrificed him to a pagan god and Chimash probably And so, you know, perhaps the Israelites felt like, okay, this is just too much and withdrew along with Judah and Edom. But the reason we think of it as the king of Moab sacrificing his own son is because of the ambiguity of the word his. Now, one of the problems we have when we read the Old Testament and sometimes the New Testament also when it’s telling a story is it’ll use pronouns without making clear which of the previously mentioned parties is being referred to. You know, here there’s two parties in verse 26. And then it says, then he took his eldest son. Wait, who’s he of the two parties mentioned in the previous verse? Who’s the he? And is he talking about his own eldest son or the other person’s eldest son? That’s not made clear. we see that the king of, I’m going to read that again, the king of Moab saw that the battle was too intense for him. He took with him 700 men who drew the swords to break through to the king of Edom, but he could not. He apparently wanted to reach the king of Edom and capture him, but he could not. But there is a possibility, and I think this is what we should understand because of what Amos tells us about this incident. I think though they could not capture the king of Edom, They managed to capture his son, who may have been in the battle also, or maybe they came to the palace to try to get him. But in any case, they couldn’t capture the king himself. But they may have captured his older son, who was his heir to the throne. And it says, then he, that would be the Moabite king, took his, that is the king of Edom’s, eldest son, who would have reigned in his place, that is the next king of Edom, the heir apparent. and offered him as a burnt offering on the wall. So the pagan king captured the son of the Edomite king and offered that son as a sacrifice to the pagan god. Now, everything about that was disgusting enough to at least cause Edom to withdraw. You know, and there may have even been superstition in there because the Edomites, the Moabites, were, of course, pagans. They might have felt like, uh-oh, now he’s invoked his gods, we better get out of here. Possibly. And Edom had indignation against Israel, it says. And they had been confederates with him, but now they’re angry at Israel. Look, you got us into this and now I’ve lost my son. So they withdrew and the other armies had to withdraw too without the support of Edom. That’s what I think happened. Now, I wouldn’t have thought that if I hadn’t read Amos chapter 2. where Amos is talking about God’s judgment on Moab. Now remember, the king of Moab is the one who made the sacrifice on the wall. It says in Amos 2.1, it says, For three transgressions of Moab, and for four I will not turn away its punishment. Because he, that is the king of Moab apparently, burned the bones of the king of Edom to lime bones. Now, that’s interesting. There is no historical story in the Bible of this happening. Unless, of course, it is talking about the story we just read. Actually, the cross-reference in my Bible actually cross-references to 2 Kings 3, 26 and 27, which is the story we read. So apparently others besides myself have come to the conclusion that Amos is referring to this story. But what does Amos say happened? He says the Moabites burned the king of Edom, and by this it would be the prince of Edom. It specifically says in Kings that it was going to be the next king. You know, the one who would have been the king. So he was technically the royal scion to the throne. And the Moabites captured him and burned his bones to lime. Now, it doesn’t say in Kings that he burned his bones to lime. And it doesn’t say in Amos that he sacrificed him on a wall. But we know of no other story that involved Moab and Edom where any king was burned. And so if we’re supposed to understand a background to Amos’ story, there’s no story other than the one in 2 Kings 3 that it could be referring to. So I think that Amos is referring to that, and Amos obviously understands it, that the Moabite king burned the king of Edom. Now, we’re specifically told in 2 Kings 3.26 he couldn’t break through. He tried to break through the king of Edom, but he couldn’t. But apparently the king of Edom’s son, who it specifically says would have reigned in his place. It says that in verse 27 of 2 Kings. So he is like the king. He was the new king, the one who’s going to be the king. So Amos speaks of him as the king, the royal heir to the throne. So I think that that’s what happened. Now, the questioner asked, why did the people recoil and go away when this happened? Well, if I’m correct, if it was the crown prince of Edom who was captured in battle and sacrificed on the wall of Edom, then, like I said a moment ago, it may be that the father of the son was disgusted, regretted that he had joined battle in this as a confederate with Israel and Judah. It says in 2 Kings there was great indignation against Israel. Well, on whose part? Probably Edom’s part. And so, you know, it looks like the king of Edom, you know, he lost all heart for this battle. He dropped out. And without him, it would seem perhaps the armies of Israel and Judah didn’t have enough firepower to take the city, so they also withdrew. That’s me reading between the lines. But something existed between the lines, and putting those two things together would seem to be the sensible way of completing that story, that picture. All right, let’s talk to Vicki from San Diego, California. Vicki, welcome.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hello?
SPEAKER 02 :
Hi.
SPEAKER 08 :
Oh, hi. Steve, are we on?
SPEAKER 02 :
Yes, we are.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay. Thank you for the opportunity to listen and to call in. I listened to your entire story today, but I’m calling in because I didn’t have a chance to comment yesterday. I had a question about yesterday. Is it appropriate to ask you now?
SPEAKER 02 :
You can ask any question you want.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, good. I’m a new listener. So yesterday there were questions about Halloween, and I have one also. How can we consider Halloween non-offensive to the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and how can we say it does not desensitize children, including adults, to evil?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, you know, I used to dress up for Hollywood when I was a kid, and I was a Christian in a Christian family, and I don’t think it desensitized me to evil. Frankly, I pretty much have always hated evil, and getting candy dressed up as a cowboy or a clown or something like that didn’t in any sense convey any concept of evil to me that I had to reconcile myself with.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I think dominantly we see death, skeletons, witches, evil, devils, things like that. And I just do not understand how Christians can go unoffended and how it could possibly not offend the Lord Jesus Christ.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, I would just ask you, are you asking me if Christians should dress up like witches and devils? I don’t think they should.
SPEAKER 08 :
No, I think that whatever you serve, you know, like, that is obviously not a holy day.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, I serve God. I serve God. Of course, I don’t celebrate Halloween, but I think Christians whose children go out and do things on Halloween, unless they, like you say, you mentioned people dressed up like demons and devils and I can’t imagine Christian parents allowing that.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, we give gifts to the little witches and demons and whoever comes to our door.
SPEAKER 02 :
But those aren’t real witches and demons. Those are children.
SPEAKER 08 :
They are children, and they’re God’s children.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right. So I don’t mind giving gifts to children, even if they’re bad children or even if they’re children who come from bad homes. You know, I mean, I don’t really hold that against children when they’re young enough to be going around. I mean, when teenagers come to the door, I’m kind of disgusted, not so much by their costumes or by their evil, but just by their immaturity, the fact that they would go trick-or-treating. You know, little kids are a different story for me. Now, I understand your position, because I know a lot of people who have held your position. And it’s… You know, it’s ambiguous, I would say. Why are people doing this? Why are people celebrating or doing anything on Halloween? Once again, I don’t celebrate. I’m not a celebrant. I don’t celebrate holidays, generally speaking, much. Maybe Christmas with the family and Thanksgiving just because those are good times to be with the family. But not because they are holidays. Yeah, I’m just not the kind of person who understands the impulse to have holidays. But some people do. Now, of course, Halloween, the term means it’s a short form of All Hallowed’s Night or Day Eve. That is, November 1st is All Hallowed’s Day. It’s an old Catholic holiday. It’s not a demon holiday. It’s a Catholic holiday. I’m not a Catholic either, but I don’t think that the Catholics did it to celebrate demons and the devil and witches and things like that. I think the Catholics, in fact, the purpose of All Hallows’ Day was to honor all the saints who have died. And that’s what it was. Now, the night before, just like the night before Christmas is Christmas Eve, the night before All Hallows’ Day is All Hallows’ Day Eve. And that was shortened to Halloween Eve. And so that’s what it means to some people. It may mean nothing to other people, and it may mean something very dark and sinister to yet a third group of people. When I’m deciding what a Christian may or may not do with good conscience, I’m concerned about what are they doing and why. What is their motivation? Now, if Christians say, we happen to know that witches’ covens meet on Halloween and they do horrible, evil things, I’d say, well, if you’re doing that on Halloween, shame on you. I don’t think a Christian can do that. If somebody says, well, we’re celebrating All Hallows’ Day because we’re Roman Catholics, I think, well, I’m not sympathetic toward it, but I don’t see anything wrong with it. I can’t say a person can’t do that.
SPEAKER 08 :
See, what if they don’t realize what they’re doing? I think most people know what they’re doing. What if they don’t realize what they’re doing?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, then, okay, I guess there are people who are not self-reflective people and they just do things without thinking about it. But I think all Christians who want to serve Jesus think about the things they do because they want to do all things to the glory of God. But, you know, there’s a lot of Christians who hand out tracts at Halloween from their door with the candy. There’s other things that people do, but And the thing is that, you know, someone may be doing it for demonic reasons. Someone may be doing it for Catholic reasons. Someone may be doing it for no reason at all, except that, like I said yesterday, people like to put on a costume. I don’t know of anything in the Bible that forbids people to put on a costume. Kids like to have candy. I don’t say anything in the Bible because they can’t.
SPEAKER 08 :
You’re in such an important position where you are right now.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s why I don’t want to promote any legalism.
SPEAKER 08 :
I would not want to be you.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, well, yeah, you’re right. The Bible does say teachers have the stricter judgment, and I’ve taken that very seriously since I was 16 years old. In fact, that’s one of the verses that’s been on my mind most since I was 16, and I’m now 72. So it’s definitely a verse that has burned into my conscience. And that is why I’m very careful not to say what the Bible does not say. when people are asking me what Christians are allowed to do or not. Now, I think there’s a lot of things Christians are allowed to do that might be not advisable. I personally, for example, not to make anyone angry, but I don’t think it’s necessarily a sin to get a tattoo. A lot of Christians do. Now, if you get a devil tattoo or some horrible dark evil tattoo, I don’t see why a Christian would ever do that. I actually don’t have any tattoos, and I can’t imagine ever wanting one. I don’t think it’s wise to get tattoos. I don’t think it’s… You know, I don’t think it’s particularly a good idea. And if someone’s asked me, should I get a tattoo? I’d say, I don’t think you should. But I wouldn’t say you’re sinning if you do, because the Bible, I don’t think, teaches that. And also, you know, think about Halloween. I don’t celebrate Halloween. But it’s not because I think it’s evil to do so. It’s because I don’t have this inclination to do so. I’d rather do things that are, frankly, more conducive to my particular values and things I want to do. So, anyway, you know, different Christians have different legalisms, and some have a legalism that says if your kids go out and get candy on Halloween, or they even would say, If your church has a harvest party on Halloween, they say, oh, that’s compromising. With what? What’s it compromising with? Oh, with Halloween. What is Halloween? What is Halloween that we’re compromising with? You mean because Christians sometimes have dress-up harvest parties at their churches on the same night that’s called Halloween? Well, okay, but they’re not calling it Halloween. Even if they were, I’m not sure why that would be a problem. If they are somehow imitating witches and devils, then obviously a Christian ought not to do that. But for me to assume what’s in the heart of another person when they’re doing something I don’t particularly have any inclination to do myself is simply not, to my mind, is not very Christian. I have not been given the competence by God to know what’s in the heart of another person unless they tell me. Now, if they tell me, hey, you know, we like to go out and dress like witches and devils because we hate God and we want to identify with Druids and pagans. Well, I’d say, yeah, then I’d say, shame on you. How dare you? But if I’m not told that, I know that when I, you know, dressed up and went out for candy when I was a kid, I didn’t have any such thoughts in my head as that. It never crossed my mind. Now, if someone says, yeah, but that’s it. You were clueless. You were compromising without knowing you’re compromising. I don’t know that I was compromising with anything unless it’s simply wrong to do those things on the same night that bad people do their things. By the way, I wasn’t doing the same thing witches do. Getting candy door to door is not really what But that’s not what witches are doing on Halloween. So, anyway, there’s only so many calendar days. And more and more of them are being designated as, you know, this day or that day or this awareness day. I just can’t really worry about what pagans are doing any given day of the week. That’s not my problem. I mean, they’ll answer to God if they’re doing pagan things. But I don’t, again, I simply will not be that kind of legalist because I don’t believe God is a legalist. I don’t think that most Christians who do something on Halloween have any idea that they’re doing anything evil. And if they don’t, I can’t tell them they are. Because how is it evil? How is it evil to let your kids wear a costume and go get candy? If they did that a different day of the year, would that be equally evil? If it wouldn’t be equally evil on a different day, let’s just say your kids went out June 13th and dressed up like clowns and went up to the neighbors and asked for candy. Would that be an evil thing? It would be not a very acceptable thing because the neighbors wouldn’t expect it, and it would be rude. The very actions are not themselves evil if they’re done on a different day. So I don’t know how actions that are not evil in themselves become evil when you do them on a certain day, unless you’re doing them for a very evil purpose. And if you’re celebrating a witch’s Sabbath, that’s a very evil thing. Any Christians out there, by the way, listening to me who are thinking about celebrating the witch’s Sabbath, shame on you. Don’t you dare do it. That is definitely compromising. Short of that, I don’t know of anything that Christians do on Halloween that’s necessarily compromising. Anyway, Vicki, I’m very much aware of the position you hold, and I know many people who do. And, you know, of course, Christians are welcome to give liberty to each other. So, in fact, that’s exactly what the Bible says. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there’s liberty. So unless someone’s doing something the Bible forbids, then I will never forbid it myself. I don’t have that authority to make rules that God didn’t make. And… Churches do it all the time. Individual Christians do it all the time. They have certain convictions of their own, even though God didn’t give them. But what Paul says about a case like that is, if your conscience bothers you about doing something, don’t do it. But unless it’s something God’s told people not to do, you shouldn’t tell people not to. You can’t judge them for what God didn’t tell them to do. Who are we to judge another man’s servant? At least that’s how I take things. I appreciate your call, though, and I do appreciate your sensitivity. to God and wanting to make sure that we all avoid compromise. I want to see that too, avoiding compromise. Hey, I’m out of time for your call. I’m sorry, the music’s playing. We have a hard break here, and then we have a lot of people waiting behind you. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. If you’re interested in our materials, they’re all free, both audio lectures by thousands and other things, at our website, which is thenarrowpath.com. We are listener supported. You can also donate at the website if you wish. Again, that’s thenarrowpath.com. We have another half hour coming. Don’t go away. I’ll be back in 30 seconds.
SPEAKER 01 :
If you enjoy the Narrow Path radio program, you’d really like the resources at our website, thenarrowpath.com, where hundreds of biblical lectures and messages by our host, Steve Gregg, can be accessed without charge and listened to at your convenience. If you have not done so, visit the website, thenarrowpath.com, and discover all that is available for your learning pleasure.
SPEAKER 02 :
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 one line open. If you’d like to join us today and haven’t gotten on the switchboard yet, you can call us at 844- 484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. Nelson from Fort Worth, Texas. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes. I’ve got a comment to make before I ask a question about Jason’s house in Acts chapter 17, verses 5 through 9. I’ve just got a comment about the way You handled some calls. I think you spent too much time with this person, and all you had to do was mention that last passage in the Bible where it says a person’s conscience bothers them. They shouldn’t do this offer to idols, and that’s all you had to do to answer. But you spent too much time with them, and it makes it difficult for other people
SPEAKER 02 :
I know. Actually, I can get to all the callers that are online right now if we go reasonably fast. Let me just say this. I’m often told that my answers are too long. Yes, they are. Yes, and my answer is there are other radio shows to listen to, or a person can get their own and give exactly the kind of answers they think should be given. I give the kind I think should be given. But that’s fine. I appreciate your suggestion. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 04 :
Again, about Jason’s house in Acts chapter 17, verses 5 through 9, was that a castle or an enclave or a thing that goes back to the book of Maccabees, Jason’s house that offered sanctuary for the Jews that were being persecuted? Is it Jason’s house? Because apparently Acts gives significant narration to Jason’s house. And maybe 2 Maccabees chapter 2 talks about Jason helping the Jews out too. So I was just wondering if you think that Jason’s house in Acts 17 ties back about 500 years before.
SPEAKER 02 :
No, I don’t think so. And the reason I don’t think so is because Jason in the book of Maccabees died, you know, probably a couple hundred years before the time of the book of Acts. And Jason, in Jason’s house in Acts 17, was still living. It says in Acts 17, 7, the people said, Jason has harbored these people, meaning in his house. It talks like he’s a real person. And then it says in verse 9, when they, that is the magistrates, had taken security from Jason and the rest, they let them go. Jason was right there standing in court. In fact, they brought him before. It says in verse 6, they dragged Jason and some of the brethren of the rulers and so forth. So Jason was a living man in Thessalonica in Acts chapter 17. Jason in the book of Maccabees. would have been in, I believe, in Israel. I don’t remember a story about Jason in Maccabees, but I haven’t read the books of Maccabees thoroughly. But anyone who’s mentioned in the book of Maccabees would have died at least 150 years before Christ. Or I should say the stories would occur 150 years before Christ. And this was now probably closer to 50 years after Christ had come. Yeah, probably a couple hundred years between this Jason and that one. Now, I don’t see anything in this that would suggest that Jason’s house was something special. And certainly not, it wouldn’t be related to Jason in Maccabees, which has to do with Jerusalem. This is in Greece. Paul is in Thessalonica, which is in Greece. And there was a man named Jason who showed hospitality to Paul, no doubt because he was a Christian man. Jesus had told his disciples back in Matthew 10 that when they go places to preach, see if there’s anyone who’s willing to let them stay in their house. And apparently when they came to Thessalonica, this man was willing to have them in his house, just like I had a guest in my house for about five weeks recently. But we weren’t harboring him from persecution, but neither was Jason necessarily. He was just hosting him. persecution did break out, and Jason was blamed for being complicit, but he was just an ordinary host, and his house was an ordinary house as far as we know. I mean, if it was any more than that, there’s nothing about that implied in the passage. Thank you, though, for your call. D.L. from Menifee, California. Hello, sister.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, so in the past, I have heard people say things like our loved ones who’ve passed on are not watching over us because heaven has no sorrow and grief, and it would cause them sorrow and grief to see us suffering. And I’ve honestly never really paid attention to that because, frankly, I don’t care. Yeah, me too. Last week, I was in a worship singing the song, Come Jesus, Come. And I suddenly stopped singing and started crying. And I said to my friend, I can’t sing this because I don’t want Jesus to come right now because my son doesn’t know him. I don’t want him to come until after my son is saved because I want to be in heaven with my son. And my friend said… Oh, that’s not a problem. She goes, once you get to heaven, there can’t be any sorrow or grief. So God will completely erase any memory of your son from your mind. So you won’t feel any sorrow that he’s not there with you.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, that’s not a reason for you not to weep now because you do remember him. You know, I mean, if she’s right, then this would be the very right time to be weeping about it because you do remember him and you would know that he’s at this point not ready to go. Yeah, I will say this.
SPEAKER 07 :
Let me tell you my question.
SPEAKER 02 :
Okay, I think I know the go ahead.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, my question is, I know there’s something in the Bible about heaven not having any sorrow or grief, but I don’t know where that is, and I don’t know the context. And I’d kind of like you to tell me a little bit more about that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, the statement is found in Revelation 21.4. Talking about the New Jerusalem, it says, And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes. There shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. And there shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away. Now, the traditional view of hell, of course, is that all of our loved ones who are not prepared to meet God when they die or when Jesus returns, they will go to hell and they’ll be burning and tormented forever and ever and ever. That could be your children, your grandchildren, your parents, your grandparents, or just people you know and love, you know.
SPEAKER 07 :
Thanks to you, I don’t believe that anymore.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, and I don’t think it’s got a strong scriptural case, but there’s always been sensitive and thinking people who have said, well, wait a minute. If my child is going to be burning and tormented forever and ever in hell, how am I going to be happy in heaven knowing that? I mean, just the thought of my, if my kid was in prison right now, And I knew that other prisoners were menacing him and torturing him and things like that. And even if I knew he was going to get out in a year or two, I could hardly sleep. I mean, I’d be tormented just knowing what my child was going through. Now, if I knew that my child was burning up but would never burn up and is in torment like the pain of burning, and that’s not going to end in a couple of years. That’s forever and ever and ever and ever, millions of years. And I’m in heaven all this time, and I’m thinking about this, and, you know, how could I ever? I mean, any parent would say to God, listen, let my son come here, and I’ll go to hell in his place. I mean, everyone would be terrified of going to hell if, you know, it’s like that. But you’d still do it for your child because you love your child, and you would die for your child. Now, here’s the thing. You don’t love your child more than God does. And God did die for your child. So, you know, this raises questions. You know, how are we supposed to harmonize these things? Well, one way, let me tell you, one way that retains this traditional view of hell is what your friend said. Well, God will just wipe that from our memory. Why? Because we couldn’t stand to know the truth. You can’t handle the truth, you know. And so God says, listen, let me do this men in black flash thing before your face and make your memory go away so you won’t be horrified at what God is doing to your loved ones in hell. Okay, well, I mean, God could do that, but I guess I’d have to, I guess I’m a little deeper thinker than that. I think, well, wait a minute, if God has to do that, Doesn’t that mean he knows I could never be happy knowing what he’s really doing behind the curtain that I’m not allowed to see? That means God’s doing things that are so horrific that even when I’m perfect and have perfect knowledge and I’m like him, I would still find it intolerable to know he’s doing it. That means God’s got some dark secrets that he can’t even let us know about or else it would ruin our joy. Well, why doesn’t it ruin his then? He knows about it. If something God does would ruin my joy, why wouldn’t it ruin his? Why would he set something up like that? Why would he do something that even perfected saints in heaven would be unable to recognize as just and good and glorifying to God? I mean, why would God have to not let us know? He’d have to keep secrets. It’s like if a Christian father was secretly doing things that he wouldn’t want his kids to know because they would hate him for it. Well, why would he do those things? If he does that, he’s not the man that his kids think he is. So, I mean, if God’s just going to say, I’m going to do this, I won’t let you know, I’m going to just blank it out of your mind so you won’t be unhappy. Well, I guess that’s one thing he could do, but it doesn’t speak very well of his plan. If his plan is to do with people that which even perfected saints in heaven could never approve of, if they knew it, that’s strange. Now, the other answer that is given by those who hold that view is not so much that God puts out of our mind, but we will be so perfected. We will be so much like him. We will totally share his attitude about all things. And therefore, we will see justice in it. We will see goodness in it. We’ll rejoice in it. This is a view that Tertullian held, the church father. He held that we’ll rejoice to see these people, even if they were loved ones of ours, writhing in pain in the hot coals of hell forever and ever. I don’t see how I would feel better about this if my mind was perfected. I mean, if my mind is perfected, it means that I’m a lot more compassionate now than I will be then. That actually when I’m more like God, I’ll be less loving. And yet God is love. I’m not love, but I’m at least loving enough that I would not see that as something to rejoice in. because I’m too sympathetic, I guess, with the suffering of others. Isn’t God? I mean, God, Jesus suffered in all points. We don’t have a high priest who’s unsympathetic toward us, the Bible says, and I don’t think he’s unsympathetic toward the lost. God himself said in Ezekiel, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked should turn from their evil ways and live. In the New Testament, 2 Peter says, Peter says that God’s not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. God loves even those who have not come to repentance. Does that mean he’ll save them? Not necessarily. But does it mean he’ll take delight in torturing them for eternity? Well, that’s a strange kind of love, if that’s what love looks like. I don’t think it looks like love, because if we did that to people we are at odds with, we would be condemned for it. Jesus told us you can’t do that. If you love your enemies, you have to pray for those who persecute you. You need to bless those who curse you so that you’ll be like your father. Okay, so if we think that the father doesn’t bless those who curse him, and Jesus doesn’t pray for those who persecute him, and doesn’t love his enemies, well, then what’s Jesus talking about when he says you need to do that so you’ll be like God? Well, maybe we have a different view of God, and maybe that different view of God was put into our heads by this traditional view of hell, which, by the way, as you know, D.L., but not all our listeners do, it’s not the only view of hell that has ever been prominent in the early church. For the first 400 years, there were three views of hell, and that was one of them. The very worst conceivable one was one of them. Tertullian held it, and so did some others. But others who were equally influential as Tertullian, like Irenaeus, did not hold it. Origen was more influential than either of those two men, and he didn’t hold it. Irenaeus held the view that sinners will eventually be annihilated in hell. Origen believed that sinners in hell will eventually be rehabilitated and will be brought to repentance and saved. Now, I don’t know which of those views would be most true, but if either of them are true, and there was biblical support for it, which is why church fathers taught those things… either of those would be more tolerable if i had loved ones who died and went to hell and were annihilated and they suffered no longer i’d be terribly sorry for their loss i would wish they’d been with me but it’s not going to ruin my whole life for eternity because they’re not suffering for eternity they’re not suffering at all they just don’t exist it’s just like when you’re Your cat gets run over by a car. Your dog has rabies. You have to put it down. You love the animal. You weep. It’s terribly sad. But you know it’s not suffering forever and ever and ever. And you get over it and you go on with life. It’s a terrible loss and you wish it didn’t happen. But it did and you live with it. The other view, of course, is that those in hell will actually be rehabilitated by God. And that was the dominant view in the time of origin for a few hundred years afterwards. So these different views of hell all have a pedigree that goes all the way back to the earliest church fathers. And all of them have a considerable scriptural backing. That’s why I wrote my book on the three views of hell. And I don’t know which one is true. But I certainly don’t see any reason to think that the one that is least like God’s character is the one that people have to hold to when there’s, frankly, good scriptural evidence and patristic evidence that that’s not the early view. Anyway, enough on that. I need to take some more calls. All right.
SPEAKER 07 :
Thank you, Steve.
SPEAKER 02 :
I understand the question well. Thank you. Okay. Garrett in Jacksonville, Florida. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 06 :
Hey, Steve. Hey. First, I want to say a comment about the lady calling about Halloween. Our family just recently stopped celebrating Halloween, and it was exactly because of what you said, basically our conscience. Sure. Yeah. The way I look at that is I know the Bible doesn’t say certain things. For example, the Bible doesn’t say don’t smoke crack cocaine, but I know that God probably doesn’t want me to do it. I don’t know if we can connect those two precisely, but that’s just kind of the way I look at it. I think God doesn’t want me to do it and just not going to do it.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, I won’t try to talk you out of it. All I would say is that crack cocaine has obvious negative results to everybody who uses it. Going door to door and getting candy on one night a year, to my knowledge, doesn’t have obvious adverse effects that would naturally happen to it. It could. I mean, if people get in the wrong crowd or whatever and have the wrong reasoning. But, yeah, that’s fine. I certainly respect your conscience. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, good point. So I was calling about Israel and end-time prophecy, but I heard you say at the beginning of the show that you don’t know of any end-time prophecies regarding Israel. Correct. So my question is, with end-time prophecy, what type of prophecies do we as Christians still have to look forward to, other than the coming of Christ? Are there any specific prophecies that we have to look forward to? And the one that just comes to my mind is the two prophets. They go to, is it the Wailing Wall? And then they preach.
SPEAKER 02 :
You’re talking about the two witnesses in Revelation 11. Yes, the two witnesses. Right. In my opinion, Revelation is not talking about the end times. Now, what it is talking about is a deep subject. I’ve written a book of the four views of Revelation, 600 pages long, that compares four different approaches to Revelation. One of them sees it as end times. The other three do not. And the one that does see it as end times is kind of the newest view to have arisen. But anyway, yeah, I’m going to say I see the whole book of Revelation differently than those who would say it’s talking about the end times. I think the evidence is on my side more than theirs. But that’s not something I want to debate here. I believe that there’s one day that the Bible calls the day of the Lord or the day of Christ or the day of God, Peter calls it at one time. That is the day when Jesus returns and he raises the dead. He raptures the church. We all stand before the judgment, and then he sends some to eternal life and some to Ionius’ punishment. I say Ionius, which is translated as everlasting in our English Bibles, but Ionius is more nuanced than that. But the point is punishment. and reward are dished out at the judgment, which happens the day that Jesus comes back and raises the dead. And I believe he destroys the present heavens and earth and replaces them with a new heavens, new earth, and the resurrected saints live with him there. That’s all on the day that Jesus comes back. Now, Christians want a whole bunch of, you know, a timeline of things leading up to that day. And the Bible just doesn’t give us one. There are a couple of things that we know are projects that God would like to complete, I think, which probably his coming won’t occur before those are complete. One of them, he said in Matthew 24, 14, this gospel of the kingdom must be preached in all the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end shall come. So clearly the evangelization of the whole world is on his mind. Now, some people say, well, that’s using hyperbole. That actually did occur in his own time or the apostles’ time. Well, maybe. Maybe it did. Maybe it didn’t. But it still reflects the desire for all people to be evangelized. And there’s no reason why God would have to abort the project prior to its being fulfilled, especially since so much progress has been made. on that project. I mean, we’re much closer to that being fulfilled than they were 2,000 years ago. So I don’t know why he’d just say, ah, look, I need to stop it right here. We didn’t get there, but hey, I’m in a hurry here. I’m not sure what he’d be in a hurry about. So I think he’s going to probably get his purposes fulfilled, and that would include world evangelization. And also, there’s reference to, in a couple places, one in Christ’s parable about the the seed that grows first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear at the harvest. He speaks of the grain maturing, that is the churches, the kingdom, coming to maturity before the harvest. And Paul did say in Ephesians 4 that God gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers for the equipping of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ until we all come, in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a mature man. And so the maturity of the church and the evangelization of the world are projects that God has been working on for the past 2,000 years. And I don’t know when we will ever know that they have reached the point that God’s waiting for. Because both of those things are kind of, I mean, a little nebulous in the sense that we don’t know everything that’s going on in the world at one time. If we look at things in our own country, that’s not necessarily reflective of the global project. So we don’t really know. And Jesus says it’s not for us to know the times or the seasons. In Acts 1, verse 7, he says it’s not for you to know the times or the seasons that the Father has put in his own authority. So, yeah, I don’t think we have any prophecies about specific things that would be like when they happen, we’d say, oh, that’s that, you know. We do see the evangelization of the world taking place, and so forth. Now, the two witnesses, I don’t take to be a future thing. I take the two witnesses to represent the church as a whole, but not in the end times. So, I mean, that might seem really strange. For those who are totally unfamiliar with any alternative view of Revelation, I would suggest a couple of options. One would cost you money, and one would be free. The one that would cost you money, I don’t sell it, but Amazon does. I wrote a book, Revelation 4 Views, a parallel commentary. It’s a big commentary, and it’s available wherever books are sold. Again, I don’t sell them because I don’t sell my own books or any of the other products. The other thing is free, and that is my lectures on Revelation at our website, thenarrowpath.com. under verse-by-verse lectures, my verse-by-verse on Revelation is almost certainly the most in-depth verse-by-verse teaching on the book of Revelation that you probably have heard. I’m not saying there isn’t anyone who’s done it deeper. I just know that when I’ve listened to the options… on offer. I haven’t heard anything that goes deeper. So, anyway, those would be a couple of things that might open your eyes to what other views of Revelation are. Garrett, I appreciate your call. We’re almost out of time. I want to take at least one more call. I wish we could take more. Gene in Topsham, Maine. Welcome to the Narrow Path, Gene.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hi. A comment on Halloween. The people that have trouble with that, What I did is I went and I got the largest pumpkin I could find in carp, J-E-S-U-S, into it. If you can’t get one that big, you can put a cross in it. Get gospel tracks. Used to be good cartoon tracks from American Track Society, but I guess Moments with the Book has cartoon tracks now. Put gospel tracks in the little baggies, put candy in them, and… Have at it. You know, that’s a tremendous thought.
SPEAKER 02 :
I mean, and I certainly know people who do this. In fact, I even mentioned it to that caller as an option. But some people don’t think about it this way. If someone said, would you like to go out door to door witnessing to people in your neighborhood? You might say, well, it sounds like a good thing, but I’m kind of shy about that. I’m not sure I’d want to show up for that project. Well, how about if your whole neighborhood came to your door and you could just give them a track? Because they’ve got their hand out. They want something from you. You give them candy and a track. That seems like, you know, that’s like missionaries not having to go to other countries to when they could go do a university campus ministry and there’s people from all the countries who are there. You know, if the mountain won’t come to Muhammad, Muhammad can come to the mountain. The saying goes, you know, if we don’t want to go to all countries or don’t want to go door-to-door in our neighborhoods, there is another alternative. Maybe they’ll come to us. Anyway, I appreciate your call and your suggestion, Gene. God bless you. We’re out of time for today’s show. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. My name is Steve Gregg. And we are, by the way, listener-supported. I just saw the bill for this month. We pay radio stations a lot of money. This month’s bill was right at about $140,000 for this month. And it’s similar every month. It costs a lot, in other words. We don’t sell anything. We don’t have sponsors. We don’t have commercial breaks. We do let you know, though, that we are listener-supported. If you’d like to help us stay on the air, you can write to The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us. Let’s talk again tomorrow.
