In this episode of The Narrow Path, Steve Gregg welcomes listeners with open phone lines, focusing on significant theological discussions. The episode begins with updates about Steve’s upcoming speaking engagements in the central coast area, encouraging those nearby to attend. From there, the conversation transitions to a deep dive into the teachings of dispensationalism, as one listener expresses feelings of deception after reconsidering the modern state of Israel and its biblical connections. This opens up an insightful discourse on historical and theological interpretations, and the challenge of seeing past entrenched religious beliefs.
SPEAKER 08 :
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 those calls. We’ll talk about your questions on the air. You can call if you disagree with the host. We’ll talk about that disagreement you have on the air as well. We have some lines open right now, which means you can get through if you call immediately. This number, 844- 484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. And I’ve got coming up next week some speaking engagements in Santa Cruz, California area. Actually, all around. I will be in Santa Cruz for much of the week. of the 16th through the 20th. And although I’m also speaking in Petaluma, which is quite a ways from Santa Cruz, on the 16th, that’s the Sunday. So that’s less than a week from now. That’s like six days from now or seven days from now. And so Petaluma next Sunday, or I should say this Sunday, Then I’ll be in Santa Cruz for a number of things, and then I’ll be in Monterey on Friday of that week. That’s the 20th, so it’s a week from this Friday. And then I’ll be in the San Jose area, Morgan Hill, on the next Saturday. So all of that is really less than a week from now, pretty much. Well, no, it begins less than a week from now. It’s going to be… extending another several days after that. Anyway, if you’re in the Central Coast area, again, we’re talking here about Petaluma, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Jose. These are areas I’ll be speaking in. These events are listed at our website under announcements. So if you’re interested in getting information about those, Or even booking something. There’s a couple of nights there that I’m actually free. So we still would be happy to book those if you want to set up an event in probably Santa Cruz or San Jose, somewhere like that. Anyway, that’s coming up. Our website, of course, is thenarrowpath.com. If you want to contact us about that, I believe my email is at the front page of our website. thenarrowpath.com, and if you just want to attend one of those events, go to the tab that says Announcements. And that’s all I have to announce right now. We’re going to go to the phones and talk to Georgene from Gilroy, California, which is kind of a general area that I’m going to be. Hi, Georgene. Welcome.
SPEAKER 02 :
Hi. You just made my day because you’re coming right where I’m at, so I’m excited.
SPEAKER 08 :
Right, yeah.
SPEAKER 02 :
I asked my pastor to explain why I should support the modern state of Israel, and he couldn’t, and he tried to convince me it was the same as the biblical nation of Israel. So I no longer believe in dispensationalism, and I’m feeling very deceived. And I wanted to know if I’m seeing things clearly. I went back and I researched the history and the founding of the state of Israel, and I see that its founding documents deliberately kept God out. as opposed to the United States founding docs, you know, where we embrace God, then it seems to have turned the political movement of Zionism towards theology and adopted dispensationalism to manipulate and confuse Christians into believing that the Bible says we must biblically be tied to this secular political state called Israel. And it feels like a well-thought-out scheme to deceive Christians into which is definitely not of God. So I want to know, what have I got wrong, and why is it so hard to get others to see it like this?
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I’ll tell you, there’s several parts to that. One reason it’s hard to get Christians to see it that way is because there are very, very many large churches and denominations that not only teach dispensationalism, they teach it as if it’s what the Bible says. They don’t teach it as, well, this is one opinion, that has become popular in the last 150 years. They just say, this is what the Bible says. Now, evangelical Christians, of course, want to be faithful to what the Bible says. And if they’ve never heard anything else, then they look at Israel and they say, well, that’s the same land that ancient Israel was in. That’s the Jewish people, so that’s the same people. And my pastor says that the nation of Israel is supposed to be reestablished in the end times, which is a dispensational view, not a biblical view. But the point is, they see all that and say, well, this is obviously it. You’ve got Israel, the people. You’ve got the land. You’ve got the prophecies. It’s very hard to disabuse. Now, the problem with this, and it took me years to become disabused of dispensationalism, though I had heard nothing else. I had only been taught dispensationalism from my youth. And my pastor never said, now this is the dispensational view. I’d never heard the term dispensationalism until I ceased to be one. I found my way out of that system simply by studying the Bible, but it wasn’t quick. You know, I read through the Bible many, many times, and I just began to pick up pieces of the puzzle that didn’t fit that system, collected them, and eventually said, well, wait, there’s something really wrong here. And then as I looked at those pieces together that didn’t fit the other system, I said, well, they do fit together with each other. In fact, they fit together with the rest of the Bible, too, just not with that system. Now, what percentage of people who go to church even care enough to read through the Bible multiple times to cross-examine what they’ve been taught? You have to realize, first of all, most Christians, if they’re going to a church where they teach the Bible, they’re going there partly because they assume the pastor has studied the Bible more than they have. and can be trusted more than their own reading of the Bible can be. That’s a basic attitude most people who go to church have. Not all do, but I would dare say probably 90% of people who go to church feel that their pastor knows more than they do about it. And so, you know, if he says this is what the Bible says, they think, who am I to question him? And then, of course, there’s the other thing. The pastors themselves often, if they know in the back of their mind, though they may not consider it very often, but they know, if they would begin to change their own views, it would compromise their standing and their denomination. And it would raise suspicions on the part of their friends and partners in ministry that maybe they’re slipping away. So the pastors often don’t want to reconsider these things very seriously. Some do, thankfully. I know some pastors who did, and they’re no longer dispensatious. But, you know, it’s an economic problem. and social thing, too, because they have a job teaching these doctrines, and all their ministers they’re in fellowship with teach it, too, and we’ll see them as a heretic if they change. So there’s a lot of pressure. And I just think that the average Christian doesn’t spend their time reading the Bible like some of us do. So that’s why it’s hard to persuade.
SPEAKER 02 :
Aren’t we looking for truth, though? I mean, I feel deceived because if If I can read the Bible and see totally a different reading other than dispensationalism, to me, if you think dispensationalism is the right way, wouldn’t you want to present both and let the one that’s the truth speak out? Because we’re looking for truth.
SPEAKER 08 :
No, because you can’t do that or else dispensationalism won’t look right. Because dispensationalism looks correct because it’s the only view people are allowed to hear in the churches that teach it. People begin to hear the other view, and dispensationalism starts to look like it’s a house of cards, as I believe it is. But as long as people never hear another view at all, they’ll never notice that. There’s one denomination that I used to be part of that teaches dispensationalism very strongly, and it’s a commonplace among their pastors. If you say, hey, could we have a debate here? Why don’t we have a Saturday night debate, and you could debate some… someone who’s not a dispensationalist, you know, about the Bible or eschatology or something. They’ll generally say no. I don’t know of any Calvary Chapel pastor that will agree to that. Not because they don’t believe they’re right, but they know, I think they know they can’t defend it against an alternate view. But more than that, they always say the same thing. They say, no, that’ll confuse the people. Well, maybe the people are already confused by your teaching, Pastor. Maybe they have better brains than you give them credit for. You know, Pastor, are you confused? Have you heard both sides? Can you hear both sides and not get confused? Then why do you think you’re so much smarter than everybody else in your congregation? Can’t they also think? Now, dispensationalism, as you know, is a very new view in terms of church history. It’s very popular. And you mentioned one other, you asked, you know, why is it so hard to persuade people to get out of it? I think one thing I didn’t mention, but should, is that dispensations are, I believe, so insecure about their position in terms of its ability to compete in the marketplace of theological discussion. that they have to describe everybody else who’s not dispensational as anti-Semitic, which, of course, isn’t the case. You know, the past decades I’ve fellowshiped mainly with people who are not dispensationalists, and none of them are anti-Semitic. I’ve been non-dispensational for over 40 years, and I haven’t taken a single step in the direction of anti-Semitism. But they want to argue that. that if you don’t take their view of Israel, you’re anti-Semitic. Now, that’s just like saying, if you won’t say black lives matter, then you’re a racist. Well, what if I say all lives matter? No, that’s a racist thing to say. You have to say what we want to say, that the black people are specially owed something from us. And, well, I don’t know. I don’t know what the black lives are owed, but I think that all people matter. And if I say that all people matter, are loved by God equally. Someone says, yeah, but you have to say that Israel has special favor before God, that God specially has covenants with them. He’s going to bless them in ways that other people who aren’t Israel can’t be blessed. I think, no, I don’t think so. Oh, then you’re anti-Semitic. No, I think Israel’s about the same as everyone else. That’s not anti-Semitic. That’s just being, you know, honest.
SPEAKER 02 :
I agree. I agree. They had two pastors. I asked if I could bring someone with me, and they said no. So at first I was sort of intimidated, but I just prayed, and God led me down the Bible through all the verses, and they just had no answers. You know, I will say this.
SPEAKER 08 :
You probably won’t get anyone to approve of a debate in their church. I will say this. I’ve known of, I think, one or maybe two Calvary Chapel pastors over the last many decades. who have allowed debate on this subject, brought in contestants to debate this matter in their church. But it’s the official policy of those pastors, generally speaking, to not, as they say, confuse the sheep by letting them hear anything other than the indoctrination they give. Which, you know, Jehovah’s Witnesses, I hate to make the comparison, and if you’re dispensational out there, don’t take this beyond what I’m saying about it. But Jehovah’s Witnesses are not allowed to hear or read publications by any religious groups that are not Jehovah’s Witnesses. Now, why would that be, I wonder? Well, in my mind, and I don’t mean this to be disparaging to people, I’m just an observation, I think that’s pretty much the motivation for not allowing people in dispensational churches to hear other sides of the view. It’s too dangerous for them. Their view is too weak. It’s on too weak a foundation. And as soon as it gets challenged by anyone who knows what they’re talking about, it suddenly loses all credibility with people who are looking for truth. Now, you mentioned, aren’t they looking for truth? Well, some are. I believe there’s two kinds of people, both in the church and out of the church, both among Christians and non-Christians. There’s two sorts of people. And that is those who love the truth more than anything and will pursue the truth no matter what it costs them. If it costs them their job, if it costs them their friends, if it costs them their comforts, their life also, they’ll pursue the truth. And then there’s the other group, the other category is people who love something else. And they’ll sacrifice the truth. or at least sacrifice the pursuit of the truth for a comfortable gig that they’ve already got of some kind. But, yeah, I mean, you’re one of those people, it sounds like, who puts truth first. I’ve always been in that category myself, which has put me at odds with some people I would rather not be at odds with who were in my former life. But you’re not going to answer to them on the Day of Judgment.
SPEAKER 07 :
You’re going to answer to God.
SPEAKER 08 :
And nothing pleases God more than for you to be honest. And honest means you love truth and you’ll change your mind if you have any reason to believe that what you believe is not true. Let me recommend this. I know that my lectures on eschatology called When Shall These Things Be at my website have been given. And also my other set on What Are We to Make of Israel. Both of them are obvious. You probably know. Yeah, they’re free on the website. Yeah, if you can get a pastor or dispensatious to listen, just say, listen, I know you’re pretty sure these are wrong, but I can’t see where they’re wrong. Would you listen to these and critique them for me? That might get the ball rolling.
SPEAKER 02 :
Okay, great. Great, thanks. Well, I’m looking forward to meeting you. Hopefully next week when you come up here, I can come by and say hi. Okay, that would be great. Yeah, thank you, Steve.
SPEAKER 08 :
God bless you, Georgene.
SPEAKER 02 :
Bye-bye.
SPEAKER 08 :
Bye now. All right, let’s talk to Tony in North Webster, Indiana. Hi, Tony. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hi, Steve. Hey, real quick, she almost answered everything that I was going to ask, but let me first of all say a couple things and ask my question. One is thank you for going into the lion’s den over the weekend and talking to Joel Richardson. My opinion was… It seemed as more that it was more of a promotional for his ministry than it was anything else because it was, I appreciated your answers and you were sort of very much more grounded and seemed much more natural. And that’s kind of in line with the question I’m going to ask you. As your last caller spoke, you know, nowadays, whether they’re Calvary Chapel types or what you call non-denominational megachurches, there are so many out there now. that aren’t just dispensationalists, but they’re kind of like Joel Richardson. He’s not dispensationalist. He’s what, a historical premillennial, right? So everybody seems to be chucking and jiving into different categories now, away from dispensationalism and into, you know, this and that and other things. And it doesn’t necessarily seem to be following, like your last caller mentioned, what necessarily can be gleaned out of the Bible today. And at least by, you know, a good understanding. The problem is, is that these large churches seeming to me take advantage of the sheeple. I call them the sheeple because who has time when you’re working to really read the Bible and go deep? You have to kind of go to church and listen to what your pastor says. And when they say these things, I mean… Most of these churches nowadays, you go up there and you look at the guy and he’s buff. He’s got short sleeves on. He’s a guy you want to follow up to. He looks great.
SPEAKER 08 :
Tony, we’ve got quite a few people waiting. Do you have a question?
SPEAKER 05 :
Right. What do I do? What do people do when they start to see that they’re being deceived in these big churches? Where do they go? What do they do? Do they challenge these guys that are, you know, they’ve been taught in these universities to spread the word like this? I hear you.
SPEAKER 08 :
I hear you. Well, one of the hardest things out there right now is finding a church where the pastor, I think it’s hard to find. I’m not saying they’re not there. I’m saying in many respects it seems like they’re needles in haystacks. Finding pastors who, A, are not concerned about building a big church. They’re happy just to be faithful in shepherding whatever sheep God brings to them. B, shepherding the sheep is really what they want. And C, they’re not locked into some theological camp, which they would be nervous about rethinking. I believe the pastor’s role is to help people follow Jesus, not necessarily to help them understand mysterious things like end times. Not that I think end times are super mysterious, but there’s obviously very much controversy over them. And as you say, not everyone has the time to read the Bible as much as a pastor should have the time to do, or lots of people have the time to do. Some don’t. So, I mean, the truth is I don’t have anything against a pastor. teaching what he believes to be true. But if he knows that what he believes to be true is a view that is controversial among true Christians, and that the majority of Christians, or a great percentage of them, throughout history have disagreed with his view, then even if he’s persuaded of it—and I do this because I’m persuaded of views that perhaps maybe weren’t the majority of you on some issues— I just say, well, this is a view I see, and here’s what other people see, and just leave it to the people to either remain undecided or do their own research. You know, the subjects that are that difficult to sort out are not the essential subjects for following Jesus. The essential subjects for following Jesus are knowing who Jesus is, knowing what he said, being obedient to him, loving him, Generally speaking, that just comes down to loving your neighbor as you love yourself, but living a holy life. I mean, these are the things that make a person a good Christian, not how much they understand of esoteric doctrines. Now, I love esoteric doctrines, so it’s been a long time since I’ve put those on the front burner for myself. I mean, I have views on almost every esoteric doctrine that’s out there, but I don’t think persuading people that my views are correct is an essential thing. I mean, obviously, people ask me questions. I’ll tell them what I think. I’ll tell them why. But that’s the only way I know to be a decent and responsible teacher. But, you know, if they go away disagreeing with me, I’ve lost nothing. You know, if they go away rejecting Christ or living a disobedient life, then I’ve apparently not had the impact I want to have on them. But if they go away having a different eschatology or a different, you know, I don’t know, demonology or whatever than I have, I think, okay, well, that’s fine. They don’t have to agree with me. But we do have to follow Jesus. But that’s, you know, following Jesus isn’t as controversial among Christians. Most Christians agree we need to follow Jesus. And the ones who don’t aren’t probably really Christians at all, because following Jesus is what being a Christian is all about. So we are going to find it difficult, probably, to find churches that, A, see everything the way you do, not that they need to. But B, that don’t think that you’re supposed to see everything the way they do. Finding churches that don’t push their views as the only possible view is not the easiest thing in the world. Now, this church I debated, you mentioned the debate over the weekend. The pastor at that church, he’s one of those guys who works out. He’s got big muscles and wears T-shirts and stuff like that. But he’s a really, I think, a godly man. I think he’s a very… I think he’s a humble man. If he’s not generally humble, see, I don’t know him. I had lunch with him and Joel. I thought both of them seemed fairly humble. Now, I don’t know if they’re just humble around me or if they’re humble all the time, but I thought I got a good impression of them. And although I disagree with them on the things we’re debating about, I don’t think that that difference has to compromise their Christian walk at all. And you need to realize, too, Almost everyone that’s teaching from a pulpit, even if they are wrong, they don’t know they’re wrong. So you can’t really blame them unless, of course, they don’t want to find out that they’re wrong. Some people don’t want to find out they’re wrong. A person who loves the truth may be wrong, but he’s wrong without knowing it. And he would like to be corrected because someone who loves the truth wants the truth and knows that they themselves are not omniscient. I know I’m not omniscient, and therefore, if I’m wrong, I want to find out. and that’s what loving the truth looks like. So, yeah, I do wish there were more churches around where you could be welcome to disagree with them on the things that Christians can disagree about, and where the main function of the whole church is love and following Jesus. Holiness and love, those are the two things that matter. So, I mean, Joel and I disagreed on whatever it was we were discussing, but We got along great offstage. We had lunch together. We’ve been in touch with each other since then on friendly terms. We’re not enemies. We were just discussing a disagreement. But we both realized that that disagreement doesn’t have to compromise either of our walk with Christ. So anyway, you’re expressing a frustration I know very well. And I’ve known for a long time, but I will say in my own case, I’ve just had to settle the fellowship with people that don’t agree with me on many things because there’s just not that many people around who agree with me on everything, but that’s okay. They’re not required to, and I’m not required to agree with them on everything. So when you find people who will allow that kind of liberty, the liberty to disagree, well, it would probably go with them. You know, I’ve often said I’d much rather be in a church. where I felt they were 90% mistaken about theology, but they’re humble and teachable and loving. Then go to a church where I thought they were 90% right about theology, but they weren’t humble or teachable or loving. In other words, loving, humility, those things that Jesus taught, Those are the important things. And in a church that’s, let’s just say, let’s say a pastor is mistaken on 90% of the things. Not that I’m the judge of that. I’m just saying, given that as a hypothetical. If a pastor is wrong about 90% of what he teaches, but humble and teachable, well then, over time, he’ll learn and he’ll grow. But if a person’s right about 90%, But unteachable, he’ll never become more right than he is now. He’ll never get any closer to 100% because he’s not teachable. Being teachable, far more valuable than being right, in my opinion. And being loving, more important than all the above. So there you go. That’s what I think. You know, we’ve taken this whole first half hour, two calls that we’re both kind of talking about similar things. The difficulty of finding churches that… you know, that have the kind of characteristics that make people like us feel comfortable there. It is a difficulty. I hear from people all the time. They say, do you know of a church in our area that’s, you know, that’s more like-minded? I have to say, I’m sorry, most of the time I don’t. I don’t know all the churches around, and I have to say, even in my own town, I don’t know how many churches there are. I’ve been to many of them, but it’s not the easiest thing to find churches that are, you know, like-minded, or even if they’re not like-minded, their pastors are humble enough and unthreatened enough to allow people to be there who don’t fully see it their way. Anyway, I would say it’s very important if you do attend a church where you don’t see it their way, is that you make every effort to not be a troublemaker. If you’re a troublemaker, then that offends God, too, because among the things God hates, according to Proverbs 6, 16 through 19, is one who sows discord among brethren. There is discord among brethren. Make sure you’re not the one sowing it. Just keep your heart clean. Love your neighbor. Be humble. Be teachable. And enjoy fellowship wherever you can get it. I need to take a break. We have another half hour coming. Don’t go away. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. We are listener supported. You can help us if you want to or not. But our website is thenarrowpath.com. There’s hundreds of resources there, all free. Check it out. You can donate if you wish at thenarrowpath.com. I’ll be back in 30 seconds. We have another half hour, so don’t go away.
SPEAKER 03 :
Is the Great Tribulation about to begin? Are we seeing the fulfillment of biblical prophecy unfolding before our very eyes? In the series, When Shall These Things Be?, Steve Gregg answers these and many other intriguing questions. The lecture series entitled, When Shall These Things Be?, can be downloaded in MP3 format without charge from our website, thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 08 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path Radio Broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’re live for another half hour, taking your calls… If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or you just see things differently than the host does and would like to express your side of an issue, I’d be glad to hear from you. The number to call is 844-484-5737. I’m looking at two open lines on our switchboard. That means opportunity is knocking. If you want to get through, I can’t guarantee, for example, that five minutes from now there will be any lines available open. 844-484-5737 is the number to call. All right. Let’s talk to Gary in Pikeville, Kentucky. Hi, Gary. Welcome.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hey, Steve. Thanks for taking my call. I called Friday, and I just wanted to try to rephrase my question. Okay. In John 7, 38 and 39, it says, out of his belly shall, he that believes on me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. But this he spake of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive, but he had not yet been glorified. So my question is regarding the Spirit and the difference in the, after Jesus’ death, people receiving the Spirit and the people prior, like, for example, John, It said he was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb. So I just was trying to understand that a little better.
SPEAKER 08 :
Sure. Well, definitely something significant changed with reference to the Holy Spirit among God’s people when Jesus came. I mean, that’s one of the major things that changed with the coming of the Messiah. In fact, as you read the Old Testament, you’ve got statements in Isaiah and Joel and Zechariah and other places saying, that speak of the messianic age as a time when God pours out his spirit. Some might call it the age of the Holy Spirit when the Messiah comes. When Jesus, you know, at the very beginning of his ministry was talking to Nicodemus, he said, you have to be born of the Holy Spirit. You have to be born again of the Spirit. So, you know, the Spirit of God is what is what the Messianic Age, one of the things at least, maybe one of the main things the Messianic Age changed. But, you know, John says there, of course, in John 7, 39, you just quoted that the Holy Spirit was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified. So what about people before Jesus was glorified? I assume his glorification has to do with his resurrection and ascension, which had not yet taken place, of course, when John the Baptist was born or or in Old Testament times, and yet you do find the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament coming upon certain people, some of the judges. The Holy Spirit came upon Gideon. The Holy Spirit came upon Samson. It was commonplace in the judges for the Holy Spirit to come upon these men and inspire and enable them to do powerful deeds. Likewise, the prophets were told that the Spirit came upon them. David, when he was anointed to be, well, I should say before that, Saul, when he was anointed to be king, the Holy Spirit came upon him. And then when David was anointed, the Holy Spirit left Saul and came upon David. Now, of course, David is called a prophet, but that Holy Spirit that came on David was, you know, he was replacing Saul, who was no prophet, although he had prophesied. There were a few occasions when Saul was pursuing David. He fell in with a company of prophets, and the Bible says the Spirit came upon him and he prophesied. But it was only momentary. What we can say is the Holy Spirit was not absent in the life of the Jewish community or the Israeli community prior to the coming of Jesus. But he was not yet given in the sense that he is now. And here’s the difference, I would say. In the book of Numbers… we have Moses complaining that it’s too much burden for him to take care of all these snotty-nosed baby complainers in Israel. And he said, God, why do I have to babysit these people? They’re yours, not mine. And God says, well, listen, I’ll tell you what. This is Numbers 11, verse 17. He said, I will come down and talk with you there. I will take of the spirit that is upon you, and I’ll put the same upon you. 70 elders that you’ll bring to the door of the tabernacle, and they shall, you know, the Spirit will come upon them, and they’ll bear the burden of the people with you. So Moses gathered the 70 elders, except for two of them, Eldad and Medad. He didn’t realize they weren’t there. They were among the 70, but they weren’t at the door of the temple or tabernacle where they’re supposed to be. And the Holy Spirit came down on these 70, including Eldad and Medad, who were not where they should be. And a messenger came and said, Moses, Eldad, Medad are in the camp. They’re prophesying. You might say, well, why is that a problem? Well, I think the idea was Moses is the prophet. Moses is the leader. If other people start having the spirit upon them like he did, they might possibly stage an uprising and try to overthrow Moses like Miriam and Aaron did in the very next chapter, Numbers 12. They said, hey, God speaks by us too. And they were kind of trying to usurp Moses’ authority. So the idea was, have all these guys at the tabernacle door where Moses can supervise, and the Spirit will come upon them. But Eldad and Medad were out in the camp, not where they should be, and the Spirit came upon them, and they were prophesying. And Joshua… came and said to Moses, tell them to stop, Moses. And he answered them in verse 29, Numbers 11, 29. Moses said, are you jealous for my sake? Oh, that the Lord’s people were prophets. All the Lord’s people were prophets. And that the Lord would put his spirit upon them. Now, Moses thought it would be a good thing if everyone of God’s people had the spirit upon them and were prophets. Of course, that wasn’t the case in the Old Testament. There were individuals, the Spirit would come upon them, like Moses, like the judges later on, like Miriam and Aaron, like the prophets, like David, like Saul. These were instances where the Holy Spirit was there, came upon them, anointed them, used them, spoke through them, but he wasn’t on everybody. And even on them, he might not have been permanently upon them in the sense of, you know, they’re walking around filled with the Spirit like the apostles later were. it’s possible that the Spirit came and went on some of these people. For example, Samson, who was a prophet, excuse me, a judge, we read, you know, the Spirit came upon him, and then he killed a lion. And the Spirit came upon him on another occasion. He killed, you know, what is it, a thousand Philistines with a job of an ox. But the thing here, or Van Ness, the idea here is that the Spirit would come upon them and empower them. and then maybe not stay, and then come back again, and so forth. It’s like you couldn’t count on anybody being filled with the Spirit all the time. And you certainly couldn’t count on everybody having the Spirit at any time. It was mainly that the Spirit was given to a few individuals who were raised up to lead in some capacity. Now, that remained true in the time of Christ. John the Baptist was certainly special. The Spirit came upon him in his mother’s womb. The Spirit came upon Jesus. It’s possible that the Spirit came upon the apostles briefly when Jesus sent them out to, you know, two by two, to villages and so forth to raise the dead and heal the sick and so forth and preach. But this was all before Pentecost. Now, Moses had said, would to God that all the Lord’s people were prophets and that he’d put his Spirit upon them. And Joel, chapter 2, said he will. Joel chapter 2, I think it’s verse 28 or thereabouts, God said, I’ll pour out my spirit on all flesh, and your sons and daughters will prophesy. So it won’t be just this one or that one around. It’s going to be all of them. All God’s people will be prophesied, just like Moses said he wished was the case. And that happened at Pentecost. And Peter said, this is that which Joel spoke about, that he pours out his spirit. So that’s what changed. What changed is that the people of God prior to Pentecost had some individuals that God raised up, filled with the spirit, enabled them to adequately serve God or his interests. But the people in general didn’t have the Holy Spirit. They just had the law. And all they were required to do is just live their lives, you know, without violating the laws. Just run your farm, run your business, run your family, you know, as people who are obedient to God. But they didn’t have the Holy Spirit given to them all. And that’s what changed with the new covenant. God poured out his spirit. It’s the age of the spirit. Everyone who’s really born again now has the spirit in them. Paul said in Romans 8, 9, If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he’s none of his. Now, that doesn’t mean all Christians are filled with the Spirit, but they can be and should be. Paul said in Ephesians 5.18, be filled with the Holy Spirit. And he’s writing to Christians who have the Spirit, but he says you need to be being filled with the Spirit. So what do we make of that? It means that before Pentecost, before Jesus died, too, God hadn’t poured out his Spirit on all people. There were some people who had the Spirit. They were special choices. But the time came in the new covenant where, as the prophets predicted, he poured out his spirit on all his people. And they all were able of prophesying and speaking for him. And this is what Peter said that happened at Pentecost. And that’s the difference. Now, if anyone is a real Christian, the Holy Spirit is in them. Now, that doesn’t mean if everyone claims to be a Christian that they can claim to have the Holy Spirit in them. They have to really be a Christian. You know, what it more means is if someone doesn’t have the Holy Spirit, they’re none of his, as Paul said. So, you know, you can kind of say that the mark of a genuine Christian, among other things, and 1 John, by the way, says this several times in the book of 1 John, that a person, if they’re really born again, they have the Holy Spirit. And that’s one way they know. By this we know that we dwell in him and he in us by the Spirit which he has given us, John says. So that’s, I think, what John 7, 39 is saying when it says the spirit at the time Jesus spoke prior to his death, the spirit was not yet given. Though, of course, it has been since. It wasn’t given in the general sense to all Christians, which is supposed to be the norm today. All right. Let’s talk to Mary from Spokane, Washington. Hi, Mary. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 01 :
Hi, Steve. Thank you for taking my call.
SPEAKER 08 :
Uh-huh.
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, I’ve been a Christian for 50 years, and recently I’ve been attending a dispensational church. And I tend to be Arminian in my viewpoint.
SPEAKER 07 :
Me too.
SPEAKER 01 :
And when they preach or they sing, they talk about God putting his wraps on Jesus when he was on the cross. And I just, I can’t find that in the Bible that, you know, that God did that.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, yeah, it’s hard to really find a Bible verse that teaches that God put his wrath on Jesus. But it may be that he did. The Bible doesn’t say that it didn’t happen, but I was always raised arguing that that was a given. In fact, it was the whole idea of the atonement, as I understood it growing up, was that Jesus became sin for us. It says in 2 Corinthians 5, he who knew no sin became sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in him. and that the idea was our sins were laid upon him. It says in Isaiah 53.6, All we like sheep have gone astray. We’ve turned everyone to his own way, and the Lord laid on him, that is on Christ, the iniquity of us all. There’s a very similar statement in a passage in 1 Peter, which, by the way, alludes several times in this passage to that very Isaiah 53 passage. But, It says of Jesus in 1 Peter 2.24, who himself bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, having died to sin, might live unto righteousness. Now, so our sins were put on Jesus. The Bible does say that. I don’t think it ever says that God’s wrath came upon Jesus, but I think the assumption is because of our sin, we deserve the wrath of God. And in order that, as it says in Romans 3, God might be just and the justifier of those who believe in Jesus, God could not just forego wrath altogether. He had to pour out his wrath on sin. So what we do have in Scripture is that God put our sins on Jesus. Now, what that means, what that looks like, I don’t think we have a frame of reference for knowing, other than, of course, the sacrificial system in the Old Testament, which is a type, a shadow of Christ. They would lay their hands on the animals. confess the sins over it. It’s like symbolically it seems to me that the sins were transferred to the animal and then the animal died in place of the sinner. Now, no one was really mad at the animal. I don’t know if we could say the wrath of God came on the animal, but the animal carried the sins nonetheless to the point of dying. It would seem to me in place of the one who actually committed those sins. And this is the This is one view of the atonement that has dominated, in my opinion, the evangelical world in which I was raised with and which I will not renounce. A lot of people these days don’t like the penal substitution view of the atonement. And they say the problem is it makes it sound like God was reluctant to forgive and a payment had to be made before God would forgive. And others said, some of the older church fathers said, well, there was a ransom paid to the devils. So Jesus’ death was a payment to the devil. There was a controversy for some centuries over whether Jesus, as a ransom, was paying off the devil or paying off God. And if he’s paying off the devil, then the devil’s the winner, because when a kidnapper takes a child and gets the ransom he wants, he wins. The person who paid the ransom is really the loser. Even if they get the child back, they’re a million bucks out, you know, the worse for it. So, I mean, the real winner in that deal is the kidnapper. And yet the Bible always says that Jesus was the victor over Satan. And at the cross, he defeated him. He destroyed him who had power of death, which is the devil, Hebrews 2.14 says. So there’s this mystery about what happened in the atonement. And some would say when God put our sins on Jesus, since the sins deserved wrath, he took the wrath. And by the way, what he did suffer, in crucifixion certainly doesn’t look like kind treatment. You know, if he had to go through that, it would seem like somebody’s angry at him, whether it’s God or Satan or whatever. I’m not prepared to say that God’s wrath came on Jesus, unless I find a scripture that says so. And maybe there’s one I’m not thinking of. Maybe someone who’s listening will give me one. But, you know, I don’t have a strong emotional attachment to any one view of the atonement. The Bible clearly says Jesus died for our sins, and that’s why we are saved and forgiven and purchased, redeemed. That’s true. But there’s many analogies from human life that are given when talking about the atonement. And the atonement is sometimes seen like what you’re talking about, like what you’re having trouble with, the idea that God put his wrath on Jesus. I would put it differently. I think I would simply say, that God allowed Jesus to carry our sins and experience the penalty of it, which is death. But then there’s other ways of seeing the atonement. There’s the ransom theory. There’s the moral influence theory. There’s certainly the Christus Victor theory, which teaches that Jesus conquered Satan through his death. Now, some people want to say, which view of the atonement do you accept? And then if you don’t say the same one that they accept, they think you’re a heretic. I believe… all those views of the atonement are given in Scripture. I’m not sure any of them are exact analogies. It seems to me like God can walk down the street and chew gum at the same time. So in the death of Jesus, he could accomplish several things. He could conquer Satan. He could balance the scales of justice. He could influence people morally. I mean, there’s all kinds of things that were accomplished through atonement. I don’t see the Bible saying you have to believe one or the other of them. In fact… I don’t think we even have to know why the atonement works. It’s important that God knows. I don’t care if I know, as long as God does. And that’s the main thing. But the pastor who’s saying Jesus took the wrath of God for us, that’s not really his dispensationalism coming out. There’s lots of non-dispensational Christians that would say that, too. It’s not a specifically dispensational point. It’s more of an evangelical point. commonplace to have the penal substitution doctrine many people say it wasn’t ever really enunciated in church history until Anselm around the 11th century and they may be right but I do think there’s indicators of it in scripture as well as the other ideas of the atonement I think the atonement is a unique thing and I think the Bible struggles to give us insight into it by giving different analogies of things we do understand And that’s why you’ve got these different theories of the atonement. Anyway, I don’t know if that’s helpful or not. I hope it may be. We’re going to have to take another call or two if possible before we’re done here. I’d like to take them all that are waiting. John from Salyersville, Kentucky.
SPEAKER 06 :
Salyersville, Kentucky.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi, John.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, Salyersville.
SPEAKER 08 :
Salyersville.
SPEAKER 06 :
How’s things? Hi. Yeah. Hello. The last caller, they may have been referring to in the book of Isaiah, who said that it pleased him to bruise him. I’m not sure exactly the scripture.
SPEAKER 08 :
Isaiah 53.
SPEAKER 06 :
That may be what they were referring to.
SPEAKER 08 :
Verse 10.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah. Yeah. The reason I called, go ahead.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, definitely. You’re right. I mean, it does say that Jesus was bruised. Of course, it’s a figure of speech. He was actually killed. But the picture is that he’s receiving punishment. And it’s for us that God did it. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah. The reason I called, I had a disagreement with you on baptism. But it’s necessary. It says, if we be buried with him, we’ll be raised up on the last days. In another place… You know, it says, by his name we’re saved. And there’s no other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved. That’s Acts 4.12. And another place, I think it’s 1 Peter 3. It talks about eight souls were saved by water, and likewise were saved by baptism.
SPEAKER 08 :
Verse 20, I know it, yeah.
SPEAKER 06 :
And then Acts. In Acts 22, 16, it says, Arise, wash away thy sin, calling on the name of the Lord. Yep. I think baptism is necessary.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay. Well, here’s the thing, though. Obedience to Christ is necessary. Surrender to him as king. He’s the king. You can’t get saved and make up your own rules. You have to go by his rules. And being baptized is a command. So one of the rules is repent. One is believe. One is be baptized. One is receive the Holy Spirit. All these things are seen in the New Testament as what Christ requires for us to be saved. On the other hand, it does not say that God cannot make an exception in some cases for something if it can’t be done. For example, the thief on the cross says, was not able to be baptized. He repented and believed. He didn’t get baptized in water or receive the Holy Spirit. So, you know, he missed out on some of the normative aspects of salvation. But that doesn’t mean God can’t say, yeah, but I see your heart is toward me, so I’m going to just give you exemption of that. Now, see, I think there’s different kinds of Christian attitudes. A legalistic attitude says, the Bible says all these things have to be done, so God can’t make an exception. Well, you know, I don’t know. I think God can make exceptions if he thinks that the essential things are done. And there are other things that normal people would be expected to do. But in this case, this person doesn’t have the opportunity. I don’t think God’s going to bust people on a technicality. And I think that that probably is what we’re suggesting about God. If we say, you know, a person who doesn’t have any opportunity to be water baptized can’t be saved. Well, Who says? I mean, it is true that the verses you quoted do refer to baptism, and there’s no question about it. There was not, as far as we know, after Pentecost, one unbaptized Christian. Ever. But there could have been. We don’t know. We don’t have record of any. But there could have been others who repented as they were falling off a cliff, you know, and between the top and the bottom, you know, they called out to God and It does say whoever calls on the name of the Lord should be saved. They didn’t get filled with the Spirit or baptized. But, I mean, we’ll leave it to God’s mercy to decide those cases. I’m not a legalist. Well, I won’t say I never have been. I suppose when I was younger I might have been more legalistic than I am now. But I believe that God’s looking for hearts that are toward him and that want him. And, you know, if he sees someone whose heart has become that way, But they have not had the opportunity to dot every I and cross every T, including water baptism, before they breathe their last breath. I don’t know that he’s, I can’t say that he can’t say that. He can do whatever he wants to do. You see, God is for people. He’s for sinners. It’s the whole sinful world that God so loved that he sent Jesus. He was a friend of sinners. Jesus was called that by his critics. And that bothered them. But they were sinners too. They should have appreciated that he was a friend of sinners. But God is on the side of sinners. You don’t die for people if you’re not on their side. And Jesus died for them and died for us. So clearly Jesus is the best friend sinners have ever had. And that’s because he loves them. He loves us. And so I believe that the only way someone will be lost is if God cannot find any excuse to forgive them. God’s not willing that any should perish. But that all she can repent. OK, that’s what God wants. But what if, you know, but he also wants everyone to be baptized. But what if somebody doesn’t get the chance to do that, but they have repented and believe? Well, you know, some people, Church of Christ people, for example, usually say, well, they can’t be saved then if they didn’t get baptized. Well, we’ll leave that to God. But I don’t understand God to be. that technical. I think God’s looking for the heart, and we’re looking for, you know, outward things. Now, if a person has the opportunity to be baptized after they believe, they will. If they’ve been told properly, Jesus commands us to be baptized. Okay. Well, the very nature of a person who’s converted is they’re now determined to obey Jesus. That’s what changes. That’s what converting happens. What’s converted means changed. You know, when a person is converted, Before that, they didn’t care to follow Jesus. Now they do. That’s the change that made them a convert. They now want to obey Christ. Then they need to be told. Jesus said, teach them to observe everything I’ve commanded you. Well, one of those things is baptism. So you teach them to do it. And if they’re truly converted, they will want to. They’ll be determined to obey Jesus, including be baptized. But there aren’t. rare cases, maybe not always that rare, but they’re certainly the exception, where someone would love to be baptized, but they die in prison before they have a chance because they got saved before their head was cut off or something, and they didn’t get a chance. Now, that doesn’t mean they weren’t saved, because if they had had the opportunity, they would have done the very thing that they know to do. I’ve also known people who, sadly, When they were converted, the person who led them to the Lord didn’t tell them that they’re supposed to be baptized. And they simply didn’t have a clue. They love Jesus. They’re determined to follow him. They’re going to live their life obedient to him as best they know. But being baptized, the requirement, they don’t know it. No one told them. And I’ve met people like that. I’ve met people who say they’ve been saved following Jesus for three years but not baptized. I say, well, why haven’t you been baptized? They say, I’m waiting for God to lead me. They apparently don’t know there’s a command for that. I had to correct them about that. So anyway, I’m going to agree with you. Baptism is a normative part of salvation. It’s a requirement. But I also believe that the Lord knows his own. And those who name the name of Jesus will turn from iniquity. And if they have opportunity and know that it’s required, they’ll also be baptized. In the first century, there was no one who didn’t know that. The gospel was preached along with the requirement to be baptized. We live 2,000 years later where the gospel is preached with all kinds of deficiencies. Many people leave too many things out. If a person’s heart is turned to Christ and some humble repentance and trust, obviously they should be baptized. That’s normative. But some of them, for whatever reason, may not have been able to. That’s my position. You can take a different one if you’d like. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. We are listener supported. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us. Have a good evening.
