Join us as we unravel the profound messages within 1 Peter about hope and the mandate to defend one’s faith. Steve articulates how Christians can present rational reasons for their beliefs, especially the pivotal belief in Christ’s resurrection. With vibrant discussions and biblical examples, listeners gain a better grasp of how to live out their faith authentically and effectively in today’s diverse world.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 07 :
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’d be glad to have you call in and we’ll talk about those together. If you see things differently from the host and you want to call in and talk about that, well, I’d be glad to have you call in about that too. The number to call is 844- 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. And we have a couple lines open if you’d like to call right now, 844-484-5737. You can get probably right through. No announcements to make, so we’re going to go directly to the phones and talk to Jacob in Tacoma, Washington. Hi, Jacob. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 09 :
Christy, thanks for having me. Yeah. The first covenant in Hebrews 8.13 is sometimes called the old covenant. The new covenant involves God’s love for Israel, but it is written on minds and hearts. Do you think that those who are disciples of Jesus ought to observe this new covenant, or would you say that it is not for Gentiles? That is, if you become a disciple of Jesus, you now belong to the people or nation of Israel, observing their new covenant in Christ.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, the new covenant, just like the old one, was for the house of Israel and the house of Judah. But just like the old covenant, it’s always possible for Gentiles to be part of that. You know, the covenant that God made at Mount Sinai allowed for Gentiles to become a part of it. All you had to do to be part of Israel or to be part of the covenant was to, as God put it in Exodus 19, 5, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant. And he made it very clear that any Gentile who wished to do so could keep the covenant. That would involve getting circumcised, which was a requirement of the old covenant. It would require, of course, keeping Sabbath and the festivals and all those things. So, you know, a Gentile who wished to keep the terms of the covenant was welcome to do it. So even though the covenant was with Israel, a Gentile could become part of Israel and be part of that covenant as a result. Now, the new covenant was also for the house of Israel and the house of Judah. And likewise, just like the old covenant, which was with Israel and Judah, it can include Gentiles and does. Now, when Christ first made the new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, it was in the upper room after the Last Supper or at the Last Supper. And he made the new covenant there with them. The Apostle Paul considered that he was, as he said in 2 Corinthians 3, a minister of the new covenant. And so the new covenant came. Now, when it came in the upper room and later at the feast and later when the Spirit came also, it was with the Jewish people. They were the faithful remnant of Israel, the faithful remnant of those who had first been part of the old covenant. But because they were faithful, God made a new covenant with them. Now, that faithful remnant we call Christians now. They were called disciples in those days. But they were all Israelites. They were all Jewish. And, well, there might have been some proselytes, but these were people who already were part of Israel, had been converted to Israel earlier. So the covenants made with Israel, both covenants are. But it became clear in a short time, maybe a few years later after Israel, maybe a few hundred thousand Jewish people had come into it, that Gentiles would be welcome to come into it on the same terms as the Jews, just like was the case in the Old Covenant. So this is the view that the Bible, I think, presents. is that God made a covenant with Israel at Mount Sinai, and he made another covenant with the faithful remnant of Israel in the upper room. And both covenants are with Israel, but Israel has always, both in the Old and the New Covenant, been able to accommodate the inclusion of Gentiles who are faithful to the covenant.
SPEAKER 09 :
Okay, I’m thinking about in Ephesians where it says, “…formerly knew the Gentiles in the flesh…” And then also where Jesus said that after he rose from the dead, that he wanted his disciples to make disciples and teach them all that he had commanded them, which involves the commandments.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, we don’t read of Jesus telling them to keep all the commandments. He said the law and the prophets were going to be in force until he fulfilled them. He said not one jot or one tittle of the law will pass until all is fulfilled. But he said he came to fulfill them. So unless he failed to do it. They got fulfilled by him. And he didn’t fail because the Bible says at the end of his life in John 17, 4, he was praying. He said, Father, I have completed the work that you gave me to do. So Jesus didn’t fail. He did fulfill that law and the prophets. And he said they would be in force until he did that. But, of course, what happened is he made the new covenant. And the new covenant, according to Jeremiah 31, says, is not like the old covenant. That’s what it says. It says, I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I brought them out of Egypt. So it’s clear that the new covenant has new conditions. And those are the conditions that Jesus himself taught. which he said, a new commandment I give to you, that you love one another. So this is not bringing the Torah into it. This is Christ. Christ himself replaces the Torah. He’s a higher authority than the law and the prophets. That’s why when Jesus met with three disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration, and Moses and Elijah, who represent the law and the prophets, they met with him to speak with him of the exodus that he was going to accomplish in Jerusalem, it says in Luke chapter 9. And Peter thought it would be great to keep the law and the prophets and Jesus. He said, hey, let’s make three tabernacles, one for Moses, one for Elijah, and one for Jesus. And that wasn’t the right answer. In fact, the Bible says Peter said that because he didn’t know what he was talking about. He didn’t know what he was saying. But after that, Moses and Elijah faded. They had only come to give their endorsement to Christ because the law and the prophets does endorse Christ. And then Jesus alone was standing there in a voice from heaven and said, This is my son. Hear him. With the emphasis on hear him, you know, instead of Moses and Elijah. The prophets and the law were for a time. Jesus said the law and the prophets were until John the Baptist. And since then, the kingdom of God has been preached, which is a different message than the law and the prophets. So as far as Ephesians 2 talking about those who are Gentiles according to the flesh, I’m not sure what the point was you’re making about that.
SPEAKER 09 :
My rabbi told us that the book of Ephesians says that you used to be Gentiles.
SPEAKER 07 :
Right.
SPEAKER 09 :
Okay, that’s the point I was making with that. I know that the new covenant is not like the old. I guess I was thinking of Matthew 5, 19, where it talks about the kingdom of heaven and the commandments.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, but that’s right after Jesus said they’re all in force until they’re fulfilled. So, I mean, obviously, he went on to say anyone who teaches people not to keep them is not right. They’ll be the least in the kingdom. But that’s because they were still in force until they were fulfilled. But he did fulfill them, like, a couple years later. Okay.
SPEAKER 09 :
I understand how they’re not for today.
SPEAKER 07 :
You don’t. No, I don’t. Do you think that we should offer animal sacrifices today, and you don’t know why we shouldn’t?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, I think there would need to be a temple for that.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, if there was a temple, you think we should offer animal sacrifices?
SPEAKER 09 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, so if God wants us to do that, why did he destroy the temple and has not allowed it to be rebuilt, if that’s something that’s important to him? I mean, he took away the sacrifices for the Babylonians for 70 years, and then he let them build it again because he wanted them to keep offering them, but… If he wants us to keep sacrifices now, why did he eliminate the temple?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, that’s a great question. I think the way that Jews or Israelites deal with it is they say that the sacrifices are not for today, so we need to pray and learn about them so that we’re understanding how to live our lives.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right. Well, if you’re an Old Testament Christian instead of a New Testament Christian, I guess that would make sense. If you read the New Testament, then it’s very clear that Jesus put an end to the sacrifices, that everything in the Old Covenant that was like that was a shadow for the time being, but Christ is the substance. So if you go back to keeping the law, then you’re going back from Christ to Moses. And that’s what Paul said in Galatians. He said if you’re going to be circumcised, you’re going to have to keep the whole law. And he says Christ will profit you nothing. And you’ve fallen from grace. So I don’t really, I mean, I’d rather be a New Testament Christian because that’s what Jesus established. I appreciate your call, Jacob. Good talking to you again. All right, let’s talk to Patty in Carmichael, California. Patty, welcome.
SPEAKER 10 :
Good afternoon, Steve. Thank you for your time. My question is, and I don’t know if I’m pronouncing this right, King Ahasuerus, is he the same man in Esther 3-1 and in Daniel 9-1? And did he and Esther have children? That’s my question.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, somebody asked me that recently. Was that you that asked me before?
SPEAKER 10 :
No, because I just came across it when I was studying Daniel and Esther.
SPEAKER 07 :
Oh, okay.
SPEAKER 10 :
I missed that program.
SPEAKER 07 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Sorry.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, interesting. Yeah, someone asked me that a couple weeks ago. Okay, well, Ahasuerus is the same king that was also known to us in history as Xerxes.
SPEAKER 05 :
Right.
SPEAKER 07 :
I think Ahasuerus is the Persian name and Xerxes is the Greek form of his name. Now, give me the Daniel reference you had in mind, too.
SPEAKER 10 :
Daniel, it says Darius.
SPEAKER 07 :
Daniel 9?
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, Daniel 9. It says Darius, the son of Ahasuerus. And I wondered if he was the same guy as married to Esther and if that was their son or did they ever have children?
SPEAKER 07 :
You know, I don’t actually think, I’d have to look that up, because Ahasuerus, in this case, in Daniel 9.1, is said to be of the lineage of the Medes, where Darius was a Persian. I mean, excuse me, Ahasuerus. the king who married Esther was a Persian. So, my guess is this is a different Ahasuerus. So, okay, because Esther’s husband was Persian, and this Ahasuerus is of the lineage of the Medes. The Medes and the Persians, of course, worked together, and even became joined in one empire. But, But of the lineage of the Medes would be considered to be his race, and that would be a different man then. Now, did Ahasuerus and Esther ever have children? I don’t know. If they did, it wasn’t important enough to mention. Oh, okay. I mean, they may have, but we don’t know. Thank you, Steve.
SPEAKER 10 :
I appreciate your time. God bless you.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right, Patty. Thank you for your call. You too. Bye now. All right, we’re going to talk next to Jack in Everett, Washington. We have a line open for you at this point if you’d like to call, if you want to be on the program. The number to call is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. Jack, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Hey, Steve, thank you very much.
SPEAKER 06 :
I have a question about 1 Peter 3.15, and it says, But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. And my question is, and maybe this will be an easy question, but what exactly does Peter have in mind when he talks about the hope? And I’ll take my answer offline.
SPEAKER 07 :
All right. That’s fine. Thanks for your call. Yeah, Peter says make sure you’re able to give an answer when people ask a reason for the hope that’s in you. Well, your hope, of course, is in Christ. Your hope is, as is often spoken of in Scripture, the hope of glory, that we will be like Jesus. It is our hope that we will be like him. It says in 1 Peter 3, when he shall appear, we shall be like him. And everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, even as he is pure. The Bible talks about Christ can use the hope of glory, glory being the likeness of Christ. Paul says in Romans 5, 2, he says we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God. So the Bible makes it very clear that we’re to be changed into the image of Christ, and that is the glory of our destiny. It says in 2 Corinthians 3.18 that we all with open or unveiled faces, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed from glory to glory into that same image, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. So the hope we have is that we will be like Christ, but that’s all part of it. a holistic faith system. I mean, that’s why we, for example, purify ourselves. I mean, if somebody had asked one of Peter’s readers, well, why are you living pure like that? No one else in the Roman Empire does that. Why don’t you fornicate? Why don’t you worship idols? Why don’t you get drunk and go to parties with us? Well, because I have another goal. I have another destiny. I’m going to be like Jesus. That’s my plan. And they say, well, why would you believe that’s likely to happen? Well, it’s basically giving an apologetic answer. The word apologetics comes from this verse, by the way. The Greek word for a reason means a defense of the hope. And it’s apologia. So that’s where we get the word apologetics from, from giving a reason or giving an argument, a defense. So the idea here is that you’re defending your faith. You’re defending your reason, giving actual reasons why you believe. Now, this is an important thing because most people, who hold religious views and hopes and dreams and so forth, they don’t have any reason for it except it’s appealing to them. They like the idea, and they hope it’s true. But, of course, we have hope because Jesus rose from the dead, and the Bible says that he’s the firstfruits of those who have died. That is, the rest are going to rise from the dead too. And when we rise, we’ll be like him. So there is a reason for our hope, and that is that Jesus rose from the dead. and that he’s at the right hand of God right now, reigning, and that we are his servants, and he’s going to reward us at his coming with sharing in his glory. So that’s the hope we have. And, you know, that hope is based on the reason that we can give that Christ rose from the dead. Now, frankly, to be able to give a defense for the fact that Jesus rose from the dead is a pretty important thing. Because if you don’t know why you believe that, someone just told you that’s true and that’s all you’re going on, well, you better know why they’re reliable. You better know why you have reason to believe it besides just gullibility. So this is a mandate to actually become informed about the reasons for our beliefs. And so that’s what I believe Peter’s getting at there. All right, let’s talk to Larry from Kent, Washington. Hey, Larry. Is this the Larry I met when I was in Kent, Washington last week?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes, it is, Steve. Hey, good to talk to you again. Good to hear from you. Yes. Yeah, thanks for coming out. We had a good time. So I just want to ask a quick question about the washing of seats. I know in John, Jesus called it a commandment, as I have done to you, so you do to one another. Was it more of a symbolism thing, where we put each other, serve one another, or was it an actual commandment that we should be upholding, doing?
SPEAKER 07 :
Right. Well, we do read of people washing feet, for example, in 1 Timothy. When Paul’s talking about the widows that should be allowed to be on the list of those that are supported by the church, one of the things it says that they have in their past is that they have washed the saints’ feet. So Jesus mentions it and Paul mentions it, although the book of Acts does not mention it being practiced. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t. But, you know, it’s usually a great idea if you’re going to make something normative practice to see that Jesus taught it. that it was practiced by the apostles in the book of Acts, and then it was hopefully taught in the epistles too. It’s good to have three witnesses on it. But I will say this. Washing feet was obviously, culturally speaking, the lowest form of service. The least prestigious servant in the home would be assigned to wash the feet of the guests when they came. And so when Jesus washed the disciples’ feet, he was lowering himself to the lowest position of service to them. Now, on another occasion, he had said in Matthew, anyone who would be chief among you must be the slave of all, must be the servant of all. And so he’s kind of giving an example how he, who is in fact the greatest among them, became the servant of all, even the lowest servant. And when he said, you know, what I’ve done to you, you do to each other. Now, and he says, as I’ve washed your feet, you should wash each other’s feet. Now, I think what he means by that, and, of course, someone may think otherwise, is simply that you need to serve people as humbly as any servant would. And you should be willing to take the lowest tasks. Now, washing feet was an actual service of value in that day. Because the streets were unpaved. They were dirty. People wore open-toed sandals and so forth. Their feet got dirty. The dirt was not just clean dirt. It was dirt that had camel dung and donkey dung and dog dung and things like that all mixed in from, you know, they didn’t ever clean it. I mean, they might sweep it, but it’s kind of gross. And so it was necessary when they’d take their shoes off coming in the house that somebody would wash their feet because it needed to be done. And therefore, it was a practical service. Now, today, there are churches that do wash feet. I’m going to suggest that maybe yours does. I don’t know. Maybe that’s why you’re asking. But there are foot washing services that churches have. I’m not against this. I don’t see anything wrong with it. But I would say that washing of feet today does not provide any actual service. It would just be symbolic, really. It would be symbolic of serving. Now, I imagine it would be possible to do the symbolic act of serving, which is in the form of washing feet, and still not be very much of a servant in real life. If somebody is really serving their brethren in the ways that they need to be served, then I think they are imitating Christ in this act. whether they actually wash anyone’s feet or not. I mean, you may never meet somebody in America whose feet need to be washed. That is, they wear shoes and socks or, you know, whatever. If you see somebody who’s got dirty feet and you wash their feet, that’d be fine. But to make it a scheduled ritual in the church, just to be fulfilling this statement that Jesus made, might be missing his point. It might be missing his point. I’m not against doing it, but It seems clear there’s a qualitative difference in washing feet in his day when it was actually something people needed and washing people’s feet today, which generally speaking isn’t what most people need. And therefore, to simply do it ritualistically would be, that might not be what Jesus is calling for. But insofar as I have talked to lots of people who go to churches where they do wash feet, a lot of people said it’s a real blessing. So, you know, I’m not going to try to say don’t do it. But I would say if churches don’t wash, don’t have a foot washing service, and yet they teach that real service, serving people their real needs, is mandatory or needed in the Christian life, then I would say they may be just as right. Got it. Yeah. Okay. All right. Good talking to you, Larry. Yeah, you too. Take care. Okay. God bless. Bye-bye. Tony in Kuna, Idaho. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 13 :
Yeah, I just had a question. Thank you guys for what you do. It’s awesome. I listen to you guys in the shop all the time. But I had a question. Not a lot of churches talk about seek first the kingdom of God. I was just wondering what exactly does that mean?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, okay, yeah, to seek the kingdom of God means to make the kingdom of God and its interests and its prosperity the priority in your life. Seek first the kingdom of God. Does it mean seek first that you would be part of the kingdom of God? Well, that would certainly be something. That would be a factor. I mean, if you’re not in the kingdom of God, then you need to make sure that you make a priority of being in the kingdom of God. But I’ve always thought he also meant to promote the kingdom of God. Seek the fulfillment of the kingdom of God’s mission. Because, of course, that’s That’s what the Great Commission is about, making disciples of Jesus and teaching them to observe everything he said because he’s the king, is to promote his kingship throughout the world. And, you know, I think, you know, it could be, some say, well, which is it? Is it that I need to seek to be a part of the kingdom of God? That is to make sure I’m not excluded because Jesus said that tax collectors and sinners would get into the kingdom before the Pharisees did. And it’s hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. So obviously there’s a factor of getting into it yourself. Make sure you’re not excluded. But then once you’re in, you’re an agent for the promotion of the kingdom of God, promoting Christ’s reign in the lives of all nations. So how would that be done? Well, it’s not by preaching the gospel. It’s also done by committing everything you do to that end. So maybe you’re not a preacher, but you’re working, you’re listening at work. Well, you can… You can represent Christ there in any way necessary. You can use the money you make working to help support the kingdom and its agents. You can volunteer time working for something that promotes the kingdom. There’s lots of ways that you can seek the kingdom. I understand that to mean to seek the fortunes of the kingdom, seek the benefits of the kingdom. That is, seek the kingdom’s success. I’m sorry I’m out of time. I wish I was not, but I hope that’s helpful. You’re listening to The Narrow Path radio broadcast. We have another half hour coming. We’re not done, so don’t go away. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. I’ll be back in 30 seconds.
SPEAKER 01 :
Small is the gate and narrow is the path that leads to life. Welcome to The Narrow Path with Steve Gregg. Steve has nothing to sell you but everything to give you. When today’s radio show is over, we invite you to study, learn, and enjoy by visiting thenarrowpath.com where you’ll find free topical audio teachings, blog articles, verse-by-verse teachings, and archives of all The Narrow Path radio shows. We thank you for supporting the listeners supported Narrow Path with Steve Gregg. Remember thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 07 :
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 a disagreement with the host, I’d welcome you to call in and raise those. For us to discuss together, the number to call is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. Our next caller is Theodore from Vancouver, B.C. Hi, Theodore. Welcome.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi. Steve, how are you? Are you able to hear me clearly?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yes. Yes, I can hear you. Yes, uh-huh.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, yeah. My question is just about a scripture that says regarding David having a heart after God. I’m not so sure what the correct wording, but I was reflecting on the lifestyle or what David went through. Or what specific action or characteristic that David has why he was considered a man who has a heart after God’s?
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, yeah, I understand David’s heart being a heart after God’s own heart to be a heart that kind of reflects the same values and the same loves and the same goals as God’s heart. It could even mean that he’s after God’s heart. That is, he’s pursuing God’s heart. But that would, of course, still raise questions about what’s meant by God’s heart. I think God’s heart would refer to endless… I mean, it might mean something else I can’t imagine, but it could mean that he shared God’s values and goals. We know that David recognized… things about God’s deeper attitudes than even was given in the law. For example, David said in Psalm 40, sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but my ear you have opened, my law is in your heart. Now, he lived under the Jewish law, which was given by God, and which required animal sacrifices. But David knew that that wasn’t really what God was majorly into. On another occasion, he said in Psalm 51, if you had desired sacrifice, I would have brought it. But he said the sacrifices of a God are, you know, a humble and contrite heart. And so he realized that God is more interested in spiritual things than in ritual things. Yeah, God had given lots of laws about offering sacrifices. And David… you would think wouldn’t know any better than to think that that’s what God is really about, as most of the Pharisees and other Jews thought. But David said, no, you want something more than that. You want a spiritual attachment to you. You want humble people. So I think David understood the heart of God and valued it. more than maybe the average Jew did, certainly more than Saul did. God was speaking to Saul when he said he was going to go find a man after God’s heart, which was not what Saul was. So that’s how I understand the phrase.
SPEAKER 08 :
So that statement basically happened before he even committed those sins, right?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yes, the sins that David committed were much later in his life, yeah.
SPEAKER 08 :
Much later, yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, when God spoke of him as a man after his heart, David was still a shepherd boy at that time, probably writing psalms out in the fields. David, I think David, for the most part, remained a man after God’s own heart through most of his life. His life was complicated by becoming one who runs a nation and running armies and fighting enemies and things like that. And then, of course, by his own, personal marriages and things like that. And then, of course, later in life, he actually committed adultery and murder, which, by the way, you know, it might be sort of, one might see that the war-like nature of his career, which is what kings often are forced to do, protect from enemies, and also the fact that he had multiple wives, might have kind of inclined him toward violence and sex in ways that made him vulnerable to the temptation for lightly killing a man and taking his wife. But that definitely was an exception to David’s general piety.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, so that’s basically the reality why we’re still in this world, especially when you’re in that level of success. temptation comes. That’s true. And that’s a big challenge to maintain your character before you even have that position. So I think the characteristic of humility, being a humble servant, was the primary asset of David.
SPEAKER 07 :
And even after he sinned, when he was confronted, he humbled himself and repented, which is still showing that his heart though he had maybe justified or rationalized his sin in his heart like people do for a while, when he was really convicted, he repented rather than killing the messenger. You know, there are kings that were confronted by prophets in the Old Testament who killed the messenger or put them in jail. But David, when king, was confronted by a prophet, he broke and he humbled himself and repented. And that’s, again, showing that he was still after God’s own heart. He was not He was not incapable of succumbing to fleshly temptation, that’s for sure. But I don’t know that any man is incapable of that.
SPEAKER 08 :
But I think that proves his humble or his humility as he has done for the Psalms, the book of Psalms. They’re all the manifestation of David’s humility. humility and really a relationship.
SPEAKER 07 :
Right. You can see his heart for God. You can see his heart for God in those Psalms. That’s true. Hey, thank you for your call, brother. I hope that’s helpful to you. We’re going to talk next to Kay in California. Hi, Kay. Welcome.
SPEAKER 02 :
Thank you. I have two questions. The first one is about John chapter 11 and that whole Lazarus section. I heard a radio person yesterday say that Jesus was angry with Martha for manipulating him or trying to, and he’s angry with Mary for trying to manipulate him, and that he cried because he knew people wouldn’t believe him or something. And I’d never heard any of those things. And then the second question is, can you comment on Aaron Budgen, B-U-D-J-E-N’s ministry? He’s the one that said that, and I wonder what kind of beliefs he had that would bring that about. And I can just listen to the answer on the radio. Thank you.
SPEAKER 07 :
Awesome. All right. Thanks for your call. Well, I have to say I’m not really familiar with Aaron Budgen’s ministry. I know he’s on some of the same stations that this show is on, but I’m not always in the position to be listening to the radio when he’s on. I probably have heard him a couple of times. I know I’ve heard his name, and I’m pretty sure I’ve heard his show, at least parts of it, while I was driving at some time or another. But I really couldn’t tell you what he teaches or what distinctives there are of his ministry or what I can’t really say that I heard him say anything I don’t agree with in the portions I heard, so I’m not going to critique him. I’m not in a position to do that. But as far as Jesus and Lazarus, I don’t see any evidence in the story that he was angry at Mary or Martha. He did speak correctively to them. maybe some people think that a strong word of correction, you know, must be accompanied by anger. I would think that a strong word of correction is best offered when you’re not angry. But, you know, what he did say to them is that he had told them that if they would believe, they would see the glory of God. And, you know, Mary and Martha both said to him, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. Now, they were angry at him. I don’t know. Maybe that’s what was said. Because they definitely were angry at him. I mean, a little miffed. Because their brother had been sick. They had sent messages to Jesus specifically, hoping he’d come and heal him. Jesus didn’t. He waited for him to die. And they thought, like, what? How come Jesus let us down? He’s our friend. He heals all kinds of strangers that he hardly knows. And yet, in our case, he ignores us. And so when Jesus did show up, they thought it was too late. And he had sent a message ahead of them saying this sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God. Now, of course, Lazarus did die. But as it turns out, the sickness was not unto death because it resulted in only temporary death and resulted in the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead. So the end result was not death, which is what Jesus said, but for the glory of God. So when he came down there, the sisters kind of rebuked him. They said, if you’d been here, my brother wouldn’t have died. He said, didn’t I tell you that if you believe, you’ll see the glory of God? You know, that’s what he said. And so then he asked to see where the tomb was, and they took him there and said, Again, Martha was a little bit miffed when he said, move the stone. And she said, well, he’s been dead four days. He’ll stink. All I see is Jesus ignoring their irritated remarks and speaking to correct them when they’re wrong. But I don’t see any anger on his part. Now, when he wept… There have been a lot of theories about why Jesus wept. Of course, the shortest verse in the Bible is in this chapter, Jesus wept. And he wept at the tomb, or as they were going to the tomb, of Lazarus. Now, what did he weep for? Some say, well, he wept because they didn’t believe him. Well, I don’t know. They had been kind of in disbelief all the way up to that time, and he wasn’t weeping. What was it at that moment that made him weep? They weren’t exhibiting unusual unbelief at the moment. Some people think he shouldn’t have been weeping because he knew he was going to raise him from the dead. And maybe that makes sense to us. But I think Jesus was confronted with death at the tomb of his friend on that moment. And I think he was reflecting on this. He saw everyone weeping, it says, and then he wept. He was sympathetic with the weepers, with the mourners. And I think that he was kind of weeping over maybe contemplating how much grief had come on the world because of sin and because of this kind of thing. Everyone dies and everyone loses their loved ones. And all this weeping was something that, you know, I think it touched him. And he shared sympathetically in their weeping. Jesus, remember, is not one who could not be touched with the feelings of our infirmities. It says in Hebrews, you know, he was tested in all ways as we are. And I think that, you know, his sympathy for these friends and seeing them weep like this just moved him. I don’t think he was angry at them. I don’t think he was even necessarily weeping because… Why doesn’t anyone believe in me? You know, I don’t think that was it. That would be more like self-pity. But I think he was just, that was a proper response in the face of death. And I think he just empathized and entered into their emotional stress at that time. That’s what I’ve come to think about that passage. All right, let’s talk to Mary from Upland, California. Welcome.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, good afternoon, Steve. I have asked you about this in the past, but there’s something more added. That’s why I call again. This is about teaching Bible as a literature in the university. And I didn’t like the way it’s going because they are trying to pick and choose from verses in the Bible, and that’s all they want to deal with. Now I’m dealing with this new book that a friend gave me. Who Stole My Church? Have you heard about it?
SPEAKER 07 :
I don’t think I know the title.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay. This book is about the old… It’s about a Protestant church, about traditional and contemporary, and they are giving in to the younger people to make it only singing and…
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, so it’s talking about how the church is changing culturally to fit in with the youth culture. Exactly. That’s what I was trying to say. Yes.
SPEAKER 03 :
So, in other words, is the Bible going to be taken apart and then destroyed and be like any other book? Or what’s going to happen is my concern.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, well, no, the Bible will never cease to be because Jesus said heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. His words will be lasting forever. There have been people trying to destroy the Bible for as long as there’s been a Bible. Many of the Roman emperors tried to gather all the New Testament documents and to burn them because they wanted to stamp out Christianity. But the Bible still remains. There were times when the popes tried to keep people from having the Bible in their language. So they would burn Wycliffe’s English translations and Tyndale’s work. They put Tyndale to death because he was translating the Bible into languages people could understand. They tried to do that same to Luther, although he hid and he got the Bible translated into German, which is why Germany became Protestant. But the point is that there’s been lots of people who’ve tried to stamp out the Bible. There’s a story about how There’s lots of stories about this. I guess I can’t pull up one of them individually off the top of my head, but how that people have tried to predict that the Bible will be not believed within a few years of their time. Voltaire, for example. Voltaire was not a Christian. And he predicted that within, I think he said within 100 years of his time, no one would believe the Bible anymore. The Bible would pass into the dustbin of history and not be believed anymore. But 50 years later, he was dead, and the Geneva Bible Society, I think it was them, bought his house and his printing presses and printed Bibles on them. So he thought the Bible would be gone. Within 100 years, but within 50 years, the Bible was being printed on his own printing presses, and he was gone. And that’s kind of the way things have gone in history. Many have sought or predicted that the Bible would be destroyed, but it has not. It will not. I mean, it may be that the time will come when someone will try to gather up all the physical Bibles and burn them, but it remains that many people have memorized great portions of the Bible. And now, of course, we’ve got it all in digital media. I don’t know if they’ll collect all the thumb drives that have the Bible on them. I don’t think we’ll ever lose the Bible. What we have is societies go through ups and downs in terms of their belief in the Bible. I think the Bible is believed today. more widely in the world today than it ever was. It’s just that in Western civilization, it’s our turn to go through a time of skepticism and to be wrong. And, you know, those, for example, back in the mid-2000s, well, let’s just say 2006, a bunch of atheists wrote books. Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, they all wrote books promoting atheism, trying to totally say, you know, belief in God and the Bible is a delusion. And yet, those books are not very prestigious anymore. There’s been so many books debunking what those books said that I think these atheists made themselves look pretty stupid. Because, frankly, they didn’t know what they were talking about. And I know because I read their books too. It was pretty easy to debunk them. Anyway, the thing is that the people who prophesy the end of the Bible or who try to bring it about they’re on a fool’s errand. Now, these college courses that teach the Bible as literature, they are often taught, they’re almost always taught by unbelievers. So I don’t really recommend people taking a course at the university called The Bible as Literature because, frankly, they’re going to basically say the Bible is just ancient literature. They’re not going to have any confidence in it. They’re not going to credit it with being the Word of God, and so forth. And so a person can do much better just to read the Bible himself. You don’t need to take a college course on it. You can just read the Bible itself, and you’ll learn the Bible. I definitely do not recommend the courses of Bible as literature at universities. However, I think I wouldn’t rule out that some people have taken such courses and gotten their first exposure to the Word of God and actually become believers. It’s very possible. But we’re not going to lose the Bible. We’re certainly not going to lose the Word of God. You don’t have to worry about that. All right, we’re going to talk to Russell in Fort Worth, Texas. Hello, Russell. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Hello, Steve.
SPEAKER 04 :
I wanted to ask a question about the time when David was running from Saul and he and his men hid in the cave. I was reading from different sources, and I ran across a story about, it was very detailed, about how when they were hiding in this cave, there was a spider that had built this beautiful web, and the men that were chasing after David. Oh, I’m sorry. So can you hear me now?
SPEAKER 07 :
Go ahead. My thing cut out. I can now.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 07 :
Your voice cut out for a reason. I don’t know. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay. I was reading… When he was hiding in the cave. Yeah, go ahead. When he was hiding in a cave, I read a story about a spider that had made this web at the front of the cave that prevented the men who were chasing David from going into the cave because they knew it wouldn’t have been built that quickly. And I thought, man, that is a really cool story. I guess I missed that when I was reading Samuel. But then as I did some more research, I found out that’s not in the Bible. But… Apparently that’s a story that’s been perpetuated, and I just thought it was interesting that something like that could be created and perpetuated as biblical, and it’s not in the Bible whatsoever that I can tell. And just see what you thought about that and what you knew about it.
SPEAKER 07 :
There’s a lot of things that people think in the Bible. They think it’s in the Bible, but it’s not. That certainly is one thing that’s not in the Bible. It so happens that I heard, and I don’t remember where because I hear so many things and I read so many books. I heard about some kind of a fictional story, or maybe it was a true story about missionaries. I don’t remember. But it was the case that somebody, whether it’s a true story or fiction, was hiding in a cave and a spider built a web across the opening so that It looked like no one had come in there, and so their pursuers were unable to discern that they’d gone in there. So I’ve heard a story very much like that, but it’s not in the Bible. It doesn’t have to do with a Bible character. So somebody may have heard that story, too, somewhere and thought, oh, that’d be, you know, David hid in the cave. So maybe they got it mixed up and thought that that was about David. But, yeah, we shouldn’t assume that people will not make mistakes in attributing things to the Bible that aren’t there. They do it a lot. People think the Bible says cleanliness is next to godliness. People think the Bible says God helps those who help themselves. There’s a ton of things that people think the Bible says, and they’ll swear by it. I’ve heard people swear by it. Oh, that’s in the Bible. You know, God helps those who help themselves. Well, no, it’s not. It’s not there. But that’s commonplace. Because the Bible is so interwoven in our culture, along with other cultural stories and sayings and proverbs, it’s easy to get mixed up as to which things came from the Bible, which things did not. I had actually, in high school, I had a speech teacher who had been a minister. And I guess he left the ministry and became a high school teacher. But he once said, he knew I was a Christian, and he kind of liked that because he was some kind of a Christian. But he said in class once, you can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear. And he looked over at me and said, you know where that’s from, don’t you? And I said, no. And he said, that’s from the book of Proverbs. And so I took his word for it, and I believed it was in the Book of Proverbs until I searched and searched and searched. No, it’s not. It’s not. It’s probably from poor Richard Malman or something. But, you know, there’s all kinds of sayings that make their way around Western civilization. And since so many of them do come from the Bible, it’s probably hard for people to remember which ones do and which don’t. All right. So that spider story, that doesn’t really belong to the story of David. All right. Thanks for your call. Robert in Pinole, California. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 12 :
Hi, Steve. In the book of Jonah, Chapter 4, where God is talking to Jonah and he says, in which there are more than 120,000 people who cannot tell their right. What does that mean?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, God is describing the unbelieving or the people of Nineveh whom God was going to destroy. But he sent Jonah to warn them, and Jonah did warn them, and they repented. And so God chose not to destroy them at that time. And Jonah was upset. And God said to him, you know, why shouldn’t I have mercy? This great city that has 120,000 people who don’t know their right hand from their left. Now, what does that mean? There’s two opinions I’ve heard from commentators. Some think that referring to the ones who don’t know their right hand from the left is referring to children, little children who haven’t learned yet their left hand from their right. It’s possible because sometimes the prophets, like Isaiah, talks about a child will be born And before he knows to say, my father or my mother, this thing will happen. Or before he knows to choose the good and refuse the evil, this thing will happen. And to say they don’t know their right hand from their left might be referring to the fact that they’re young, they’re little children. So to say nothing of the adults that deserve to die, the city had 120,000 children. who were that young, and if they don’t know the right hand from the left, they certainly shouldn’t be held much accountable for the sins of their fathers, or if the society shouldn’t be wiped out. That’s what some people think. Others think that right hand from left is simply a figure of speech. God did frequently say to Israel in the law, make sure you keep straight on the path and don’t turn to the right hand or to the left, which was simply a way of saying, stay on the path, don’t go left. Don’t deviate. And right hand from the left, you know, just speaks figuratively, I think, of not going the wrong way. And to not know your right hand from your left might refer to someone who just doesn’t have any moral sense, doesn’t know right from wrong. And that is something that some commentators believe too. I think that’s a very real possibility, though I think the idea that he’s talking about children too young to know the right from the left may also be true. Either one really works. I guess it would depend on whether the city was big enough to have 120,000 children or whether that’s more like the whole population and that God was saying the whole population was morally bankrupt, didn’t know right from wrong and so forth. In any case, he is speaking of ignorance. He’s talking about ignorant people, whether it’s all people who are ignorant of morality or whether it’s talking about… the little children who are ignorant enough that we should have pity on them and hope that they wouldn’t be destroyed with the city. Those are the two options I’m aware of. Thanks for your call. I’m out of time. You’ve been listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg. We’re live Monday through Friday, and we pay for the time on many, many radio stations. It’s expensive. If you’d like to help us, we are listener-supported. You can write to the Narrow Path at the website… address or just go to the website and donate there at thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.
