Join Steve Gregg as he navigates through intriguing discussions that include modern-day exorcisms and their authenticity. He offers insights into a common theological query about 1 Corinthians 11:14 and dissects the Lord’s Prayer’s plea on leading us into temptation. This episode promises a meaningful dialogue that not only answers questions on scripture but also encourages thoughtful reflection on how these insights apply today. Whether you’re pondering the nature of evil, questioning how to ethically interact with estranged family members, or curious about cultural and historical contexts of biblical texts, this episode is designed to broaden your understanding.
SPEAKER 02 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour each weekday afternoon. And if you’d like to participate in this program, that’s why we’re live, so you can do that while we’re on the air. We’d love to have you join us if you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith. You’re all welcome to call in and to state a question, or you can also state a disagreement with the host if you’d like to. We welcome you to do that. Right now I’m looking at a couple of lines open on our switchboard, which means you could get through easily if you call right now. The number is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484. 5737. And I don’t think I have any announcements to make right now, so I’ll just go directly to the phones and talk to Mark from Eagan, Minnesota. Hi, Mark. Welcome.
SPEAKER 05 :
Oh, thank you. So I typed out my question so I could read it quickly for you. Could you explain, please, the capabilities of Satan compared to his demons? In other words, I don’t believe Satan can be everywhere at once like the Holy Spirit can. Satan is limited and is located in hell or someplace else, I think. Where is he exactly? Can he roam the earth freely? And what about the demons? Does he appoint demons to harass us and tempt us? Because either Satan and or his demons knows our weaknesses, which begs the question, how does he or they know our weaknesses? Can he or they read our minds or do they see us and know how to attack us?
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. Well, that’s a lot of questions, and some of them simply are not answered directly in Scripture, though we can perhaps deduce possible or realistic answers to some of those questions. Does Satan live somewhere, like in hell? The Bible actually never associates Satan with hell at all, except at the end of the world when he is cast into the lake of fire, which is what I would associate with hell. So, at least until the end of the world… Satan does not have any reference to hell or any connection with hell that we know of. Therefore, the idea, you know, when we say that some doctrine or some teaching comes from the pit of hell, we usually mean it comes from Satan, although Satan isn’t in the pit of hell. He doesn’t, as far as we know, have anything to do with it any sooner than we do. Of course, he and the wicked will be thrown into the lake of fire when Jesus comes back. Until then, we don’t know much about his whereabouts. We do see him cast out of heaven in Revelation 12, verses 9 through 10. That is said to have taken place when the kingdom of God came and when the salvation came and the power or the authority of Christ, which was, of course, at the cross. When Jesus came out of the grave, he said all authority in heaven and earth had been given to him. When the authority of Christ came was then. That’s when the kingdom came. That’s also when salvation came. And according to Revelation 12, verses 9 and 10, that is when Satan was cast out. But his being cast out is, to my mind, somewhat figurative of his having been before God as a prosecuting attorney. laying charges against us, because in that passage in Revelation, he’s called the accuser of the brethren. And even the word Satan in Hebrew means adversary, as an adversary in court. So, I think his being cast out of heaven is figurative of God casting Satan’s case against us out of court. And, I mean, he may literally have been geographically removed from heaven, I’m not sure, but Where he is, we don’t know. Even before Jesus came, we find Satan in the book of Job roaming to and fro in the earth. That’s what God said to Satan. Where are you? Where have you been? He said roaming to and fro throughout the earth. So that seems to be what Satan is said to be doing. Now, what about, is he everywhere at once? No, no. He wouldn’t have to roam to and fro throughout the earth if he was everywhere at once. He could just see it all at one time. But his organization seems to be. Now, we don’t know much about his organization. We do read about demons, evil spirits, unclean spirits, and things like that in the Bible, and they all seem to be references to the same thing, which seems to be those who are Satan’s minions. Now, calling them that… would be due to the fact that in Matthew 12, there’s reference to Beelzebub, the prince of demons. And Jesus spoke about Beelzebub and the prince of demons both as identified with Satan. Because when the Pharisees said, Jesus is casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, Jesus said, well, if Satan is casting out Satan, his kingdom will fall. Notice he said, you said I’m casting out by Beelzebub. Well, that’s Satan. And if he’s casting out demons, that’s also Satan. That’s Satan casting out Satan. So Satan, although he’s an individual in my opinion, is part of an organization. Just like we might say that through the U.S. military scattered throughout the world, Donald Trump is active, you know, keeping the peace or whatever we might say. The president, whatever is done through his agents can be attributed to him. And so, I mean, we blame presidents, for example, for mistakes made under their oversight through the military as if the presidents themselves did it. And we give them credit for things. For example, the killing of Saddam Hussein is attributed to the president and not to the troops so much that he sent. So, you know, what is done by Satan’s troops, his organization, is often said to be done by him. Now, do they know what we’re thinking? I don’t think they read our minds. I don’t think they need to. they would know what our weaknesses are. You say, how would they know? Well, anyone who lives with you knows what your weaknesses are. I mean, I don’t know if you’re married or not.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, then your wife probably knows what your weaknesses are, and she doesn’t see you all the time. It is possible for invisible adversaries to be watching you all the time. I don’t know if they do, but it seems that they could. Yeah.
SPEAKER 05 :
So you think demons are just like hanging around and they see you and they know how to attack you, or Satan does and he appoints them to do it, or how does that work?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, we’re not told how it’s organized, but demons are invisible, and the Bible indicates there’s a lot of them in the world. So, you know, I believe that it’s possible that demons are watching you all the time. I don’t know that to be so. But they could be. At any given time, they may be. So let’s just say this. If Satan did appoint a demon to watch and to tempt an individual, then that demon could do so full-time, I would think, and we wouldn’t know it. I don’t claim to know what’s going on in the unseen world like that. And the Bible doesn’t… The biblical writers did not choose to fill in the gaps or flesh all that out for us. But we… we do know that the devil and the demons are involved in attempting and testing and afflicting people. So, you know, apart from that, we have to, like I said, speculate about the details.
SPEAKER 05 :
All right. Thanks, sir.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. Well, thank you for your call. Let’s talk to Andrew from Denver, Colorado next. Andrew, welcome.
SPEAKER 10 :
Hi, Steve. Thank you. I’m I’m curious about the term the church age. I heard that in a sermon recently. And I just, I guess I lean more towards amillennialism, but I’m not sure how to deal with that term and what it means exactly. I think I know what it means, but is that a real thing, you think, or is it something that’s just a dispensational term, or what do you think about that?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, when we talk about the church age, we are talking about the age of the church, obviously, which means from the beginning of Christ’s church at Pentecost till the end of the age. Of course, the church existed before Pentecost. In the Old Testament, the Bible referred to Israel as the church, the ecclesia. But the remnant of them were filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter 2 and became the church of Jesus Christ. And so that’s what we usually mean by the church. The church will someday be, you know, like Christ when he comes back and raises us from the dead. We won’t cease to exist, but there’ll be certainly a new era, an age. When we use the word age, I mean, that’s quite a flexible term. We could talk about the age of the dinosaurs or the age of, you know, the Crusades or something like that, a period of time characterized by something uniquely part of that time, is commonplace. And to say the age of the church or the church age would be simply the period of time that the church is active or prominent or in existence on earth. The Bible doesn’t use the term, by the way. I mean, the Bible doesn’t ever speak of the church age in that terminology. And I don’t know how many people before dispensationalism used that term. There might have been plenty. Anyone could use it, whether they’re a dispensationalist or not. I use it, and I’m not a dispensationalist. I’ll speak of the age of the church, to distinguish it from the age of, say, the Mosaic Law or something, or the age of the resurrection that Jesus spoke of. So it’s not a biblical term, but it’s not an objectionable term to people of any theological camp. The dispensationalists would call it the dispensation of grace, the age of the church, and they believe that that church age began at Pentecost, and as probably is a reasonable thing to suggest, and that it will end at the rapture. And that’s probably reasonable to suggest, too. The difference is they think that after the rapture, there will be some more of history to run out, and it will have to do with refocusing God’s attention from the church to the national Israel, so that they would say that, the church age is in distinction to the time where God is seeking to save the Jews. Now, you know, until dispensationism came along, I don’t know that anyone held that view because it was the view of the church that God is seeking to save the Jews throughout the church age and that the church age lasts until the end of the world. So it’s not like the church is going to leave and God’s going to have another project. So to my mind, the Bible teaches that the church age is is the whole time from the beginning of the church until Jesus comes back, and it coincides with the time that God is trying to bring the Jews and the Gentiles to him, and that there’s not a separate age that’s just for the Jews. So the suggestion that there would be a separate age just for the Jews after the church age is over would be where I would differ from dispensational position on that.
SPEAKER 10 :
All right? So would you say the teaching in Ephesians where it’s pretty clear that the kingdom consists of Jews and Gentiles, the church age, as you said, was kind of, it was also referred to as before the day of Pentecost. So I guess that’s what’s confusing. The way it’s used, if it’s the Ecclesiae, And if you’re using the Septuagint, that goes back to the Old Testament as well, right? It’s just the people of God, essentially.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right, right. But what we call the Church of Jesus Christ did not exist as such until Jesus Christ came. And remember Jesus said, yeah, upon this rock I will build my church. God had a church, which means called out ones or an assembly, in the Old Testament. And that was comprised of the nation of Israel. But Jesus came and said he’s going to build his church upon the apostles of Peter. And that’s what Ephesians 2 says.
SPEAKER 10 :
Ephesians 2 says. So that’s distinct from the law of Moses and the immunity that was created around that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right. The new covenant. The new covenant defines the church. Okay. All right. Great. Okay, Andrew. Thanks for your call. Good talking to you. Okay. Barbara in Roseville, Michigan. Welcome. Welcome.
SPEAKER 03 :
Oh, hi. Thank you, Steve. You know, a couple of weeks ago, a mother had called in, and she was crying a real emotional thing. Her daughter, who was on drugs and alcohol, didn’t want to have anything to deal with her, and she wanted to know if she should cut her out of the wheel and not leave anything for her. And I just had one thing to say, forgive. We don’t treat people evil because of the way they treat us, and don’t give up hope on her daughter. And even like for Christmas and birthdays, just put a card in the mail, $10, so that when her daughter comes to herself, she’ll remember that she has a mother, the grandchildren will know that they have someone who loves and cares about them and wants to be a part of their life. I just wanted to say that.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. I appreciate that. As far as writing somebody out of your will, that would be a different act than showing general, you know, love and generosity to somebody while they’re restrained. I guess I’d have to say that it depends on how vociferous the daughter is in rejecting all contact with her mother. I mean, if she doesn’t want any contact with her mother, then I don’t know to what degree the mother should continue to pursue the prodigal son while he was away from his father and didn’t want to be with his father. His father wished he was home and loved him just the same and was so glad when he did come home. But he didn’t send, as far as we know, birthday cards and money to him and things like that, because that might be seen as underwriting his lifestyle, which was very irresponsible. Actually, it was a very self-destructive lifestyle, as you can tell, because the son turned out with some means of money, and his lifestyle totally was a squandering of it. in sinful behavior, and then he ended up totally broke and eaten with pigs. Obviously, you don’t want to underwrite that lifestyle. It’s just destructive and wasteful. In fact, the word prodigal, it’s funny that he’s called the prodigal son. The Bible doesn’t use that term. It never calls him the prodigal son, but someone, whoever came up with that name for that story, chose the word prodigal, which actually means prodigal. It actually means wasteful. Prodigal means wasteful. And so, you know, there would be no doubt some children who go off and live so wastefully and so self-destructively that supporting them would not be an act of love. They might like you to do so, but it would be, it’s like you’re underwriting their destruction. So there are times like, you know, if your kids are drug addicts or things like that, that it would not be a helpful thing to them to leave an estate for them when you die. They could just buy more drugs and just kill themselves faster. Now, I’m not saying there wouldn’t be some kind of provision someone could make in their will that says, you know, as long as my child is using drugs, you know, they can’t have any of this inheritance and put it in some kind of a, I don’t know, escrow or something account where the child has to be clean from drugs forever. two years or something like that before they can get the money out. I’m not saying you shouldn’t love your child and seek to do good for them. The point is, though, that underwriting their lifestyle isn’t always doing good to them. Sometimes it’s trying to win their affection. And who doesn’t want to win their children’s affection if they’ve lost it? But sometimes you’ve got to do the tough love thing and say, I’m sorry, as long as you’re destroying yourself, I’m not going to pay for that. I’m not going to pay for your destruction because I love you. So, yeah, your point is well taken, and I won’t say that I’m completely in a different place. But I would say while you should be as friendly and loving towards your child when they’re away from you and when they don’t want to be with you, it’s as possible. Nonetheless, you’re leaving them some substantial fortune when you die would not necessarily be for their good unless they change. It’s not good for irresponsible people who are living a sinful and self-destructive lifestyle to be made rich. It’s actually hastening their doom in all likelihood. Jeff in Sacramento, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 07 :
Hello. There’s two scriptures, so I have a question. And I’ve had this, well, ever since the 90s, probably mid-90s, because I know the answer, but… I just don’t hear preachers really talk about it. I hear a lot of preachers, like, they’ll quote scriptures on many issues and often misapply them. But, okay, there’s the scripture that all our righteousness is filthy rags. And then, but Paul, the New Testament, he says at one point to a church, he says, you are witnesses and so is God also that how holy, righteous, and blameless we lived among you who believed. Well, isn’t it an insult to the Holy Spirit of God to say that the fruit that he produces is filthy rags? If we’re doing it on our own, I believe that when it says that all our righteousness is filthy rags, that’s a time of apostasy or the basic state of humanity outside of Christ, or if we’re walking in the flesh. But if we’re walking in the Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is producing rags, works in our lives, those are not filthy rags. That’s why I say it isn’t an insult to the Holy Spirit of God to say, you know, his fruit is filthy rags.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, absolutely. I mean, when preachers say all of our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, they’re quoting Isaiah. chapter 64, in verse 6, which is not written to Christians. Frankly, it’s not even written to every non-Christian. It’s written specifically to the Jews who were living filthy lives, but they were still worshipping at the temple, which means they would still go to the temple and they would offer sacrifices and so forth. And, you know, it’s usually misquoted. People often say, all of our righteousness… No, it doesn’t say that. It says all of our righteousnesses. It’s talking about plural. It’s talking about righteous acts, which in this case is referring to their religious acts at the temple. The Jews at various times in their history. Though they continued to follow the rituals of the temple, which were what Isaiah is referring to in the context about their righteousnesses, they were living abominable lives. And so the prophets, like Isaiah and others, often said that, you know, when you’re living that way, your temple sacrifices are doing no good at all. In fact, many times God said, even in Isaiah chapter 1, I hate your sacrifices. Not because sacrifices are bad. But because, as it says in Proverbs, the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord. That is, God was pleased with sacrifices when they’re brought with a pure heart by somebody who loves God and wants to honor God and worship God with these sacrifices. But if a person’s living a wicked life, these sacrifices are simply hypocritical and offensive. So when Isaiah said all of our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, he’s referring to Israel’s religious activities when they’re living totally contrary to the standards and morals that God commanded them to live by. So it would be easy to say, perhaps, to paraphrase it, all of our religious activities are like filthy rags while we’re living an immoral life. So you’re right. I mean, to say, and preachers do say this because they don’t want anyone to think that that they’re not extremely bad sinners. I mean, usually it is considered to be the best thing you can do for someone to convince them that they’re really, really bad, because then they’ll see their need for God and for Jesus to forgive and so forth. And maybe that is a good thing, but it’s not good to misuse Scripture. I grew up my whole life hearing people say, well, every good thing you do that you think is good is wicked and is filthy in God’s sight. Well, no, actually God likes good behavior. The Bible everywhere says that he’s looking for good behavior. He’s ordained good works for us to walk in. He’s looking for people who are zealous for good works. So good behavior is a good thing. It’s not filthy rags. But religious behavior, when you’re not living an obedient life in general, is offensive to God. So that’s what’s being said there.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, thank you.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. So I think I agree. I think you agree with that, it sounds like. So, yeah, that’s how I understand his words. All right, brother. Thanks for your call. Ann from Mount Airy, Georgia. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you very much. I’ve listened to a lot of your lectures over the past few years. I feel very educated about a lot of things theologically when I’m out about And I bring up Jesus to people when I have an opportunity to have a minute, maybe in a checkout line or something or in a parking lot coming and going. I was wondering if you could just help all of us out with what’s your approach when you have that opportunity to share the Lord. And also when I’ve been asked by people to that are maybe a little resistant and, oh, you believe, I don’t believe I’m going to go to hell and burn for eternity. No, thank you. I know you’ve done, I’ve listened to the lectures about the four views of hell. Do you lean toward one of those? So it’s kind of two questions. How do you present the Lord to people when you have an opportunity? And how do you explain or what’s your preference of your four views? Do you lean strongly toward one over the other three?
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. Well, first of all, the four views, my book on the four views of Revelation, you may be confused with the book of the three views of hell. There are three views of hell that are widely hit. That’s okay. No problem. And in my book, I mention several times on that, as I do in my lectures, I have not really been able to settle on which view is correct because there is a scriptural case That is a credible scriptural case for more than one.
SPEAKER 08 :
Right, and I know you’ve said that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, so I haven’t changed my mind about that. Yeah, I haven’t changed my mind about that. But I would, you know, when I’m witnessing to people about Christ, I generally will follow the example of the apostles in the book of Acts who never mentioned heaven or hell. Because I don’t have a message to them about heaven or hell. I have a message about Jesus.
SPEAKER 12 :
Yeah, the message is Jesus.
SPEAKER 02 :
But, I mean, if they say, well, I don’t believe in a God who burned people forever in hell, I’d say, well, I don’t necessarily believe that God’s going to do that either. I mean, whether we believe it or not. Yeah, whether we believe it or not doesn’t make it real or unreal. I mean, God’s going to do what he’s going to do.
SPEAKER 04 :
But I don’t feel that I have… It’s not going to be good.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, I don’t feel compelled to see it with just that one view where the Bible might support other views. But I would deflect from the whole issue of hell only because we don’t know what it is. But I would say that I would talk about Jesus himself and the fact that God has… given Jesus to be the Messiah, to be the King, and he commands everyone to repent. Now, of course, it depends on how long you have to talk to somebody. You can get into a lot more detail. One of the important details has to do with, of course, he died for our sins and rose from the dead, which we always emphasize, but it’s not always clear to people if we just say those things. what that means or why it is or what that imposes upon us as an obligation. I’d say that I try not to get into deep discussions with people if I don’t have enough time to. Having a good gospel tract or something like that you can hand to people is probably the best way to deal with somebody in a line at the store or something you’re not going to be able to talk to for very long. In longer conversations, I’d go into more details about things. But I can’t go into more detail now because I’m out of time for this segment. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. My name is Steve Gregg, and our website is thenarrowpath.com. We have another half hour coming. Don’t go away. Please stay tuned.
SPEAKER 01 :
The Narrow Path is one feature of the teaching ministry of Steve Gregg. Steve’s philosophy of teaching is to educate, not indoctrinate his listeners. He believes that Christians should learn to think for themselves about the Bible and not be dependent on him or any other teacher for their convictions. We hope to teach Christians how to think, not what to think about the Bible.
SPEAKER 02 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we have another half hour to go. If you want to call in, we have some lines open right now that may only last a few seconds or minutes, so you might want to seize them while you can. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith, feel free to give me a call. If you see things differently than I do, feel free to talk about that. The number to call is 844-484-5737. I’ll give that number again. Ready? 844-484-5737. And we’re going to go to the phones, but I want to make this announcement. Yesterday I said that June 9th we’re going to be going on a new station in Miami. And as I understand it, it’s actually… three stations. It’s AM670, the word in Miami, and it looks like there’s like three FM stations associated with it, and they’re in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach. As far as I know, we’re going to be on all these stations beginning June 9th, just probably a couple weeks from now or so. These stations currently are Spanish-language stations, but the Salem Radio Network, Salem Media, is changing that over to English-speaking stations, and we’re going to be with them from the first day that they start that. That’s on June 9th, and we’re going to post that information online. It’s not there yet because it’s a little early, but it’ll be coming on. And if you know people in Miami or Fort Lauderdale or West Palm Beach, You may want to let them know about that, and they can start listening. Of course, anyone anywhere can hear the show on their device if they get our app, or, of course, they can hear us from our website. All right. Then next we’re going to talk to Fred from Alameda, California. Fred, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yes. I thought that Pharaoh was one of the great failures of of the Old Testament, but however, I’m looking at Romans chapter 9 in verse 17, and it seems to be saying something contrary to that. Can you explain Romans chapter 9 verse 17?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, first let me know why you think it’s contrary, because what I see in Romans 9 sounds very much like what the Old Testament says. What is your…
SPEAKER 08 :
If you see that verse, it says, For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, even for this same purpose have I raised thee up. And then it says something else. Well, if he’s raising Pharaoh up, I mean, that sounds like God’s supporting him. So how could he be evil?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, what God said to him is, For this cause I have raised you up and caused you to stand, that I might show my works or my power in you. He’s talking about how God… has prevented Pharaoh from collapsing under the initial plagues that he has sent. God sent ten plagues on Egypt, and an ordinary man in Pharaoh’s position would have repented after the first one or two. And, in fact, Pharaoh was inclined to repent, but the Bible says God hardened his heart so that he stood firm against Egypt. repentance because he wanted to bring about the full series of plagues upon him, not because it was Pharaoh alone, but the whole nation of Egypt and the gods of Egypt, according to Exodus 12, that were under judgment. So God upheld Pharaoh and made him stand as opposed to collapsing, as an ordinary man would, under the testing and the judgments of Because, frankly, he was made to be less than sane in his choices here. A sane man, as I said, would have caved in after two or three of these plagues. But God hardened his heart and made him stand firm against repenting so that the whole series of judgments against Egypt could be realized.
SPEAKER 08 :
So it’s not saying anything good about Pharaoh.
SPEAKER 02 :
No. In fact, if anything… God says, I’m the one who raised you up. You didn’t. It’s like when Jesus said to Pilate, you would have no authority if it was not given to you from on high. You feel like you’re great because you’re the Roman emperor or the Roman emperor’s appointment to be procurator here. But actually, it’s God. who has given you this position, so don’t get all cocky about it. Don’t think you’ve got some kind of independent greatness apart from God putting you here. But to say that God raises up rulers doesn’t mean they are good rulers or respectable rulers. It says in Romans 13 that God raises up essentially all the rulers, and Daniel says that too. Daniel says God raises up rulers and brings down rulers. So to tell Pharaoh that God raised him up, would simply be to say, therefore, you’re answerable to God. I mean, if somebody appoints you to a task, as God has appointed rulers to a task, that person then answers to the one who appointed them. Whereas if God didn’t appoint them, or if no one appointed them, if they got there by their own strength, they don’t have to answer to anybody. But to say that God appointed you is a way of saying, and therefore, God is going to assess your performance and judge you based on it. I mean, you answer to him. So that somebody is raised up or appointed to a role by somebody else, especially by God, suggests that they are not sovereign themselves. They answer to somebody else, in this case to God. And that God said, I’ve caused you to stand, I think simply means you would have fallen long before this if I hadn’t kept you on your feet here in resistance against me.
SPEAKER 08 :
Wow, good answer, yes. I never thought about that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, it’s great talking to you.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, great.
SPEAKER 02 :
Thanks, Fred.
SPEAKER 08 :
Bye-bye.
SPEAKER 02 :
Bye now. Eli from Payette, Idaho. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 06 :
Hi. I want to get your take on how you feel or interpret modern-day exorcisms. I saw a video recently. uh, the guy that runs the ministry, he seems legit, but he’s like putting his hands on people’s foreheads and they’re screaming. And it seems real genuine, but I just have a weird feeling that I’m just curious what your take is on stuff like that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, I have lived long enough to see a lot of people who, uh, perform what they call deliverance ministries, which is what you were referring to as exorcism. And, um, Obviously, some of them I think are real. I mean, there’s definitely real demons. There’s real demon possession, and there’s real authority in the name of Christ to cast demons out. That being so, I believe that there’s genuine exorcisms, and always have been. We don’t see as many of them per capita here in America, probably, because there’s more people who are Christians and more people who are even civilized. by Christianity, even if they’re not Christians, so that there’s not as many people doing the kinds of things that get people possessed. Although I think perhaps there’s been an increase of that in my generation over what had been in, at least in the Western world for some time. You know, when people get involved in the occult, especially, that opens them up to being possessed by demons. I don’t say that everyone in the occult is possessed. I’m just saying that seems to be one of the ways. that people get demonized, and throughout most of history, most of the world worshipped demons, false gods, and were involved in the occult, and soothsaying, and astrology, and fortune-telling, and mediumship, and so forth. These things are the kinds of things that get people possessed. And while there is, of course, a recurrence of those things, a resurgence of those things in the West now, For a long time, those things were rather subdued or abandoned through Christian influence. But with the receding of Christian influence in the West, we’re seeing more demon possession, too. Now, there are people who are fakes, just like there were in biblical times. And, you know, the Sons of Sceva, for example, were not genuine. I mean, they were exorcists. They may have had some success sometimes, but they didn’t have the authority over demons at that Paul did, and they tried to copy his formula and say, we command you, demon, in the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, come out. And the demon said, well, Jesus we know and Paul we know, but who are you? In other words, we don’t recognize you as having any authority. But there are people, there’s always charlatans in the church. The Bible always said there would be. There’s fakes whenever there’s a genuine spiritual gift. There’s also people who want to fake it and make a living out of it. or impress people out of it, get a reputation for it. And so there are, to my mind, fake exorcists running around. And then there’s genuine ones. There’s genuine people who do cast out demons on a fairly regular basis. Now, even those who do, you know, if they teach seminars on spiritual warfare, seminars on exorcism and things like that, I wouldn’t necessarily trust everything they say about the subject because The Bible doesn’t indicate that one’s doctrines or opinions have to be totally correct in order to have authority over demons. If one has the faith and can move legitimately in the authority of Christ, I believe that they can cast demons out of people, and this is often done. But that doesn’t mean their full understanding of the demonic realm is necessarily trustworthy. There’s a lot of speculation in most people’s teaching on this subject because the Bible doesn’t answer all of our questions, and so people have to make up or try to decipher answers out of experience. But on the mission field, where the gospel is going out to places where there’s still a lot of demonism, missionaries often encounter demon-possessed people. And they’re encountered in America, too. They can be encountered anywhere in the world. But, you know, lots of missionaries who have no interest in having a deliverance ministry or being exorcists have had to face demon-possessed people and have cast out demons. So I don’t know who this person is that you’re referring to, but I would say that, you know, it’s possible that what he does is genuine. So, I mean, I can’t tell you the names of exorcists I know who are genuine. I myself am not – I don’t identify as a deliverance minister or exorcist. I’ve had a few cases where I have been involved in casting demons out of people with success, although I’ve had cases where I was involved and did not have success. So I certainly am not a person who puts myself forward as one who – You know, call me if you’ve got a demon-possessed person you need to fix. You know, I’ll serve in the emergency whenever I’m in the position. But I certainly don’t focus on that kind of thing at all. Some people do. And I’m not really sure if that’s something God appoints some people to do, to focus on that particular thing. Probably. There probably are people with special gifts in that area. or special ministries. But as I would say, there are people who kind of go overboard and see demons everywhere and do all kinds of hocus-pocus stuff. And I would say anybody who’s involved casting out demons or teaching on the subject of casting out demons, you’d want to check them as much as possible by Scripture. Make sure nothing they’re saying is contrary.
SPEAKER 06 :
Am I still here?
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 06 :
I was going to say, what makes sense to me, and I’m looking at what the Bible, I mean, just the references to exorcisms, what makes sense to me is people going out, yes, and coming across people that are demon-possessed. What doesn’t make sense to me is people coming into the church who are demon-possessed. Because if someone is truly demon-possessed, what interest would it be to that person or that demon in the person coming to church?
SPEAKER 02 :
Well… You know, I’m not really sure how often that happens, but when Jesus was on the earth, people came to him who were demon-possessed. In fact, the most demon-possessed person we have record of in the Bible is the man of the tombs, or actually two men of the tombs who had a couple thousand demons in them. And when Jesus appeared on their shore near to where they were living, they saw him and came running to him and bowed down before him and worshipped him. It seems to me they were seeking help. And the demons were not pleased. The demons were not happy. They were screaming in torment to be in the presence of Jesus. They were terrorized. So it’s interesting that a demon-possessed person, even severely possessed, apparently can reach out to Christ for help and can seek help. And by the way, demon possession is often referred to in the Bible as tormented by evil spirits. And so a person who’s tormented… may very well see that their only hope is in Christ and seek it, seek help there. That a person is demon-possessed, in other words, does not mean that every moment of every day, every thought and every choice they make is controlled by demons. It’s a very common thing among the demon-possessed to manifest the demonic presence at certain times and other times to act relatively normally. so that an observer wouldn’t necessarily know they had a demon until the manifestation takes place. So when people are operating more normally, they may very well seek help from God. And, you know, like I said, Jesus had some people seek him. It’s interesting, Jesus actually never went out looking for the demon-possessed, but people either were brought, little kids who were demon-possessed were brought to him by their parents or else they’d come to him. Or they’d be in the synagogue, like one man was in a synagogue where Jesus was preaching, and everything was cool until the man began to jump up and scream and say, We know who you are, Jesus of Nazareth. What have we to do with you? And Jesus cast the demon out. So the idea that demon-possessed people might come to the church looking for help or be brought to the church by friends who know they need help is not an unrealistic thing. If a person is especially known to… to operate in the realm of exorcism more than the average person, that might even more attract people who either, as I say, are demonized and want help to come, or else their friends or parents might bring them. So I can’t rule out that there would be meetings where a lot of people who need deliverance might not be there. Anyway, I try to be careful not to debunk too much unless there’s something unscriptural going on. But I also would be reluctant to endorse too much. I just say, you know, when we meet people who are demon-possessed, there’s always the opportunity to cast the demons out if we’re a Christian. All right. Thank you for your call. Jason from Fort Worth, Texas. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hello. Thanks for taking my call, Steve. Long-time listener, first-time caller. Can you explain 1 Corinthians 11, 14 to me about where Paul says it’s a shame to wear long hair? Yeah, for a man.
SPEAKER 02 :
For a man to have long hair, right. Yes, I think I can. In this section of 1 Corinthians, Paul, chapter after chapter, is introducing… questions that the Corinthians had written to him about. There are things going on in their church that they wanted advice about or his counsel about, and he gives it. Now, in the first six chapters of 1 Corinthians, he pretty much is addressing problems in the church that were reported to him from people from the household of Chloe, he says in chapter 1. who brought reports. But then in chapter 7, verse 1, he turns a page and says, Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me, and then he begins to answer things that they wrote to him about, including whether it’s good for a man to get married or not, whether it’s okay to eat meat sacrificed to idols. And in chapter 11, the main issue seems to be women praying and prophesying without covering their heads. Now, Paul indicates… that his counsel is definitely that they should cover their heads because otherwise it’s considered to be a shame. Now, the word shame would be a social, you know, a social more being violated. It’s talking about, you know, how they would be viewed. If he said it was a sin, that would be a different thing. If he said it’s a sin to do this, then that would mean that God disapproves of it. But to say something is a shame, it just means that socially it brings reproach. Now, he said that women who shave their heads or who wear their hair uncovered were doing something shameful. It dishonors their head. It brings a dishonor. And then he says, now, of course, a man, if a man has long hair, nature itself teaches you that it’s a shame to him. But if a woman has long hair, it’s her glory. Now, that’s verse 14 that you’re talking about.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yes, sir.
SPEAKER 02 :
What I believe he’s saying is that nature itself teaches us that a man should not take on a woman’s appearance. Okay.
SPEAKER 11 :
I understand now.
SPEAKER 02 :
Okay. Now, let me just say this. At many times in history, long hair on a man was not the same as taking on a woman’s appearance because long hair on a man was actually… At the end of this whole discussion, Paul says in verse 16, just two verses later, if anyone seems to be contentious about this, we don’t have these customs. The whole church of God doesn’t have these customs. He’s saying there’s a custom apparently in Corinth and in Greek cities like it. that men should have their hair short and women should have their hair long, that men should not cover their heads when they pray, and that women should. Now, he’s saying, all the other churches don’t have these customs. But he says, if someone there is contentious about it, don’t worry about it. It’s not worth dividing over. But he’s giving, I believe, what is his counsel here. And what it amounts to is not that God has some basic moral standards that if a woman cuts her hair, she’s violated some moral issue, or if she doesn’t wear a head covering. And likewise, that there’s not a moral standard if a man covers his head when he’s praying or has long hair, which Paul takes to be the same thing, that that’s somehow morally wrong. It’s in Corinth, in the Greek cities, it was… You know, culturally, it brings disapproval. And so it was a shame to them. But it was not a sin, because if it was a sin in God’s sight for men to have long hair, then he should have never given them the instructions in Numbers 6 about the Nazarite vow. which, by the way, was a vow that required a man not to cut his hair. And that would result, of course, in him having long hair. Samson, for example, had a Nazarite vow. So did Samuel. So did John the Baptist. Probably Elijah did. And even Paul took a Nazarite vow in Acts 18. So many godly men in Israel… had long hair if they took Nazarite vows. So it certainly wasn’t a shameful thing in the sight of God. Also, you know, in the temple, God told the priests to cover their heads. They had to wear a turban when they went in to pray. So it’s very clear that the statement that a man should not cover his head when he prays or should not have long hair. Paul’s not speaking universally. It wasn’t true of his culture, but it was something that he was recommending the Corinthians to observe in their culture because that was how people saw it.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, you made it perfectly clear. Thank you.
SPEAKER 02 :
Okay, Jason, thanks for your call. God bless. All right, we’re going to talk next to Tom from Hebron, Connecticut. Tom, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yes, a wonderful program. I like it very much, and thank you for that. Thank you. Yep. My question is, I guess I do not understand the meaning of the Lord’s Prayer where it says, lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Can you explain that?
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, I can see how there’s problems there. In fact, many people have that problem. I have to admit that I sometimes wonder that too. Let me just try to talk about what the problem is for those who haven’t thought about it. If we’re asking God to not lead us into temptation, this suggests that we’re asking him not to do something that he might otherwise do. Now, the Bible does say that God does not tempt anyone with evil. And therefore, we might think, well, God therefore would never lead us into temptation. But the statement that God doesn’t tempt anyone with evil is not an absolute statement. God allows us to be tempted. He might even lead us into situations where we’ll be tested. And we see this, for example, frankly, with Jesus. In Matthew chapter 4, it says that the Holy Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. Now, the truth is, Jesus said to his disciples, there will be stumbling blocks, which means temptations to fall. that are inevitable, but woe to him that presents a stumbling block to another. The idea here is that we’re going to be tested. We’re going to be confronted with situations that could stumble us. These are temptations. These are tests. Jesus had to go through it. We have to go through it. Adam and Eve had to go through it. And frankly, everyone on the planet has had to go through it. We are led into temptations as God wishes to test us. The word temptation means test. And so when we pray, do not lead us into temptation, either we’re saying that God wants to lead us into temptation, but we don’t want him to. Or we’re praying unnecessarily. If God doesn’t want to lead us into temptation, we don’t have to ask him not to do so. So what’s the deal? Do I want to pray that God won’t lead me into temptation if God otherwise would want me to? Now, I think that we have to see the two statements in this verse as parts of one statement. Do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. Now, this is what I believe to be what we call a limited negative statement. In the Bible, we find many such statements where it says, you know, not this, but that. And what it really means is not only this, but also that. For example, when the Bible says, when God says, I will have mercy and not sacrifice. In Micah, Hosea 6.6, I will have mercy and not sacrifice. Well, actually, God did require sacrifices. But he’s saying, I don’t only want sacrifices. I want also you to be merciful. So not sacrifice but mercy means not only sacrifice but also mercy. It’s very common. Jesus said, do not labor for the food that perishes but labor for the food that endures through your life. Well, we have to labor for food that perishes. We’re going to just sit around and food’s going to pop up? No, he means don’t just labor. Don’t only labor for the food that perishes but also for the food that that endures through eternal life. Jesus and other biblical writers frequently talk this way. It’s called a limited negative. It means don’t do this, or it means don’t only do this, but also that. So do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us. It means don’t simply lead us into temptation, but also deliver us Out of it, from the wicked one. So if we have to go through temptation, at least don’t just leave us there, but take us through it. Take us through the temptation successfully. Deliver us from the evil one. In other words, we’re not praying that we won’t ever be tested or tempted. That would be asking God not to do to us what everyone had to do, including Jesus. In fact, this testing is part of the reason for our being here, to be tested and to qualify. by obedience and success and victory, to be reigning with Christ someday. This testing has to take place. So we’re not asking that we won’t be tempted, although it sounds like it. We have to read the whole sentence, which includes, but this. Because I think to say, do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one, In the form of a limited negative means don’t simply or only lead us into temptation. But we know that’s going to happen, but also deliver us out of it. That, I believe, is the meaning of it. And there’s many other cases where Jesus and others use this limited negative. Jesus, for example, said, do not think I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Well, he did come to bring peace, but not only peace. Yeah, I did come. I’m the prince of peace. My peace I give unto you, he said. It’s the fruit of the Spirit, peace. He did come to give that, but he said, but not just that. It’ll also be a sword or a division. So I believe that when we read that statement in the Sermon on the Mount, we have to recognize the form of speech or the figure of speech that Jesus is using, which is, again, a common one in Scripture. All right. I appreciate your call. I’m out of time for the program today, so I’m going to have to sign off. Appreciate everyone who’s called this week. We’ve got the weekend coming up, and then we have more of this on Monday, next Monday. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. We are listener-supported. If you’d like to help us, you can write to The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.
