Join Steve Gregg as he addresses a variety of questions from listeners, including an exploration of biblical covenants and their conditional nature. As the episode unfolds, Steve provides thoughtful answers on how to live a life that is both spiritually fulfilling and practical. The discussions illuminate how Christians can genuinely seek the kingdom of God through both secular and religious activities. Listen in to discover rich theological insights, whether about open theism or the everyday practice of faith.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 04 :
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 so that we can take your calls during the program and you can call in with questions about the Bible, about Christianity, about anything like that that you’re curious about or perplexed about and we’ll talk about it. If you’d see things differently from the host, you’re more than welcome. to call in and tell us what that would be. I’ll be glad to talk to you about it. We have some lines open right now, so this is a good time to call. If you’d like to be on the program, the number is 844-484-5737. That number again is 844-484-5737. A couple of announcements. They’re all about this weekend, and it’s all about Southern California. We’ve got listeners all over the country, all over the world, but a lot of them are in Southern California because that’s where I am. Also, we have meetings occasionally in Southern California. Not very often. This Saturday, we have our monthly morning men’s Bible study in Temecula. Also, this Saturday night, we have our monthly Bible study for whoever wants to come, men and women and children are welcome at our Bible study in Boyna Park, which is in Orange County, California. And then on Sunday, two morning services and one evening service at one church, which is called the Living Truth Christian Fellowship in Corona in Corona, California. The Living Truth Christian Fellowship. I’ll be speaking there at nine o’clock in the morning. I’ll be speaking on the same subject. at 11 o’clock in the morning. Both those talks will be about why I am a Christian, why I’m still a Christian. And then the evening meeting at 6.30 will be a Q&A. So that’s at the Corona Church, which is called Living Truth Christian Fellowship. That’s this Sunday. And then Saturday morning and evening, I have different meetings, which are typically monthly meetings. If you’re interested in those, and you don’t know where those places are, feel free to go to our website. You can know where that is. That’s at thenarrowpath.com. And once you go to thenarrowpath.com, you can hit the tab that says Announcements, find this weekend’s dates, and you’ll find also the locations and times of these meetings. All right. Duly announced. Let’s go to the phones and talk to Barbara in Roseville, Michigan. Hi, Barbara. Welcome.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, thank you, Steve. Now, I was wondering how the Bible and Revelation deals a lot with symbolisms like the eagle’s wings and the bear. Is there a symbolism for Canada? Is Canada mentioned in the Bible, or is this like a sanctuary city that’s going to just not be affected by, you know, all this fighting and a third of the world being destroyed? And I’ll just listen. I’ll hang up and listen.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right. Well, thanks. Well, my understanding of Revelation is somewhat different than maybe the majority of the people that you’ve heard talk about the subject, because I don’t believe that Revelation is about the end times. I believe Revelation is about something that happened, as John predicted that it would, shortly after he wrote it. He said a number of times in the book, these things must shortly take place. These things are about to take place, he said. These are the time is near, he said several times. And so taking Revelation as literally as we possibly can, we’d have to say that John was writing about things that would happen fairly soon after his time. We are living a long time after John’s time. So whatever is happening today or tomorrow or next year are not we’re not very near and we’re not very soon when he wrote it. So My understanding is, since I believe the Bible is inspired, and I believe the Bible is speaking clearly on this subject, is that Revelation was about things that actually did occur shortly after John wrote it. The majority of which, I think, is about the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem and of the Jewish state from 66 to 70 A.D. There’s a lot of people who believe that way, though it doesn’t seem to be the major view of our times. It is the view that I think has the most biblical support and the most biblical weight. So I don’t see Revelation as we’re talking about today. Now, in the prophets, whether it’s Isaiah or Ezekiel or Jeremiah or any of the prophets, you do find references to eagles and bears and leopards and things like that, lions. And there are people who, because they assume these prophecies are about the end times, they try to associate these animals with modern nations. It’s not too difficult, once you’re thinking in modern terms, to associate the eagle with America, because that’s our national bird. England has often been compared to a lion. Russia, of course, to a bear. Now, all of these are animals that are mentioned in prophecy, But they’re not talking about modern nations. They’re not talking about America or England or Russia. For example, Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Jeremiah is referred to as a lion that has come out of the thicket. In Daniel, we’ve got a lion that comes out of the sea in Daniel 7, which is also Babylon. And then there’s a bear, which comes out also of the sea. And that is not a reference to Russia. It’s a reference to the Medo-Persian Empire. These are ancient empires. There’s a leopard then, which represents Alexander the Great and the Grecian Empire. And basically all Old Testament prophecy scholars recognize those identifications. So although in our own modern times we might have adopted symbols like a donkey for the Democratic Party, an elephant for the Republican Party, and so forth, we would not expect the prophets to have any, in writing to their own people, living in the Middle East thousands of years ago, to be making reference to these ultra-modern images that modern nations have sometimes adopted in political parties and so forth. So, you said about Canada, I don’t think Canada is ever mentioned in the Bible, but I don’t think America is either, or England, or Russia. I know many people take Ezekiel 38 and 39 about Gog and Magog. They think that’s a reference to Russia. I don’t think so. Those who think so are probably the people who’ve only heard one view of prophecy, which was my case when I was younger. And having studied these prophecies somewhat more broadly and recognizing that, you know, not everybody has shared our ultra-modern views. assumptions about prophecy, I don’t, I’ve become convinced that none of these images in the prophets refer to any modern nation today, including the modern nation of Israel. So that’d be my take on it. Okay, let’s talk to Carolyn from Seattle, Washington. Hi, Carolyn. Welcome.
SPEAKER 07 :
Hi, thank you, Steve. Dispensationalists say God has has to keep his word concerning his covenant with Abraham and Israel. Is there any one place in the Bible where it says that he had an unconditional or conditional covenant with them? Like when you’re looking at Deuteronomy 28, blessings and curses, that’s a hard area to get past.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. Yeah, I mean, dispensationalists often do say that God has an unconditional covenant that he made with Israel. But it’s rather hard to find this alleged unconditional covenant. They usually are referring, in their own minds, they’re referring to the covenant God made with Abraham. Because when God made his covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12, these are the words of the covenant. He says, get out from your country, from your kindred, from your father’s house. to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation. I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you. I will curse him who curses you. And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed. Now, is that an unconditional covenant? It doesn’t look like it. He actually gave a command. Get out of your country, from your kindred, go to a land I’m going to show you, and I’ll do these things. So there were requirements for him. Now, he met those requirements first. He did eventually go to the Promised Land, and so in the case of himself, he met the requirements, but it was not an unconditional promise. If he had said, no, I like it right here in Ur of the Chaldees, I think I’ll stay here. Well, the promises of God would not have been fulfilled because he would not have fulfilled his own requirements. Now, as far as the promises of Abraham continuing to later generations, this was also conditional requirements. upon those generations being obedient to God. How do I know that? Well, because God said that in Genesis 18. As God is about to reveal to Abraham that God is going down to Sodom and Gomorrah to destroy the city, God is musing with himself, sort of in a soliloquy. In Genesis 18, 17, the Lord said, Shall I hide from Abraham what I’m doing? Since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him, for I have known him in order that he may command his children and his household after him that they keep the way of the Lord and do righteousness and justice so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has spoken to him. Now notice, Abraham has to teach his children to keep the way of the Lord, and they have to do it so that God can bring about what he promised Abraham. That is to say, if they don’t do it, God can’t and won’t. There’s no suggestion here that regardless how the Israelites behave, God’s going to fulfill this promise. It is stated to be conditioned upon them doing justice and righteousness and going the way of God. So, of course, that’s not unconditional. And people who say it is are not paying very close attention. Now, there’s also a covenant God made with the same people, pretty much, the Israelites when they came out of Egypt at Mount Sinai. But that was clearly conditional. And, you know, it began with the words, In Exodus 19.5, God said at Mount Sinai, if you will obey my voice, indeed, and if you keep my covenant, then you’ll be my holy people. You’ll be my holy nation. You’ll be a kingdom of priests and so forth. In other words, they would be the chosen people if they obey him and if they keep his covenant. So again, there’s no unconditional promise there. Once again, as in the case of Abraham, God states the condition right up front. And you mentioned Deuteronomy 28, where Moses is saying to the nation of Israel that if they keep his covenant, God will bless them in the ways that God promised he would. But he says if they don’t keep the covenant, God will not bless them in any of those ways. He’ll curse them in all those ways. And as it goes on, through the chapter of Deuteronomy 28, it gets pretty scary, the way that God is threatening them. In fact, he says in Deuteronomy 28, 45 and 46, he said, moreover, this is if they break his covenant, which they did many times and still do to this day. He said, moreover, all these curses shall come upon you and pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed. Because you did not obey the voice of the Lord your God and keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded. And they, that is these curses, shall be upon you for a sign and a wonder and on your descendants forever. Now, a lot of people say, well, God made some promises to Abraham forever. Yes, he did. And one of them was that if his people do not obey God, then the curses will come upon them and stick to them and their children forever. Now, I don’t know why people who are so interested in talking about God’s forever promises to Abraham or to the Jews, they’re not very fond of that particular promise that God made. But, you know, this is what God said it. Also, the same… Go ahead.
SPEAKER 07 :
Excuse me. Wasn’t there a covenant where Abraham… I think it was Abraham was put to sleep and God walked… between the carcass himself?
SPEAKER 04 :
No. No, actually, that is interpreted that way by many people. That’s referring to what happened in chapter 15, I believe. Yeah, Genesis 15. Abraham cut some animals in pieces according to God’s instructions. And then God made Abraham go to sleep. And then apparently in a dream or in a half-waking state, Abram was apparently partly awake and partly asleep. God made some promises about bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt after 400 years. And then it says in verse 17, And it came to pass when the sun went down and it was dark, and behold, there was a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces. On the same day, the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying to your descendants, I’ve given this land. Now, when people say God passed through the pieces, there’s no reference to God passing through pieces.
SPEAKER 05 :
No.
SPEAKER 04 :
It says, Abraham saw, what did he see? He saw a smoking oven, and he saw a burning torch passing between the pieces. Now, what Bible teachers often will point out correctly is that in the ancient Middle Eastern world, many times covenants were made by cutting animals into parts, putting their parts across from each other, and the two covenanting parties would pass between the parts of the animals. That was part of their ceremony. And the implication was, if I don’t keep my end of this deal, then I’ll be cut into pieces like these animals are. So it’s kind of wishing a curse on oneself if they don’t keep their promise. That was the custom. So some say, well, this is notice Abraham didn’t go through the pieces. Who did? Well, they say God and Jesus did. They say the smoking oven is God. And the burning lamp is Jesus. Well, that’s a fascinating suggestion. Where do we get that from? Is God ever referred to in the Bible by that term? Was Jesus? Did the Old Testament give any reason? Did Moses give any reason? Did God give any reason for us to assume that the oven is God himself and the lamp or the torch? Is Jesus? Well, I won’t say it can’t have been them, but to say that it was is going far beyond what the Bible suggests. The truth is that just before this visual was presented to Abraham, God said these words to him in verses 15 and 16. Well, actually, a little earlier, in verse 13, he says, “…know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs,” referred to Egypt, “…and will serve them, and they shall afflict them four hundred years.” And also that nation whom they serve, I will judge, as he did with the ten plagues in Egypt. Afterward, they, the Israelites, shall come out with great possessions, which they did with Moses. Now, as for you, God says to Abram, you shall go to your fathers in peace. You shall be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth generation, meaning after 400 years in this case, they shall return here. Abram’s sons will come out of Egypt, come to the promised land, as they did with Joshua. For the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete. Okay, so all this is a prediction of God preserving Israel safely for 400 years in Egypt and then bringing them back to the land of Canaan, which is, of course, what God promises in verse 18. He says to your descendants, I give this land. Why? Because they’re going to come out of Egypt and they’re going to inhabit it. So this is what this whole thing is about. So what does the burning oven and the smoking torch or lamp refer to? Well, like I said, some people think it’s God and Jesus. And those who say that, they assume this means that God has made a covenant with himself or with Jesus, which means that he alone has obligations. Abraham, not passing through the seeds, did not enter into the covenant. Well, that’s one way to look at it. But I believe that the smoking oven probably refers to the 400 years in Egypt. Both the book of Deuteronomy… and the book of Jeremiah speak about God bringing Israel out of the burning furnace, or the bronze furnace, I think, or iron furnace. It’s called the iron furnace of Egypt. That is, when they escape from Egypt, they escape from the iron furnace. Well, an iron furnace, this isn’t exactly the same terms, but the smoking oven and an iron furnace are very similar, could be the same thing. But it’s Deuteronomy 4.20 that says that, that compares the Egyptian captivity with an iron furnace. Jeremiah 11.4 does also. And 1 Kings 8.51 does. So three times. The captivity in Egypt is compared to an iron furnace. Now, here’s a furnace. Here’s an oven. And God has just predicted the 400 years in Egypt as well as the escape. Now, what about the lamp that burns? Well, in Isaiah 62, verse 1, the salvation of the Jews from Babylon… is compared to a lamp that burns. God delivering them from Babylon says their salvation is like a lamp that burns. So being delivered from Babylon is very much like being delivered from Egypt. And to my mind, with these cross-references, we’d be much more justified in saying that the burning oven refers to the captive in Egypt, And the lamp represents them being delivered from it. This was explained in actual words in the verses just prior to the vision. So the vision would be a visual confirmation of what was promised. But it would not have anything to do with Jesus and the Father making some kind of a covenant that Abraham made. didn’t have to have any part of. But you’ll find dispensatious always assumed this about it. And on that basis, they say, see, this is an unconditional promise that God made to Abram because Abram didn’t have to pass through the pieces. Well, the whole business that’s been promised there is not the generic covenant of Abram’s seed being a blessing to all nations. This is a promise of deliverance from Egypt. And I think that the visual that he saw was no doubt depicting that. I could be mistaken, but I could be right. And certainly there’s more in the context to suggest what I’m saying than anything else, it seems to me. So that would be my take on it.
SPEAKER 07 :
Well, thank you. That was great.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, Carolyn. Thank you for your call. Jason in Bloomington, Minnesota, right? Yeah. Welcome. Hi, Jason.
SPEAKER 03 :
Hello, Greg. Thank you for taking my call. I guess my first question would be if you’re familiar with Greg Boyd from St. Paul, Minnesota. And then what your view or teachings would be on kind of Calvinism versus Arminianism versus open theism and if open theists get God all wrong.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, I don’t think they get God as wrong as the Calvinists do. I’m not an open theist, and therefore I disagree with Greg Boyd on that particular point. But I’m also not a Calvinist. I’m much more of a mainstream, what should I say? My theology is the primitive theology of the church, pre-Augustinian, so the first four centuries. of Christianity held a certain theological view that is pretty much mine. Also, Calvinism came up with Augustine in the 5th century, early 5th century or late 4th, and I don’t believe it was an improvement. I don’t think Augustine improved on what the church fathers had thought for the previous 400 years. So, I’m not a Calvinist. Now, I don’t know when open theology first arose. I first learned of it back in the 70s, and I had a lot of friends who held it. I still have friends who hold it, or quite a few friends who hold it. But I objected to it initially when I first heard of it because it teaches that God doesn’t know the future choices that people are going to make because people have free choice. And if they have free choice, then those choices that they will make in the future cannot actually be determined now. They can’t be determined in advance or else they’re not free. And the view is that If they’re not determined, then we don’t know. No one can know what’s going to happen because they’re free. It could go one way or another. And therefore, even God can’t know. Because if God does know, then they’re going to happen just the way he knows. And if he knows in advance, then they’re determined in advance to go the way that he knows they will. And there’s no free will. So this is the argument of the open theist. And, you know, it makes pretty good sense, except that there might be other ways that time works. And this is the thing. When I first heard the view, I thought, well, this is an attack on the omniscience of God. And therefore, it’s… a degrading of God’s glory and of his character and his attributes because God knows everything. And they’re saying he doesn’t know the choices we’re going to make in the future. So they’re denigrating the omniscience of God. But then Clark Pinnock, a theologian that I highly respect, though I don’t follow his theology on everything, including this, but he did make a good point. He said, you know, when we say that God is omnipotent and he can do everything, that doesn’t mean he can make a square circle. It doesn’t mean he can make 2 plus 2 equals 5. Why? Because those are nonsensical. God can’t go against reality. He’s powerful enough to change anything that he wants to change and to do whatever he wants to do, but he can’t make illogical things true. He can’t make, you know, it be the middle of the night and the middle of the day at the same time in the same spot. I mean, because just by definition, day and night are opposites of each other. It’s not that God can’t do anything he wants to do, but when we talk about God’s omnipotence, we’re simply talking about his power. We’re not talking about that there’s no nonsensical thing that God can’t perform. The Bible itself says there’s things God can’t do. The Bible says he can’t deny himself. The Bible says he can’t lie. The Bible says he cannot be tempted with sin. I mean, the Bible itself says there are things that God can’t do. And therefore, to say that he can’t make a square circle because it’s a nonsensical statement, well, that’s not denying his omnipotence any more than saying he can’t lie. There are things he can’t do. And to say that he’s omniscient does not necessarily have to mean that he knows every imaginable thing that we could imagine. For example, does God know about unicorns on the planet Venus? I suspect not. Why not? Why don’t you know about that, God? Well, because they don’t exist. And open theists would say, well, the future doesn’t exist yet either. Now, that may be debatable. That’s a philosophical question about the nature of time. But they’re not trying to say there’s anything God doesn’t know that exists in the real reality. He’s saying… God knows everything that is to be known, but the future doesn’t exist in any place to be known. And so that’s how they understand it. Now, I don’t agree with their conclusions, but I see that they’re not really trying to diminish God’s omniscience. They would say he knows everything there is to know. It’s just that the future isn’t somewhere to be known until it happens. And I can think of God knowing the future some ways and not making things happen, but I’m not that. I’m pretty much in the standard classical pre-Augustinian view, and therefore I disagree with Greg Boyd on that one thing. Maybe some other things, too. I’m out of time for this point. I’ll be back in 30 seconds or
SPEAKER 01 :
Thank you very much.
SPEAKER 04 :
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. We have one line open at the moment. Call and get through at this number, 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. And I just want to mention more briefly this time that we have in Southern California five meetings in three locations this weekend. Two on Saturday. One is in Temecula. One is in Buena Park. And then we have three at the Living Truth Church in Corona, California on Sunday. If you want more information about those, you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Look under announcements and every imaginable detail will be found there. All right. Let’s go to the phones again. This time we’ll be talking to Sabrina in Sacramento, California. Hi, Sabrina. Welcome.
SPEAKER 10 :
Thank you for taking my call, Steve. I’m a social media influencer, and I just wanted to, and I feel like everything that got me here so far is from the Lord. But I do do a lot of worldly content, and I would be standing on verse Matthew 6. And 25 through 33, where that verse says, put the kingdom of God first before you do anything else. And so I just wanted to know from your standpoint, can those two combine?
SPEAKER 1 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 04 :
You have a social media, you have a podcast or something like that, which is on secular topics. That’s what you’re saying. Yeah. Is that compatible with seeking first the kingdom of God? Of course. Of course it can be. I mean, to seek the kingdom of God is every Christian’s duty. But doing religious things for a living is not everybody’s duty. You know, throughout biblical times. People worked as farmers and business people and, you know, various kinds of jobs that you could do, carpenters, tradesmen, and so forth. And they were still seeking the kingdom of God if they were Christian. I mean, a Christian is one, as Paul puts it, whatsoever you do in word or in deed, you do in the name of Jesus. Now, that just means you act as an agent and a servant of Jesus no matter what you do. Now, not everybody. is going to be a Bible teacher. I’ve been very blessed to have been called to do that when I was very young, and I’ve been doing it for 50-something years, and I love it.
SPEAKER 05 :
You’re awesome.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, I love doing it, and you can probably tell that. But on the other hand, there were times when I thought I might also be called to do something else because in the first 12 years that I was teaching the Bible, It was only part-time. I didn’t do it full-time. So I did various kinds of jobs. I washed windows. I did janitorial work. I actually considered maybe getting a law degree and practicing law part-time. There was a time I thought I’d like to be a zoologist or something. And it never occurred to me that if I pursued any of those things, I would be neglecting the kingdom of God. Because when God made Adam and Eve… He gave them charge over the garden, over the world. So it’s our mandate to manage the world. And that requires street sweepers and garbage collectors and, you know, no doubt teachers. I mean, secular teachers in schools who teach children how to read or how to do math. I mean, these are not… religious activities, but seeking the kingdom of God is not a religious thing. It has to do with fulfilling the will of God for your life all the time. Now, Christians do religious things too. I mean, for example, if they go to church, they worship God there. They sing songs. They listen to Bible teaching or whatever. And, you know, there’s religious things that Christians do But that doesn’t mean that they’re all called to be full-time religionists. We’re called to be full-time followers of Jesus. But his vocation is different for different people. Paul mentioned there’s all kinds of different gifts to the Spirit, and some of them are like gifts of leading, gifts of helping, gifts of giving. Things like that. So, I mean, those are not religious things you do, but they are certainly godly things, if that’s your gift to do. So, you know, I don’t think that for you to have a podcast on some secular subject is any more contrary to your pursuit of the kingdom of God in your life than if you were an elementary school teacher. You know, how is that contrary to being a Christian? It’s not. Now, I don’t know what the subject matter is of your podcast, of your podcast or whatever it is you’re doing. But obviously, whatever you do in word or deed, you do it in the name of Jesus, which means you do it self-consciously as one who’s here to serve Christ’s interests. So let’s say you have a, I don’t know what you’ve got, maybe you’ve got a political podcast. Well, then you should, in that way, promote such ideas and political ideas as agree with what God’s word says. Maybe you’ve got a podcast for women teaching them domestic skills or something. Well, you know, that can be a very godly thing. Didn’t Paul say to Titus in chapter 2 of Titus, you older women teach the younger women to be keepers of the home, to love your husbands, love your children, and so forth? I mean, to teach women how to keep home, how to love their children, how to rear their children in a godly way. that’s not the same thing as being a pastor or in religious work, but it certainly is a godly thing. So I guess the thing is when you say that your social media influencing that you do is, you said it’s worldly. I don’t think you meant following the values of the world, but it’s on secular subjects, I suppose. But you can seek first the kingdom of God doing that. You know, a person who works in a factory or in a farm, they’re spending their whole day doing things that have nothing to do with preaching the gospel specifically. But if they’re doing what God calls them to do, A, any contact they have with other people who are in the same area of work, they can be an influence for Christ for them. Even if they don’t have a chance to witness to them verbally, they can simply be exhibiting the spirit of Christ, the kindness of Christ, the faithfulness, conscientious work being a hard worker where other people are being lazy or whatever. I’m doing what Christ would do, being a good example of Christ where you do it. And then, of course, there’s the other aspect, and that is whatever you do is probably going to make some money. Now, maybe you’re, I don’t know if you make a living doing this, but most Christians do something for a living. And once again, because they realize they belong to Christ and they’re doing it for the kingdom of God, then, you know, they’re making money. And the money they make can be used to support their families, which is a godly thing to do. And to support the poor or to support the church or Christian ministries or whatever. So, in other words, everything you do can be done for God. Even if your job all day long is a secular vocation, you’re making a living and you’re living for God. So what you’re doing for that living, even if you don’t ever have a chance to speak for Christ in those eight hours of the day that you work or whatever, you still making a living and and you are living for God so that’s how you’re supporting your life for God and again whatever money you make that’s something you steward for God too so there’s really no to seek first the kingdom of God does not mean that you have to work at a you know a religious job and you can’t talk about things like politics or family life, or things like that, of course you can talk about those things. But as a Christian seeking the kingdom of God, you see that activity as simply part of doing what God has given you to do in the general plan of promoting his kingdom. And it’s possible the things that you do certain hours of the day, it’s not clear how someone else could look on and say, well, that’s obviously what a Christian would do. But you should always be doing what a Christian should do, just not necessarily… religious activities all the time.
SPEAKER 10 :
Amen.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you, Steve.
SPEAKER 10 :
Thank you. You’re awesome. Thank God for Steve. Thank God for Steve.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, God bless you, Sabrina. What kind of, is it a podcast that you have?
SPEAKER 10 :
No, I have a social media platform on, I do a small business for Sacramento Luxury Picnic.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, yeah. Okay. Well, yeah, I can’t see how that would be inconsistent with following Christ.
SPEAKER 10 :
I just wanted to hear from you because I adore you and I listen to you a lot. So I really respect what you have to say.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, I appreciate your call. God bless you.
SPEAKER 10 :
Thank you. God bless you, too.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right. Bye-bye now. All right. We’ll talk next to Fred in Alameda, California. Fred, welcome.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yes, I wanted to see if you could explain to me, I don’t know where it is in the Bible, but there’s something about settling on your lease. And I understand that it has to do with wine and or wineskins.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 06 :
L-E-E-S. Like, can you explain that?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that’s in Jeremiah when he’s talking about Moab. I would have to get a concordance to find the exact chapter. I forget. It’s in the 40s, I think, if I’m not mistaken. Well, let me just real quickly just glance through here. I can tell you what it is. It’s it basically says that Moab looks like it’s chapter 48. Yeah. Jeremiah 48, 11. It says Moab has been at ease from his youth. He has settled on his dregs, or lees. I think the King James might say lees. New King James says dregs. And he’s not been emptied from vessel to vessel, nor has he gone into captivity. Therefore, his taste has remained in him, and his scent has not changed. Now, what this is saying is that when you make wine, at least when they made wine back then, they would trample the grapes, and they’d put the liquid that they’d trampled into jars. But those jars would have, of course, wine plus a bunch of stuff like grape pits and grape skins. And those were the dregs or the leaves, as they were called in older days. So the jars would not just have pure wine in them. They’d have this other solid matter that they wanted to get out. So what they’d do is they’d take another jar and they’d pour off. They’d let the leaves settle on the bottoms. because they were heavier than the liquid. So if you let them sit long enough, they’d all be settled on the bottom. Then you’d pour off the top part into a clean jar, being careful once you got near the bottom not to let the dregs get into the new jar. And so you’ve got now the second jar, less dregs. There might be still some that got by. So you do the same thing. You let the second jar sit, and the lees or the dregs settle to the bottom. And then you do the same thing with another jar. Pour off the top part and try to leave the bottom bit that has all the dregs in it out. And you do that as often as you need to to have pure wine. Now, if you didn’t do that… the flavor of the wine does not improve. It doesn’t really, it’s not very good wine if you don’t do that. So it was a process that winemakers used to improve the flavor of the wine. But they would never let it set long. They had to disturb it. They had to disturb the settled wine by pouring it off into another jar. Now, Jeremiah is using this as an analogy to a nation that, That isn’t allowed to settle comfortably, but it has to go into captivity from time to time. Their enemies come, they take them away into captivity, and then that may have to happen again. This disruption of their life, this unrest… that they have to experience is actually something that can improve them. Israel, for example, was assumed to be improved by going into captivity because God would then get rid of the dregs and the faithful remnant would come back. and build Israel again and be a better, a purer community. Now, he’s saying Moab never has gone through anything like that. The nation of Moab was a pagan nation descended from Lot. And Jeremiah said, they’ve never been there. They’ve been settled. They’ve been secure. They’ve never had to, you know, rethink anything about their existence because it’s been going without interruption for a long time. And therefore, they haven’t changed in any way. And they needed to. And so that’s what it’s talking about. It’s just a figure of speech based on winemaking that you pour the wine off as much as possible to separate the good wine from the dregs at the bottom. And you may have to do it more than once to get a good pot of wine. But Moab, which has a lot of sin in it, a lot of things that leave much to be desired, you could probably get rid of some of that by them going into captivity or being poured into another jar. but God has never really dealt with Moab that way as he did Israel because God is committed to Israel’s improvement, not to Moab. So he’s just pointing out that Moab has really never improved because they’ve never gone into captivity. It’s like wine that’s never been poured off into a new jar, or they’ve never removed the dregs. That’s what he’s talking about.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, Fred, good talking to you. Thanks for your call. All right, we’ll talk next to John in Kent, Washington. John, welcome.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, Steve, just wondering about your thoughts about Jeremiah 49, where it talks, I’ve heard pastors mention about what’s happening in modern day Iran, that vicinity, and I was wondering if that’s just a… dispensational view because that’s the viewpoint I’ve heard as far as pastors or commentators make on that. So I was wondering what your view is on that.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that is a dispensational way of looking at things because Jeremiah had no interest and no knowledge about and no words to speak to modern Iran. Now, of course, Iran in biblical terms was Persia or Elam. But it’s not the same. I mean, it’s different now. There’s a different generation. When Jeremiah wrote to all these nations, it’s interesting that you bring up that chapter because it’s just the chapter following the one we were talking about with the previous scholar. and both of them are God’s oracles against ancient nations contemporary with Jeremiah, the Moabites. For example, the Moabites don’t exist anymore. They’ve become extinct. The Persians are still there, the Iranians, but it’s not the same Iranians. These prophecies were about how the Babylonians were going to come and conquer Israel, well, for one thing, Jerusalem and Judah, but along with them would be conquered all these smaller nations and lesser powers, lesser than Babylon, because Babylon was swallowing up an empire going to be made up of all these smaller nations. He’s going to conquer them all. So the prophecies that Jeremiah gives against these nations have to do with what was going to happen to them through Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion. He’s not talking about anyone living in the 21st century. All right? Okay. All right. Cool. Thanks. Appreciate it. Okay, John. Thanks for your call. Let’s see. Jim in Palmer, Texas. Welcome.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hi, Steve. How are you doing? Always a pleasure to talk to you. And my question has to do with the definition of paganism. Because when Paul was walking through the Areopagus, he states that, you know, I see that you’re religious in all matters. And then… And the Romans had a plethora of gods. They were polytheists. So what is the difference between, like today, with the Jewish religion and Islam, the monotheism? But would they still be considered a pagan religion? I’ve got a book here by a Joseph. He’s a rabbi, jushpin. And some of the blasphemous things that he says about Jesus, and actually he says that Paul was the founder of Christianity. So my question has to do with what would be the definition of pagan? Would the Jewish and the Islam religion be considered pagan religion?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, there’s a narrow definition of paganism, and there’s a broad definition of paganism. The narrow definition… refers to actual worship of the earth spirits, possibly of the earth itself, kind of a nature worship religion, which a lot of times people who are into Wicca or witchcraft, their beliefs kind of overlap with ancient paganism. And so there’s a very specific kind of religious system that calls itself paganism. Now, in the Bible… The Bible is not written by people who call themselves pagans, and therefore they use the word in the more broad sense. Instead of talking about the specific religion of paganism, it’s just talking about Gentiles. I mean, basically the word pagan… the word heathen, the word nations, because Israel was separate from the nations, and the word Gentiles. These four words were pretty much interchangeable in biblical usage. A heathen. Many people would use the word heathen today, and they’d restrict that maybe to the, primitive tribes living in the jungles and stuff like that. They’re practicing voodoo or whatever. But heathen and Gentile and pagan were pretty much kind of the same categories. Anyone who is not a worshiper of Yahweh, as far as the Jews were concerned, were pagans. Now, Christians might extend that to anyone who’s not a Christian. But in a sense, the Bible doesn’t really… in the New Testament used the word pagan. But it’s probable that if you talk to somebody living, a Christian living in the Roman Empire, they would have referred to the Roman’s religion as paganism. And they probably would have referred to, as you mentioned in Athens there, the Greek gods in Athens as paganism. Because again, paganism becomes kind of an umbrella term for all false religions. All religion that isn’t the worship of the true God. Now, would then Islam be considered paganism to a Christian? Probably. Probably so. Would Judaism? Now, most Christians would not call Judaism a pagan religion. But I think if they’re going to call Islam a pagan religion, they might as well call Judaism a pagan religion. Both those religions believe in one God, unlike Judaism. let’s say the Gentiles did in biblical times, which all believed in many gods, but Jews and Muslims and Christians all believe in one God. The thing is, the Muslims and the Jews in Judaism, they do not believe in the Trinity. They believe in a God who is not, in their definitions, the Father of Jesus. Now, to the Christian, the only true God is the one who, well, we understand him in Trinitarian terms, but more importantly, he’s the father of Jesus. Jesus is the one who is sent by the Father, who is the only true God in eternal life, Jesus said in John 17, 3. So, you know, obviously we could say that God, as he is worshipped by Muslims and as he is worshipped by Jews… would not be exactly a true understanding of God. They’re worshiping God perceived very differently than he really is, according to Christianity. On the other hand, and there’s more than one way to look at this, because on the other hand, Jesus said that his father, he said in John chapter 8, my father is the one that you Jews call your God. So he says that the Jews, in speaking of the actual true God, Jesus’ father, they refer to that God as their God. So there’s some ambiguity there as to whether we should see false views of God, such as the Jews and Muslims have, as really being a different God, or simply being a really inadequate understanding and knowledge of the one true God. And that’s something I can’t decide. God will have to decide that. But that the Jews would call Christians, you have a Jewish book that’s very… unflattering to Christianity, that they would call us pagans would make sense because they think we idolize Jesus. That is, they don’t believe Jesus is God. And if we worship Jesus, then they would see that as idolatry, and they would see that as like what the pagans do. So you ask what a paganism means. It has a variety of uses. In one sense, it’s a specific religion that very few people practice in modern times. It’s more of an older superstitious earth religion. But in a broader sense… paganism probably refers to anybody who isn’t of the same faith as the person using the term of them. So, I mean, a Jew would call us pagans, and we might refer to them as pagans, you know, if indeed they are rejecting Christ, they’re not worshiping him properly. But I don’t use the word pagan anyway, so I’m just trying to answer your question because you used that word. But I don’t think we need to refer to anybody as pagans, unless, of course, they refer to themselves as pagans, because those who practice paganism, that is the pagan religion, they do call themselves pagans, and they’re not ashamed of that. Otherwise, the term is used mainly as a pejorative. And some would favor that word, others would not. I would just prefer to speak of believers in Christ and unbelievers that make those distinctions. All right, let’s talk to… Stephanie from Manchester, New Hampshire. Stephanie, welcome. Hello?
SPEAKER 09 :
Hello? Yes, it’s Tiffany, not Stephanie.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, sorry about my call screen. I thought you said Stephanie. Go ahead, Tiffany.
SPEAKER 09 :
It’s Tiffany. Thank you so much, Steve, for taking my call. So, I just wanted to talk about Matthew 721 and about, like, I used to believe in once saved, always saved, but as Time went on. I don’t anymore. I believe how I was living my life a couple years ago. I was on my way to hell, but I’m getting baptized. Well, actually, re-baptized on Sunday. I was baptized when I was a teenager, and then I’m 40 now, but I lived a very sinful life over these years and did not obey God and lived in my flesh. Finally started obeying God and having a true relationship with Him and
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, welcome back.
SPEAKER 09 :
Being part of the body of Christ and stuff like that.
SPEAKER 04 :
Welcome back. We only have about a minute before the music starts playing. We’re going to be off the air. What is your question?
SPEAKER 09 :
Just to elaborate on, like, once saved, always saved, and to, like, do it around Matthew 721.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, Matthew 721 is sometimes used by people who believe in once saved, always saved, because Jesus said, many will say to me, Lord, Lord, we did these things in your name, and he’ll say, I never knew you. So they would argue… I’m not one of them because I don’t believe in once saved or always saved. But those who do believe it would argue, well, you see, these people never were saved. And therefore, this is not a matter of people losing their salvation. It’s a matter of them never really being saved in the first place. And no doubt that is true of the people Jesus is describing. But he’s not describing everybody. The Bible does talk about people who are believers and who are Christians and who fall away. The book of Hebrews, for example, has many, many warnings about to people that the author refers to as Christians and warns them not to fall away because they might, and some have. So, yeah, I do believe that the Bible teaches that if a person does not remain in Christ, then they are cast forth as a branch, Jesus said in John 15 and verse 6, and they are burned. So that suggests that they’re not saved anymore. Salvation is in Christ. And to remain in salvation requires that we remain in Christ. That’s the point. And Jesus said, don’t fall away from me because then you’re not remaining in me. I’m out of time. I’m sorry to say you’ve been listening to The Narrow Path. Our website, thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.
