In this episode, host Steve Gregg delves into the complexities surrounding marriage from a Christian perspective. A caller raises the question of prioritizing a spiritual ceremony over a legal one, prompting Steve to explore the role of legal and spiritual commitments in a Christian life. The discussion expands to consider whether spiritual vows hold the same weight as legal ones, especially when it comes to matters of faith and conscience.
SPEAKER 04 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and as usual, we have an hour live together for you to call in. If you have questions about the Bible or maybe disagreements you have with the host, we’ll talk about those on the air. I welcome you to do so. There are some lines open right now. If you want to call, the number is 844-484-5737. That number again is 844-484-5737. And since this week’s announcements have already passed, I have a couple things this week, but we have nothing, I think, nothing this weekend. I have no announcements to make, and we can go directly to the lines. And so first of all, we’ll talk to Tony in Maine. Tony, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi, Steve. Good evening. So I’ve been listening to the program for quite a while now, and it has blessed my heart, and I’ve been considering giving my life to God. And I remember reading somewhere in one of the scriptures where it says, take a woman, leave your parents, take a woman, and call her your wife. My question is, because I’m concerned, I really don’t want to rush to the whole legal perspective of it, like filing with the state and all that. So I’m concerned about doing a spiritual ceremony between me, my girlfriend, and God, but of course the presence of an officiant. So I would really like I want to know what are your views on that? Do you think one has to do the whole legal ceremony, or is it fine or okay to do a spiritual ceremony?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, you say you’re thinking about committing yourself to God. I appreciate that you’re thinking about that. But until you are committed to God, your situation would be different than it would be afterward. like having a spiritual ceremony when you don’t have a real commitment to God, almost seems, I don’t know, kind of strange. It seems like if you are not seeking specifically to be a follower of Christ or God, it seems like the highest authority over your life would be the state, and that if you want to enter into something like a marriage agreement, going through the state means through the courthouse or whatever would be the way to go. I’m not saying that the Bible has ordained the state to do that kind of a thing. But, see, the Bible gives its instructions to Christians. It doesn’t actually give instructions to non-Christians because it assumes, you know, until someone is committed to Christ, they will not be expected, you know, to be interested in the instructions.
SPEAKER 08 :
So I’m speaking more of, I’m speaking more from a Christian’s perspective because I’m considering, like, considering getting baptized and all that. So my idea or my philosophy is that so we live together, we have a child, a boyfriend, and I want to be baptized.
SPEAKER 04 :
Uh-huh. Well, let me ask you.
SPEAKER 08 :
I didn’t want to rush into being married, like, you know, egos. legal sense of it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, it doesn’t sound like you have rushed into it. It sounds like you have a child and a girlfriend and things like that. Usually those things don’t happen until after you’re married. So I think you, it doesn’t look to me like you’ve rushed into marriage. I think it probably is time to move into that direction if you want to legitimize your relationship now I mean if you made vows to God and to each other in the presence of some officiant and there’s witnesses and so forth as far as I know that’s that’s what a wedding is now if you get a marriage certificate from the courthouse or not I don’t think that changes anything I’ve said for years, but I’m usually talking to Christians, that if you are committed to God and keeping your vows and you’ve made those vows and witnesses have heard those vows and the church is recognizing those and going to hold you accountable to them, then nothing is added by a state license. The Bible doesn’t ever mention state licenses. The Bible doesn’t mention that the state has any right to license marriages. And certainly the fact that the state has assumed that right has led to some very strange ideas like that the state can marry people who really are not legitimately available for marriage, like people of the same sex or people who are maybe already married to somebody else, but they get a legal divorce, but they’re still married really in God’s sight. And they marry someone else. The state will license marriages like that, which means the state doesn’t have a clue really what marriage is supposed to be or doesn’t care. And obviously, the same state will grant a divorce to people who have no good reason for a divorce. They made a contract of marriage, which the state licensed. So it’s a state-recognized contract. But when one person wants to default on the contract, the state says, okay, no problem. I mean, it’s clear that the state has no real interest in marriage, such as Christians have. And that’s why when Christians are getting married, they might consider that the more important licensure and approval of marriage is the church. Now, on the other hand, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with getting a license to marriage. And I’m just concerned that, you know, your girlfriend had been together for some time. You have a child together and you’re still reluctant to license it. Is that a reluctance to commit yourself? If it is, then a spiritual vows won’t do any good because the spiritual vows suggest you’re committed for life. And if you’re not committed for life, you’re not making wedding vows. If you are committed for life, I’m not sure how it would be a problem to you to get a license for it. Your girlfriend slash upcoming wife may feel more protected by a marriage license. And I can see that because often the church does not enforce the marriage vows. It marries people, but it doesn’t enforce the vows they take, which it should. But because it doesn’t, some people might say, well, I’ll get the state involved here because, you know, I’m going to have financial interests. I’m going to have things like that. I could, you know, if my partner defaults. A lot of people feel safer having a marriage license, and I’m not against it. I have a marriage license, so I don’t consider that’s what makes me married. My wife and I are married, you know, in the sight of God and witnesses, but we also have a license. If we didn’t have the license, it wouldn’t make any difference because we’re just as committed with it or without it. But that’s just the thing. Because we’re committed with it or without it, it’s not a problem to have it. It doesn’t tie me up more than if I didn’t have it. So I just wonder, where lies your reluctance to get married in the, let’s just say, the normal legal way?
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay, so the thing is, I have been married before. And my then-wife cheated on me and I got divorced. But my current girlfriend, she has never been married before. And financially, I don’t see myself in a financial position right now to do it. She wants her dream wedding. So it’s like a financial decision. And I’m like, okay, I understand you want your dream wedding. But for me, I want to be baptized, and I don’t want to be where I go under that water. And then, spiritually, I’m like, having sex without marriage still, I think that’s unclean for me, spiritually. So that’s my point of view on it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that’s wise.
SPEAKER 08 :
So I was thinking of doing a spiritual ceremony, and then, of course… an official engagement for a legal wedding at a later date, maybe a year or two.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that’s an unusual situation. Let me give you some counsel here.
SPEAKER 08 :
I don’t think… Okay. Tony, let me ask you. Let me say something. Okay, I’m going to put you on hold so I can answer you if I can.
SPEAKER 04 :
I think you’ll find it difficult to find a church that recognizes a mere spiritual ceremony. I don’t have trouble believing it unless it’s, of course, a sham. You know, if somebody is making a true commitment before God and they have a conscience toward God and their whole life demonstrates that they have a conscience toward God and that this commitment to their spouse is equal to, you know, in sincerity to their commitment even to God. If that’s the case with a person… I can allow that, you know, a license is not necessary to validate a marriage. But most churches are a little more traditional than I am about that. And if you’re going to get baptized, they may require that, you know, you be married first in the sense that they recognize. Now, I can see something else. I mean, you could have a small wedding, not your girlfriend’s dream wedding. You can have a small wedding, a church wedding or whatever, or a Christian kind of wedding. And then, yeah, you can postpone a big ceremony. There’s no reason why you can’t. I mean, I don’t know why they would need to, but some people renew their vows later in their marriage. They kind of go through a ceremony. The Bible doesn’t talk about doing that, but I just can’t think of anything wrong or immoral about doing that. So if you say, well, I don’t think I can afford the wedding that you want. But I do want to make an honest woman out of you and me. You know, we want our marriage to be a marriage. So why don’t we, you know, get somebody, a minister, someone like that, some witnesses, have a little ceremony in our living room with these witnesses and this minister and take our vows. And we’ll call ourselves married. But we’ll also plan… since you didn’t get the wedding you were hoping for, that when we can afford it, we’ll have a big wedding and renew those vows at that time. That would be very out of the ordinary, but I can’t think of any reason that that wouldn’t be okay. And, you know, if you have, let’s just say, if you have involved a minister of a church in such a small ceremony as we’re talking about, that minister probably would have no problem baptizing you. I think the ministers that – now, you’re, of course, you’re in Maine, so you’re in a much more traditional area than I am. I’m in Southern California. But I think the churches in your area are probably more likely to be traditional, and they’ll be less likely to feel okay about a non-legal marriage. But my position is you can get married without the legal parts if you’re as bound by it in your conscience as you would be if you had the legal part. And the legal part, if you want it later, or a wedding, you can do anything you want like that after you’re married. But I would involve a church in it. You’re probably going to involve a church in your baptism. I’m not sure how you get baptized without a church being involved. I would talk to the minister that you hope to have that happen with and tell him what you told me. But tell him, you know, we’re thinking about making our vows and stuff in a small setting so we can be, you know, legitimately married, although we hope someday to, you know, my wife would kind of like to have a big wedding, so maybe we’ll do something like that later. That would be what I would suggest. I think that would be morally open to you, and I think you might even get the support of a pastor to baptize you under those circumstances. But it is a very different situation. I would imagine any pastor you described it to would find it very irregular, but irregular doesn’t mean it’s immoral. So that would simply be my opinion on that. Thank you for your call. Carrie from Fort Worth, Texas. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Hey, Steve. Hey.
SPEAKER 09 :
Paul, and I don’t know where it’s located, but he talks about how the natural mind cannot receive the things of God. They are foolishness to the natural man. First Corinthians 2. I was wondering if you could comment on how we go from a natural mind to a spiritual mind, what the the supernatural aspect of that and maybe just the supernatural aspect of Christian life altogether. I mean, just answered prayer is the supernatural thing. And, I mean, there’s so many supernatural things that happen in a Christian’s life. How do we go from a natural mind? I mean, it happened to me in one day. One day I was against the church. The next day I was in full support and, you know, so.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, that’s just it. That’s what it involves. It means you change your mind. That’s what the word repent means. When you’re living in sin and you’re not following Christ, that’s a mindset. That’s a philosophy. That’s a moral set of commitments. When you repent, you change your mind about that. You say, okay, I’m going to live for Christ now. I’m going to seek fellowship with other Christians. I’m going to seek to live a holy life. I’m going to seek to allow the Spirit of God to guide me and change me. That decision is simply a turnabout in your attitude, in your mind, and your commitment. Now, that’s how it happened to you, I suppose. When you were converted, you found that you had changed your mind about Christ. church and God and stuff like that, because that’s what it involves. Now, when a person has a natural mind, I’m not sure if Paul is referring strictly to a person who is unconverted, but I think he is. Later, or elsewhere, I should say, in Romans chapter 8, Paul makes a distinction between the carnally minded and the spiritually minded. Now, in 1 Corinthians 2 there, he talks about how the natural mind, does not receive the things of the Spirit of God. They’re spiritually discerned. Only the spiritual man can do that. So he distinguishes between the spiritual and the natural. Whereas in Romans 8, he distinguishes between the spiritual and the carnal. Now carnal just means fleshly. And with Paul, generally speaking, fleshly means related to your unregenerate state. It’s entirely possible for a Christian who is regenerate to exhibit some carnal attitudes and carnality in certain ways. But I think Paul is talking about an unconverted mind, the carnal mind, and that’s also the natural mind. So it seems to me like changing the mind, going from a natural mind to a spiritual mind, is simply that of making the decision to follow Christ. Now, that may seem very barren and very clinical. It’s not. Of course, that decision comes as a result of the conviction of the Holy Spirit. You’re not going to become spiritual without the involvement of the Holy Spirit. But when a person is aware that they’re being tugged at by God’s Spirit in their conscience, in their mind, and they find, you know, maybe I’ve been resisting this. I realize now that there’s something going on. I believe the Spirit of God is convicting me. I believe the Spirit of God is kind of trying to move me a certain direction. I’ve been resisting it. I’m going to stop resisting. I’m going to go along with this. I’m going to let the Spirit of God bring me to real repentance and change me, redirect me, reorient me. And to my mind, it’s a decision that is made. Now, there are Christians who believe it’s not a decision that is made by you. They believe that God’s the only one who makes those kinds of decisions. He’s the one who already chose before you were born if you’re going to make that decision and when. But I don’t think the Bible teaches that, but that is one view of theology that many people do hold. I’m going to have to answer as I understand it from Scripture, and that is that the Holy Spirit draws, the Holy Spirit convicts, and yielding to him and rather than resisting him, will cause you to turn to Christ, to recognize Christ’s authority in your life, to surrender to that authority, to take up your cross, deny yourself, and follow Jesus. And when a person has made that transition, they are now, you know, not the natural man. Anyway, they’ve been regenerated, they’re reborn, they now possess the Holy Spirit. Now, even someone who’s been reborn and possesses the Spirit may very foolishly be careless. in the matter walking in the spirit and that you know that’s something to be remedied we need to not be careless about that but if a person is really saved is you know too frequently not walking in the spirit They’re going to look just the same as a carnal man or a natural man. They may, in fact, be a man who possesses the spirit, but it won’t look much different than if they didn’t. You know, the spiritual mind is one that’s yielding to the Holy Spirit, learning from the Holy Spirit, trusting. In the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. It’s just, it’s a spirit-filled, spirit-exchanged life we’re talking about. And, you know, a very major part of that life is the way you think about things, which is your mind. You know, do you think about things from God’s point of view, from the spiritual point of view? Or are you still looking at them the way you did before you? knew God or took him into consideration. You know, Solomon seems to be describing the natural mind in Ecclesiastes, when he was away from God, he says he was looking for all, he was looking for man’s chief good under the sun, among things that were just here on earth, just like natural men do, not taking God into consideration. And he described it as a very frustrated, unfulfilled life, He listed a large number of things that he kind of looked to to kind of derive meaning from and satisfaction from in his soul, but he didn’t find it. And it concludes, hey, we just need to be devoted to God and obedience to him. But, I mean, that’s kind of the difference between two kinds of people. A natural man is hoping to be, somehow, find meaning and fulfillment in natural things under the sun. And the spiritual man is the one who says, hey, I’ve been there and done that. That’s not very satisfying, honestly. I mean, that doesn’t really give meaning. It may give temporary meaning. relief from boredom. It might even get fun, which is a fleeting kind of a thing, but it’s enjoyable when it happens, but fun is no substitute for joy. Fun and stimulation and enjoyment is no substitute for for a peace that passes understanding and for, you know, a clear conscience and lots of things that comes with a spiritual mind. How does one do it? Well, they do it by submitting to Christ. That’s the only thing I know. You turn to Christ. And, of course, you’ve already done that. So I don’t think you’re asking for yourself. It sounds like you’re just asking sort of in the abstract, how does a man do that? Because from what you said, it sounds like that already happened to you long ago.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, Steve, I was just… Just the supernatural aspect of it is what’s intriguing me. I mean, it’s almost like I see an act of obedience where, like at the Jordan, when the priests put their feet in the water. They put their feet in the water, and then the water parted. And then the supernatural happened.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, yeah, and the thing is, something supernatural does happen. When you’re regenerated, that is a supernatural thing. You’re born again of the Spirit. But you don’t do the supernatural thing. God does. It’s not like, you know, if you go through these three steps, a supernatural thing will happen. But what does happen is when you determine to surrender to God and be obedient to him, then God does the supernatural thing. And it’s the same as when they put their feet in the Jordan. God said, okay, you start walking. That’s your command. They start obeying. They didn’t make the Jordan part. God did. So, I mean, there’s the part we can do and the part we can’t do. But if we’re doing what God said to do, and it’s attached to the promise that he’s going to do something supernatural, well, then just by doing what we’re told to do and trusting him is going to result in the supernatural. That’s one thing about the Bible and the supernatural. The Bible, of course, affirms the supernatural on almost every page. But it’s the opposite of, say, demonic supernatural things like magic or sorcery, because the power to do the magic of sorcery is sought to be possessed and controlled by the practitioner. the witch, the magician. They are trying to learn how to make these things happen. Where in the Bible, the supernatural is not something we do. I mean, God might do it through us, but it’s not us saying, okay, I would like this supernatural thing to happen, so here’s the procedure. You know, where do I get the eye of newt and the wing of bat and make this happen? No, you don’t decide when something supernatural is happening. The whole point is you yield control. You don’t take control. uh of things coming to christ is yielding to him trusting in him and and he does the supernatural when and how he wants to but ours is only to obey he gives he gives the instructions we do the instructions and if we’ve done them in the manner that he said they should be done he does what he said he’ll do so yeah i mean if you’re entirely correct in your intuitions that regeneration and being changed from natural to spiritual man, that’s a supernatural thing. But you might be making the mistake of thinking, and therefore we need to learn what we do, what steps we take to make the supernatural thing happen. I think instead of making our goal to make a supernatural thing happen, I think our goal should be to please God, to obey God, to trust God, which is what he wants us to do, and then to watch God do whatever supernatural thing he’s going to do, which is I don’t know. That’s the only way I know how to answer that question. But, Kerry, I appreciate your call. Thank you for joining us again today. Marie from Sacramento, California. Well, wait, no, I’m going to keep you on hold there, Marie, because I’m looking at the clock, and we would just get started and be interrupted by a hard break. So we’ll come to you, Marie, right after this break that’s coming up. At the bottom of the hour, we like to let our listeners know what many of you already know, but some may not. And that is the narrow path is it’s listener supported. You may have noticed there are no commercials. Even at this break, the only break we take in the whole program, we don’t sell anything. We have nothing for sale. You can go to our website and you’ll see thousands of resources, none of them for sale. It’s free. We don’t make any money that way. But we spend money to be on the air because the radio stations cannot afford themselves to give us the time for free. So just like everybody else, we buy the time on the radio. But without commercials and sponsors and stuff, that means we are supported simply by, you know, unpredictable, you know, support that comes in from listeners. Now, that might seem a little risky, but it is not. If you do what you think God wants you to do, he’ll take care of it because you We’ve been doing this for 28 years under the same policies we do now. And all we do is tell people, we’re listener-supported. You want to help us out, here’s how you can do it. Here is our address. It is thenarrowpath.com. That’s the website, and you can donate from there, too. But our mailing address is The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. That’s The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California. 92593. And we get a lot of mail there. That’s how maybe half or most of the donations come that way. You can also donate online if that’s what you want to do at thenarrowpath.com. You’ll find a tab that says donations, and you can do it there. And if you do, I’ll tell you exactly where that money will go. It will go to buying airtime. There’s nowhere else in our budget. If nothing else, where are the money goes? We buy airtime, and it keeps us on the air all across the country. Again, you can go to thenarrowpath.com. We have another half hour coming, so don’t go away. I’ll be back in 30 seconds.
SPEAKER 01 :
As you know, the Narrow Path radio show is Bible radio that has nothing to sell you but everything to give you. So do the right thing and share what you know with your family and friends. Tell them to tune in to the Narrow Path on this radio station or go to thenarrowpath.com where they will find topical audio teachings, blog articles, verse-by-verse teachings, and archives of all the radio shows. You know listeners supported Narrow Path with Steve Gregg? Share what you know.
SPEAKER 04 :
Welcome back to the narrow path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg. And as usual, we’re taking your calls for another half hour. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or a different viewpoint from the host, we always welcome your participation here. You can call the number 844-484-5737. Right now our lines are full, but if you call the number in a few minutes, there will certainly be lines that have opened up before the end of the hour. The number again is 844-484-5737. And I should probably mention that a week from tonight will be the beginning of an 11-day itinerary I’ll be doing in the Midwest. I’ll be in Michigan, I think the Grand Rapids area initially, but I’m going to several different parts of Michigan and to Indiana and Illinois also in 11 straight days of speaking engagements. Now, we’ve got a lot of people listening in that area, and I don’t go there very often, so I’m pretty sure I haven’t met most of you there, but if you’d like to join us, you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com, look under Announcements. There you’ll see the dates that I’m in your area, if I am, and the place and time and all of that. So if you want to join us, all you need to know to do so would be check the information at thenarrowpath.com under the tab that says Announcements. All right. Our next caller today is Marie calling from Sacramento, California. Thanks for calling, Marie.
SPEAKER 02 :
Thank you. I have a question about the ascension of Jesus.
SPEAKER 04 :
Mm-hmm.
SPEAKER 02 :
about the location of it. I looked at all the scripture that records it, and I found some interesting things. There seems to be a discrepancy because in Matthew 28, verse 16, he says that the disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go, and then he records the Great Commission. Okay, so, but in Luke and in Acts, it’s pretty clear that that he ascended from the Mount of Olives, which is not in Galilee.
SPEAKER 04 :
That’s correct.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yes. And, of course, Luke may not have seen in present, most likely he didn’t see this ascension, but the rest of them were there. I’m not sure about John Mark, but what do you think about this discrepancy about Galilee and the Mount of Olives, which is near Bethany?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, you thought very well about this, though. There’s no discrepancy, but you’re right. I mean, even if Luke wasn’t present to see it, it’s impossible to imagine that by the time he wrote the book of Luke and the book of Acts, he had not spent enough time with the apostles in Jerusalem to know the story of Jesus’ ascension from the Mount of Olives. It’s hardly likely that he would have thought it was from there when it was from somewhere else, because Luke associated with the apostles for centuries. very probably decades before he wrote his books, and I’m sure they talked about these things a great deal. The point I would make is that Matthew doesn’t describe the ascension of Christ. It describes an appearance of Christ on a mountain in Galilee. It doesn’t say to whom he appeared. It says his disciples, but that term is used in Matthew to refer to everyone who followed Jesus. My belief, this is an educated guess, is that that mountain in Galilee is is the location where, as Paul said, Jesus appeared to 500 people at once. Paul mentions this appearance, but without mentioning the location, in 1 Corinthians 15. However, it would almost have to be in Galilee, because Jesus, at that time, did not have 500 followers in Jerusalem. He had done most of his ministry and most of his miracles in Galilee. When he had multitudes following him, they were in Galilee. Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem. was periodical and short. Like, he’d go down there for the festivals, you know, stay there a week or so, and go back. Now, he had followers in Jerusalem, but not that many, because on the day of Pentecost, just, you know, 50 days after he was crucified, there were only 120 that were waiting in that room. So, if Jesus appeared before that time to more than 500 people in one place, almost certainly they’d have to be in the region where he had the most and had done the most to attract crowds. And that would be, I’m sure, Galilee. We don’t have the Bible telling us that that’s where that was, where the 500 were, but we do have Matthew telling us there was an appearance to his disciples in Galilee. And it’s interesting, too, because when the women met the angel at the empty tomb, the angel said, go tell his disciples he’ll meet you in Galilee. And yet, within hours, Jesus appeared to them in Jerusalem, in the upper room. So obviously, that is, he appeared to the apostles. It would seem the meeting of the disciples in Galilee was going to be a broader group of disciples. He at one time had hundreds, if not thousands, of disciples in Galilee, where he conducted most of his ministry. The apostles, which now were limited to 11 men, the first time he appeared to them on the night of the resurrection, even Thomas wasn’t there, so only ten of them saw him. And then they were still in Jerusalem eight days later when Thomas was with them. Now, if Jesus had told them, I’ll meet you in Galilee, and they spent a whole eight days after getting that message in Jerusalem without going to Galilee, I have to assume, That what he’s saying is we have a, we don’t read of it, but we have a scheduled appointment in Galilee. Make sure you’re there. I’ll meet you there. And tell all the disciples about it. In other words, get the word out to everybody who ever followed Jesus that there’s going to be a general meeting in Galilee of Jesus with whoever’s there. And I think that’s probably where the 500 were. But there was no ascension in that description. Matthew does not describe the ascension. He simply describes this appearance. And so, I mean, I don’t see a problem. Now, if Matthew said, and after he gave the Great Commission here. He went up and disappeared into the clouds. Well, then we’d have a serious problem because Luke said twice that this happened on the Mount of Olives. So I don’t see a discrepancy. I think the discrepancy comes from assuming that Matthew is describing the ascension in Matthew 28, when, in fact, if we look carefully, that’s not in the story that he’s telling there.
SPEAKER 02 :
So the Great Commission doesn’t have that much bearing on the location then? I mean, is that the only place, Matthew 28, the only place where we see that Great Commission spoken?
SPEAKER 04 :
That one, yeah, there’s like four different recorded Great Commissions. I mean, I believe they were all, I think Jesus said all four of them at different times. Of course, there’s Mark 16 and what’s considered the disputed long ending of Mark, where Jesus said, go and preach the gospel to every creature. And whoever believes will be saved and is baptized will be saved. Whoever does not believe will be damned. That’s, of course, it’s questionable whether that was an authentic occurrence because it’s in a disputed portion of Mark. But if it was real, and I kind of tend to think it is, then that was apparently in Jerusalem. He made that statement to his disciples, preach the gospel of your creature. But the make disciples of all nations commission was given to somebody. in Galilee, on a mountain in Galilee. Now Luke also seems to record in Luke 24 a command that Jesus gave, just kind of summarized, that repentance should be preached beginning in Jerusalem and so forth. But then later, the day that Jesus ascended from Mount Olives, And Acts 1.8 says that Jesus said, you know, tarry in Jerusalem until you’re endued with power and on high. Well, actually, that’s Luke 24’s version. It says in Acts 1.8. You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you’ll be my witnesses in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to the uttermost parts of the world. So, you know, there’s several different times. Over a period of 40 days, when Jesus met with disciples in various settings and on several occasions reiterated some form of the great new mission, it took different forms. One is preach the gospel. One is make disciples of all nations. One is, you know, the gospel must be preached. Repentance must be preached. You’ll be my witnesses. These are different ways of saying, you know, the very similar thing. He’s driving it home to them that when he leaves, he wants them to get the message out. But it does not appear either by the wording of those commissions or by the locations they are in that they’re all one commission. It seems like there are four different ones.
SPEAKER 02 :
Okay. Thank you so much. Could I ask another question, or do you need to take another caller?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, my lines are full, but if it doesn’t take long to… Is it a yes or no kind of question, or is it more in-depth?
SPEAKER 02 :
No, it’d be more.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’d be more? If you don’t mind waiting and calling next week with it… Well, go ahead and say it. You’ve got your foot’s in the door. Go ahead and give it to me.
SPEAKER 02 :
Thank you. In Romans 11, Paul says that the Jews are blinded temporarily until the fullness of the Gentiles come in. And I heard you say that until doesn’t mean until. I’d like you to explain what it does mean and why it doesn’t mean until.
SPEAKER 04 :
Sure. It doesn’t say the Jews are blinded temporarily. It says there’s been a partial hardening. Now, partial doesn’t mean for part of the time, but it means part of the nation. Partial hardening has happened to Israel. does not mean all of Israel has been temporarily blinded. He’s not talking about anything temporary. He’s saying the state of matters is that part of the nation of Israel has been blinded. There’s no prediction that that will change on their part. And he’s actually said it earlier in verse 7 of the same chapter. He said Israel has not obtained what it sought for. He says the elect… The election had received it, and the rest were blinded. So blindness in part or hardening in part, different translations say different. The partial blinding or hardening means some of them were blinded or hardened. Others were not. The elect had not been. So when Paul says a partial hardening or blinding of Israel has taken place, and this is until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. Now, many people think that until means that’s limiting the length of time that this hardening will last, and that it’s suggesting that when the fullness of the Gentiles have come in, Then they won’t be blinded anymore. But Paul never says anything about them ever not being blinded. The word until certainly can refer to saying, you know, I’m going to stay up until nine o’clock, implying I’m going to bed after that. But if you say, don’t wait up for me. I’m going to be coming in at 10 o’clock. And I say, I’ll be up until then. It doesn’t mean I’m going to bed then. It means, you know, until you come home, you can be sure I’ll be up. You know, I’m not guaranteed I’m going to go bed at that time, but I’ll be up at that point, too, as I am now. It’s saying that I’m going to remain up at least until this point. Maybe afterwards, too. Who knows? Because the word until is frequently used this way in the Bible. I often give the example of God saying to Jacob, I will not leave you until I have fulfilled all the promises I’ve made to you. Okay, so are we to assume that God is telling Jacob, I’m not going to leave you until I fulfill my promises, then I will leave you. No, what he’s saying is, don’t worry. Until these promises have been fulfilled, you never have to worry about me giving up on you. I’ll be here and make sure that this happens. He’s not saying, I’ll give up on you after that. And frankly, the term, until it’s used that way many, many times in Scripture, I have a list, I have a lecture where I give a bunch of them, but I also, that lecture is in the… The series is called What Are We to Make of Israel? But the interesting thing is I was listening to that not very long ago, and I said, I have this long list, and I gave about half of the ones on the list because I didn’t have time to give them all. It’s a very common thing in Scripture for the word until to simply mean not before. This will prevail forever. And it will not stop prevailing before this happens. And the focus is not on any temporariness. The focus is on the goal. The goal is, I will fulfill the words I say to you, and I won’t leave you before that. And when God says, the fullness of the Gentiles are going to come in, and part of Israel is going to be blind that whole time. Now, will they be blind after that? Well, we don’t know. Paul doesn’t say anything about it changing. Of course, some people say he says in the next verse, verse 26, and then all Israel will be saved. So they think it’s talking about reversing it. He doesn’t say that. He says, so, which means thus. Some translations say thus. It means in this way, all Israel will be saved. In what way? That God takes part of Israel today that are believers. And he takes Gentiles, too. And in this way, all Israel, the Jews and the Gentiles that belong to it, will be saved. And he’s just explained that with a picture of an olive tree in the verses immediately prior. Israel is the olive tree. It’s got branches. Initially it had all Jewish branches, but some of the Jews don’t believe, so they’re cut off, leaving only the believing branches. Only the believing Jews are still on it. The rest are not part of Israel. They’ve been cut off and thrown off. But the believing Jews have stayed. And then Gentile branches have been grafted in because they believe. So the tree of Israel is now made up of believing Jews and Gentiles. Just like the tree of Israel in the Old Testament was. Because Israel in the Old Testament also had Gentiles in it. But the difference is Israel today, God has made a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah. So in the old covenant, Jews and Gentiles could be part of Israel if they kept the old covenant. But now there’s a new covenant. And now Jews and Gentiles can both be part of Israel if they keep the new covenant. And that’s what we have done. We’ve come to Christ. We’re in the new covenant, Jews and Gentiles. So when Paul says part of Israel has been hardened until all the Gentiles are come in, He doesn’t mean, and then they’re not going to be hardened. He doesn’t mention whether, and by the way, the ones that were hardened in his day, most of them never did change. Remember, he’s not predicting something eschatological. He’s saying, he’s in the present tense. He’s describing the state of the Jews in his own day. He says, Israel, hardening in part has happened to Israel. Okay, now of those Jews of his day that hardening had happened to, how many of them ever turned back to God? We don’t know, but not many of them. at least not a very large percentage of them did. So he’s not predicting that their hardening is temporary. For the vast majority of those who were hardened, it was permanent for them. They died in that state. Otherwise, we’d have seen massive Jewish conversions in Paul’s day. So the problem people have with Romans 11 is they’ve been taught to see it as eschatology. It’s not talking about end times. It’s talking about how did God fulfill the promise to save all Israel? By saving the true Israel. But he began that conversation in Romans 9, 6 saying, they are not all Israel who are of Israel. So when we talk about Israel is going to be saved, which Israel are we talking about? The larger Israel or the smaller Israel within? And the answer is given already earlier in the conversation in Romans 9, 27, where he quotes Isaiah 10, where it says, though the children of Israel be as the multitude of the sand of the seashore, only the remnant of them will be saved. So Paul has already made it very clear. Not everyone… who is of Israel, meaning not everyone who is Jewish, is Israel. And when God says he’s going to save Israel, he means the remnant of Israel. Only the remnant will be saved. And that’s what he’s discussing in Romans 9 through 10 and 11. And that’s what he is also affirming in chapter 11. He doesn’t change his mind in chapter 11. For example, when he said in chapter 9, the Israelites might be a multitude, but only a fraction of them, only a remnant of them will be saved. Two chapters later, he hasn’t changed his theology. Oh, no, I changed my mind. They’re all going to be saved. No, he’s got the same theology in chapter 11 he had in chapter 9. And he does not believe all the Jews are going to be saved. But he knew that any Jew might be, including himself. He gives himself as an example at the beginning of chapter 11. He says, has God cast off his people? Certainly not. God has not cast off his people whom he foretold. He says, I’m a Jew. I’m a Hebrew. I’m a Jew. Which means, you know, if I’m not cast off and I’m a Jew, then clearly God hasn’t cast off the Jews. The people that God has cast off are unbelievers, Jew or Gentile. And the people who are his people are believers, Jews and Gentiles. And that’s how Israel is defined by Paul. And it’s all those Israelites, all the believers, all the ones attached to the olive tree, which is Israel, are going to be saved. Hey, I gave you a lot of time. I need to take some more calls before we run out.
SPEAKER 02 :
Very well.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you, Marie. Good talking to you. All right. Another caller also from Sacramento. Mary was, and so is Michelle. Welcome to The Narrow Path, Michelle.
SPEAKER 05 :
Hi, Steve. I’m calling because I’m having a little bit of a personal challenge. I’m loving… my neighbor which I know I’m required to love my neighbor but in this in this environment where you see so much unbiblical behavior and people just expecting that you’re going to accept it and acting like it’s acceptable when it isn’t for those of us who are Christians do you have some scriptures or some suggestions on how I can in my heart, truly reconcile that and love my neighbor?
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, well, I suspect that what you’re hoping to do in finding difficult, you’re hoping to feel good about your neighbor. Because when we love someone, we usually think, you know, I feel good about them. I feel warm. I feel fond. I feel a lot of affection. That’s love. But in the Bible, love is seen in a somewhat different way. At least the kind of love that we’re required to do is. We can’t be required to like someone or feel good about them. Because you simply can’t be commanded to feel a certain way. You can’t command your feelings. We have moods. We have, you know, sleepless nights, you know, maybe low blood sugar. We have all kinds of things that change our moods. And so there’s no way that God or anyone else can tell us you have to feel such and such a thing. That’s what we think of. I don’t like these people. You know, why would I love them? Well, you don’t have to like them. Love is what you do. Remember, Jesus said, greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. Now, laying down your life is not something you feel. It’s something you do. And that’s the best of love. You quoted, love your neighbor as you love yourself. Of course, Jesus said, That doing so is the whole law in the prophets. And Paul repeated it twice in his epistles. That loving your neighbor as you love yourself is the whole law in the prophets. But in another place, Jesus said it in different terms. In Matthew 7, 12, Jesus said, what you would then do to you, do that to them. This is the whole law in the prophets. When I thought loving my neighbor as I love myself is the whole law in the prophets. Exactly. Doing to your neighbor what you would want done to you is loving them. Loving is what you do, and the reasons you do it, clearly. I mean, you might do nice things for people and have ulterior motives. That wouldn’t be love. But John said in 1 John, Brethren, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. Love is done in action. So if I have a neighbor and they’re flaunting their bad behavior and I don’t like it, I don’t feel good about it, that doesn’t mean I can’t still love. Do good to them. I should do good to my enemies even. I don’t know if I can feel good about my enemies, but I can do good to them. And that’s what loving is. And again, it’s not just doing it mechanically and trying to manipulate or get some selfish end out of it. You do it because you recognize that God loves them. They are made in the image of God. They are flawed children of God. There but for the grace of God go any of us. the bad behavior, the absence of conscience that they exhibit. We could be them. You know, what makes us better than them? Remember what Paul said in, I think it’s 1 Corinthians 4, 7. He said, who makes you differ from another and what do you have that you didn’t receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you didn’t receive it? The idea being that anything that makes you different from someone else in a positive sense, that’s something God gave you. That’s grace. And except for the grace of God, That’s you or me, that person. So in a sense, we can say I don’t like that person’s behavior. They’re irritating. They’re annoying. I don’t approve of what they’re doing. But I can be awfully thankful that I am not like that, and I can be very sad that they are, and I can do what I can to befriend them, not necessarily be their best friend, but to be kind to them and to do good to them and needs that I see that they have, just like I would if I did like them. And you can love a person. You can lay down your life for them, whether you like them or not. You do it because you love God, and God requires it. I remember once, years ago, a man was saying he had trouble honoring his wife. The Bible says to honor your wife, give honor to her as the weaker vessel. And he said, I have a hard time honoring her because she’s not behaving honorably. And it was true. And he thought that God said to him, well, you honor her not because she deserved to be honored, because you’re honoring me to do it. I told you to do it. You don’t honor her because she’s honorable. You honor her because that’s what I told you to do, and you honor me by doing it. And that’s just the same thing with loving your neighbor. Even if you don’t like them, even if it’s hard, you’re devoted to their well-being. That’s more what love is than the way you feel about them at any given time. And so, you know, you do it out of love for God. You don’t do it because they somehow are lovable.
SPEAKER 05 :
I hope that helps you. Do you pray for them? Do you think that helps in your heart?
SPEAKER 04 :
I think it does. I think if you pray for them, begin to serve them, I think you start to feel better about them, too. All right, let’s talk to Cody from Baytown. We don’t have much time. Cody, welcome. Oh, hi, Chris. Good to hear your voice. Hey, can you hear me? You’re a little muffled. You’re a little muffled. Are you right up by your phone?
SPEAKER 07 :
I had some headset on. Maybe this is better.
SPEAKER 04 :
That was the problem. It’s better now. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, good deal. Hey, a while back on your program, you mentioned a book, Blumhart’s Battle. And, man, I ordered that in a fascinating read. I just wanted to thank you for that. It’s a mind blower. Yeah, yeah, true account. Yeah, this is very, very awesome. Hey, am I correct in understanding? So I read a commentary about Moses. The reason why God didn’t allow him to enter the promised land was the water. You know, he was told to speak to the rock, but, you know, in his anger, he struck the rock twice. I had read a commentary. The reason not only the disobedience, but why that was such an egregious sin was because the rock is a picture of Christ, and he struck it twice. And, like, Christ is only… was only to be struck once, you know, via the cross. Is that a correct analogy? Is that a correct interpretation?
SPEAKER 04 :
I think it’s a correct extrapolation. That particular explanation is never given in Scripture, but the identification of the rock with Christ is Scripture. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 10, verses 1 through 5, says, talks about the things that happened to the Israelites in the wandering in the wilderness, and he mentions they drank from the rock, and he says that rock was Christ, which I think he means that rock is a type of Christ. And the water that is given out from the rock is like the Holy Spirit, which is poured out from Christ, and so forth. So, I mean, Paul does identify a typology there. Now, he doesn’t mention anything about Moses striking the rock or whatever, so he doesn’t make that point, but I think it’s a good extrapolation. If Christ is represented by the rock… God did tell Moses to strike the rock the first time, and water came out. But the second time, he didn’t tell him to strike. He said, just speak to the rock, and it’ll give you water. And many people feel like this is intended to make the point that Christ had to be stricken in order for the blessings of God and the Holy Spirit and stuff to be poured out upon us at the cross. But he doesn’t have to be stricken again. Once he’s been stricken, you just have to speak to him. You don’t have to crucify him. He doesn’t have to die again. He doesn’t have to suffer again. And so Christ the rock was struck the first time under God’s instructions. But the second time, God did not instruct him to strike, but only to speak. And Moses’ disobedience there, though Moses probably did not understand the weight of it, He was messing up, messing up the type. God intended for this rock and this water and the rod and so forth to all be part of an acted parable about Christ. And this, of course, Moses probably had no idea about that at the time, but it just shows that maybe we should obey God about everything. We never know how much is expected. If God says do something, that’s a little thing, no big thing. I can modify that a bit. But who knows? how big an issue is hanging on that that God knows and you don’t. But, yeah, I’m going to give my support to that view. And, Cody, I appreciate your call. God bless you. I’m out of time. You’ve been listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. We are listener supported. You can write to us at The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593, or go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Have a good weekend.
