Menu
In this episode of The Narrow Path, Steve Gregg dives into various topics exploring Christian theology and practical advice for believers. The episode begins with a heartfelt discussion about navigating familial conflicts through faith, showcasing how biblical wisdom can apply to modern-day situations. As the show progresses, Steve unpacks biblical idioms and explains their context, providing listeners with an insightful look at ancient scriptures.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 06 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour each weekday afternoon, taking your calls as we always do. If you have questions you want to call in about the Bible, about the Christian faith, about that kind of thing, feel free to give me a call. If you disagree with the host on anything, maybe you disagree with the Bible itself, I think it’s a Not a wise thing to be a believer in the Bible, and you’ve got some reasons for that belief. I’d love to hear from you. You’ve got things against Christianity or just against something that I’ve said on the air. Feel free to give me a call. I’ll be glad to hear your points of balance and disagreement. The number to call is 844-484-5737. It looks like our lines might be full, but there might be a line that’s not taken. 844- 844-484-5737. Yeah, all the lines are full now, but call in a little while. Just a few minutes probably, a line will open up. 844-484-5737. Let’s talk to our dear friend Anonymous from who knows where. Hello, Anonymous. Welcome.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hello, Steve. How are you today?
SPEAKER 06 :
Good, thanks.
SPEAKER 11 :
Good. Am I loud enough for you?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, I can hear you. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, great. I called in about a week ago or so, anonymous as well, and it was an issue between my daughter and my wife. And I just had an idea that I’m considering meeting with my daughter apart from my wife. And I kind of pushed that away for a long time because I felt I wasn’t honoring her. My daughter doesn’t want her there. That’s the problem. So I’ve been kind of pushing that away for the last year or so. And I said… To her, my wife, you know, I don’t think it would be honoring for me to be there without you. So it’s been at a stalemate. But last year, I did meet with her one-on-one without my wife, and that was okay. But I’m going to meet with her probably – Before you go further, of course –
SPEAKER 06 :
Our listeners probably don’t know your situation at all. Could you give us like a 30-second update or a recap of the situation? Is your wife your daughter’s stepmother or is she her actual mother?
SPEAKER 11 :
Biological.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay, go ahead. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 11 :
It is an unusual situation. Yes, so my wife and daughter are both Christians. They both have issues against each other, age old type things. They’re both alike in temperament. and they both react about the same way. So they’re very much alike. And so the daughter feels as though the mom has not been as truthful with her over the years, and her mom has not been as humble as she could be toward my daughter. So they just have that issue. One feels one is not truthful, and the other one feels the other one is not humble enough to deal with right now.
SPEAKER 06 :
So So when you told your wife that you didn’t think it would be honoring to her for you to speak to the daughter alone, how did you?
SPEAKER 11 :
Not speak. No, meet. Oh, meet? Yeah, meet.
SPEAKER 06 :
And how did your wife respond to you saying that? Did she say go ahead or not?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, she pulled away. I told her I was going to do that, and she kind of isolated herself last evening. I told her, I said, I’m going to go ahead and. So she kind of pulled away from me, and this morning she seemed to be halfway decent about things, but she just pulled away and kind of drove off for a while and came back and didn’t say a whole lot. So she’s not happy about me meeting with her apart from her.
SPEAKER 06 :
Is she opposed to the idea of you trying to seek reconciliation between them?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes and no. I mean, there’s only so much I can do.
SPEAKER 06 :
Is she jealous of your daughter?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, that might be part of it, too. But I think my daughter has been very rude to my wife. I mean, she’s a very strong-willed child, like I mentioned before. She just had to have everything explained exactly the way she could understand it and not she was going to balk against it. And she just was very strong-willed. And she’s a good Christian in a lot of ways. She’s very strong, but she’s just one of those persons that if you – can’t give her a good answer, then she’ll fight you on it. So it’s just a nip and tuck.
SPEAKER 06 :
You know, when there’s strife between two parties, especially two parties in the family, you know, if it’s not solving itself, somebody’s got to be the grown-up. And it should be, of course, the adult that would be the grown-up. You know, actually both should be grown-ups. But it seems like your wife should realize that, okay, she is the adult. She needs to behave like the adult in the situation and, you know, allow you to take whatever measures you need to take to reach out to your daughter. What is it you’re going to ask me, or are we just going to share what your next step is?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, should I go ahead and hold these meetings apart from my wife, even though my wife would probably like to be there if she were invited, because she’s not being invited by my daughter. She’d rather have me there without the daughter. So I’m thinking maybe I should just not even meet with her until we get everything done. at least where she wants to be in front of my wife.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, if your wife came even against your daughter’s will, would your daughter cancel the meeting and just not meet with you?
SPEAKER 11 :
Exactly.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay. Well, why don’t you meet with her one time just to kind of survey the possibilities? I mean, you could… If she won’t meet with your wife there, that certainly can’t be allowed to put a wedge between you and your daughter because your wife is not reconciling with her. It may be your daughter’s fault, not your wife’s fault. Your wife should be eager to see you reach out to the daughter even if it’s not on her terms. I would think that you should probably meet with your daughter at least the one time and explore and try to see what roadblocks there are to having similar meetings with your wife present. And, you know, it may be that you can’t solve it, but it’s not going to be solved with no one meeting with your daughter. That’s true.
SPEAKER 11 :
Okay, and again, the reason why my daughter would not want my wife is because she wouldn’t own up to any of her faults and or questions or accusations my wife has against her. So she would kind of stonewall and my daughter would feel as though she’s not getting any response from my wife.
SPEAKER 06 :
Now you’re anonymous here, so you’re not giving away anything on anybody. But do you feel like your daughter has legitimate complaints against your wife and vice versa?
SPEAKER 11 :
Or is it perception? Yes, I do. I do. Like I said, they’re both like in temperament. So I see that my wife had been made mistakes and not being as forthright as possible. And that alienating my daughter.
SPEAKER 05 :
And how old is your daughter?
SPEAKER 11 :
She’s 30.
SPEAKER 1 :
30.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, well, first of all, your wife, of course, part of being a grown-up is she has to realize that you have the right to have a relationship with your daughter, even if your wife doesn’t want to do whatever is necessary for her relationship with her to be right. I mean, obviously, she should be eager. to resolve any issues between herself and her own daughter. But if she’s not eager to do so, then she shouldn’t be able to stand in the way of you having a relationship with your daughter. Obviously, your daughter needs to have contact with parents, and your daughter may be unreasonable, and your wife may be unreasonable, but that, I mean, no one can say, and therefore you, who are not being unreasonable, should not have as much right to talk to your daughter as you have to talk to your wife. I mean, both of them, you have the right to be in relationship with both, in fact, an obligation. I do think that a man’s obligation to his wife is greater than his obligation to his adult children, because children are ours only for… They’re only on loan. We prepare them to launch, and then we launch them, and then they’re responsible adults. Whereas we enter into covenant with our wives and husbands, and that’s a lifelong thing. We don’t launch them anywhere. We try to get closer to them. But that being said, it’s hardly reasonable for a wife who’s got perennial issues with her daughter to be jealous or angry if her husband says, well, I don’t, you know, I have issues too, but I’m willing to work them out with her. You know, anyway, it doesn’t look like it’s going to be the pleasantest thing in the world, but between you and your wife.
SPEAKER 11 :
I appreciate it. I appreciate it. And don’t just take a little courage on my part to do the right thing. So that’s also always an issue because to go against my daughter vis-a-vis my wife, it’s just a tough thing to do. Have that kind of courage to say, wife, I’m sorry, I’m still going to meet with her. I’ll still honor you, but I think it’s important.
SPEAKER 06 :
You should take it step by step. You can take it step by step and say, you know, my goal here, I’m going to meet with her this one time. I’m not saying I’m never going to meet with her again, but I’m going to feel things out as we go along. And my goal is to iron things out ultimately between us all so that we can have a happy family without these kinds of issues. I don’t know how easy or even possible that will be, But there’s no sense in just leaving things as they are and not trying to work things out. So I’m going to try to work them out. But, you know, I would like it much better if all three of us could be there. But that seems to be something that isn’t possible at the moment. So we’ll work step by step toward that goal.
SPEAKER 11 :
Thank you very much and have a good year.
SPEAKER 06 :
You too. I’m sorry this is going on in your family. God bless you. Bye-bye. All right. Bye. Well, let’s talk to Bruce in Albany, Oregon. Bruce, welcome.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, Steve. I had a question on the book of Luke, chapter 14, verse 26, about the hate of their father and mother and hate everybody. I don’t understand that.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, this is one of those things where if you don’t know anything about the Hebrew idioms or the context of a biblical statement, it can really trip you up. We have to realize that when we read the Bible, we’re reading something written in the ancient Near East where they had their own idioms just like we have ours in our language and so forth. Very commonly in the Bible, both the Old and the New Testament, so we see this is actually a Hebrew idiom that transcended many centuries, we find that where there’s a choice between two things and you’ve got to favor one over the other, it is spoken as if you love the one and hate the other. Even if the one you’re not choosing, you don’t really hate in the sense that we speak of. That’s just the way they spoke. So we read in Genesis, for example, going all the way back there, that Jacob had two wives, Rachel and Leah. And it says he loved Rachel more than he loved Leah. And the next verse says, Now, Leah, I mean, Jacob had seven children with Leah. It’s not like he hated her or couldn’t stand her. But it just says he loved Rachel more. But in the idiom, The Hebrews, to say he loved Rachel more was tantamount to saying he hated Leah without intending by the word hate all of the animosity and malice that it brings up in our minds. It’s fairly commonplace in Scripture for it to be used that way. Even Jesus used it that way in the Sermon on the Mount when he said no man can serve two masters. He will love the one and hate the other. Wait a minute. If you have two jobs, you’ve got two bosses. you don’t have to hate one of them, do you? Well, you have to favor one of them. If both of them say, hey, can you work this Saturday? And you have to decide, well, which one am I going to go with? You’re going to choose your favorite. You’re going to have to favor one over the other. You might get fired by the other, but let’s just say it’s not that tricky. And you’re just, you know, you favor one master over the other. Well, that’s what Jesus called loving one and hating the other. It doesn’t mean that what we mean by hate is involved here. And in this case, where Jesus in Luke 14, 26 says, if anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and his mother, his wife and his children, etc., he cannot be my disciples. Well, he said kind of the same thing in Matthew chapter 10, where he said in verse 37, Matthew 10, 37, he who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me. He who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. Now see, that statement, taking his cross, is also the next verse in Luke 14. You mentioned Luke 14, 26. The next verse says, whoever does not bear his cross and come after him cannot be my disciple. So this is obviously the same teaching worded differently in two different cases. And Matthew…
SPEAKER 04 :
I understand Matthew a lot more than Luke, but now I understand Luke.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, because what it says in Luke is the same thing that it says in Matthew, but in different wording. Because Matthew says it more the way we would be inclined to say, you know, whoever loves father and mother more than me is not worthy of me. But in Luke it says whoever doesn’t hate his father and mother. But that means, you know, in relation to, in contrast to me, you know, in contrast to loving me. Now, a lot of people who teach on that passage would say, well, Compared to your love for Jesus, your love for your family should be like hatred. It should be extremely polar, polar opposite of your love for Jesus. But that’s not really quite saying it right. This is more like just a figure of speech. You need to love Jesus more than you love your family. And in the Jewish idiom, that would mean you love Jesus and hate your family. But it doesn’t really mean hate in the way that we use the term. It’s a different culture, different culture. linguistic convention okay that explains it yeah it’s a troublesome verse for many people but yeah when you see how frequently that very dichotomy is used in the Bible where it’s really not talking about malicious or hostile hate it’s just talking about preference of one over the other giving one preference at the expense of the other is really what it’s talking about alright very good
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you for your explanation.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right. Thank you for your call. Greg in Sonoma, California. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 03 :
Blessing, Steve. I have 1 Corinthians 11, verse 10. The last sentence of the paragraph sums up. For this reason and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. Was that only talking about the scarf or what? Could you explain that?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, this is the context where Paul is talking about the need for women to wear their heads covered when they pray and prophesy and men not to do so. And it’s a discussion that goes on to verse 16 where he concludes by saying if anyone seems to be contentious about this, well, we don’t have any such custom. Neither do the churches of Christ, he says. So he’s saying this is… This is the advice I’m giving you, but we wouldn’t get contentious about this. We don’t have that. It’s not a hill to die on. We don’t have this custom universally. And we know they didn’t. We know there were other cultures, including Paul’s own Jewish culture, where they didn’t have this. I mean, women often did cover their heads, but there was nothing contrary to a man covering his head, which is different than the customs in 1 Corinthians 11. That is, Jewish men wear yarmulkes or they wear prayer shawls and things when they’ve when they prayed and so forth. So it clearly was a different custom among Jewish believers than was held among Greek believers in Corinth. And so he’s obviously talking about a local concern. And he says, yes, people really have trouble with this. Well, it’s not really a universal thing, so let’s not fight over it. That’s what I believe he’s saying. Now, what does he mean, though, that a woman ought to have a lot of the… translations say a symbol or a sign of authority on her head. Actually, in the Greek, it just says she ought to have authority on her head, which is hard to know what that means. Some people think it means authorization to pray or prophesy, that in that church, if they didn’t have something on their head, they weren’t authorized or free to pray or prophesy because that was the custom there. I believe… This is a very difficult verse because he says they should have authority on their head, probably a symbol of authority like a covering. But the hard part is because of the angels. He says, because of the angels they should. And this is the hard part. Like, what angels? And what does a woman wearing a cavern on her head have to do with angels? Why should this be an issue? Now, we don’t really know the answer to that, but one school of thought is that it’s talking about the fallen angels, and the idea that angels may be tempted by human women so women ought to be modest and cover themselves and not display their beauty, you know, while praying and prophesying because the angels might be tempted. But I hardly see that as a reasonable idea because I presume if angels can see you when you’re praying and prophesying, they can see you when you’re not. If they see you, you know, I mean, after all, the angel of the Lord encamps around the righteous. I believe there’s angels, you know, guardian angels and so forth around us all. And, you know, a woman doesn’t wear a head covering all the time, even if she did so in church. when she sleeps or when she bathes and does things like that in all likelihood. So I don’t think it’s talking about the fact that if a woman is exposed, somehow this is going to be a problem to the angels. And if it’s something about the holy angels, see, some people say, well, he’s just talking about the holy angels. They’re emotionally invested in propriety and things that please God. And if a woman doesn’t cover herself when she prays the prophets, the angels would be offended. Well, I would assume they wouldn’t be offended unless God is. And if God is, then why not just say that? Why say don’t do this because the angels would be offended? How about say don’t do it because God will be offended, if that’s really the case. But he doesn’t. So what’s he referring to? Well, nobody knows for sure, but we have to realize also the word angels, angeloi, in the Greek means is the ordinary word for messengers, too. For example, not all, but most commentators believe that when it talks about the seven angels of the seven churches in Revelation, it means the seven messengers, human messengers, because human messengers are also called angeloi in the Greek. It can go either way. It just means the word means messenger. And so some think maybe he’s talking about the visiting preachers who come to the church as they face the congregation. It’s more considerate to them for women not to be displaying their beauty to distract them or to stumble them or something like that. Now, I imagine most women would say, oh, that’s ridiculous. But most men would not think it’s ridiculous. The truth is that men are distracted by female beauty. And, I mean, we certainly see that’s the reason why in the Middle East today the Muslims want their women covered because the men… you know, are distracted and they don’t want other men looking at their wives and so forth. They go overboard because they don’t have the Holy Spirit in Islam. So they obviously have to just deal with their own fleshly self-restraints and so forth. So they just cover their women up, make it easy. But The church, we do have the Holy Spirit, but men can still be tempted, and Paul might be thinking that, you know, that in a society where women cover themselves modestly, for women in the church to not do so could present stumbling blocks to the messengers. We know in the early church there were traveling ministers like Paul himself and others. The church of Corinth had had Apollos there, had had Paul there. might have even had Cephas there, but there were some in the church who were following each of these three men. And, you know, so it may be he’s even thinking about human beings. So we don’t really know, we don’t know all the thoughts of the Greeks, which the Corinthians were, or even of Paul in this situation, because this is the only time in the entire Bible that covering the head in prayer or worship is mentioned. And here we don’t have exactly a full exposition of what the reason is for it. When Paul says we don’t have any such custom, neither do the churches of Christ, he may mean simply that it’s customary in Greek culture for women to cover their heads and to not do so is that of a brazen, loose woman. Some commentators have said that the women in Corinth, because it was a seaport, went to the When the ships came in, the prostitutes wanted to be recognizable to the sailors, and they would shave their heads. Now, I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve heard it most of my life. It could be true. And that would explain why Paul speaks of women shaving their heads as sort of obviously not correct, because he said if a woman is going to cut her hair, let her go ahead and shave it off, which he’s suggesting is obviously something they wouldn’t do. And some say, well, that’s because the prostitutes did that. So it could simply be that he’s telling the Corinthian women to do what is considerate, to not stumble people in that culture, that if only brazen women went around with their head uncovered, then women who were Christians probably shouldn’t do that. That could be what he’s got in mind. But nobody knows, in my opinion, no one knows for sure. And the reason I say that is that I’ve read plenty of commentaries on it, and you get different suggestions. And when you get people equally educated giving different suggestions on some of this stuff, you think, okay, nobody really knows, so they’re giving their best guess. So I don’t know the answer to what the angels have to do with it, but he does seem to be referring to the women ought to have a veil or a covering. the word covering that he uses refers to something that wraps around. So if you can picture a Middle Eastern woman, although this is really Greek women he’s talking about, but something not just a little doily on the head like some Christian denominations do, but actually something that’s covering them up more. And he may simply be saying that when you’re in church, you want to be as modest as you can be because you certainly don’t want to be guilty of distracting people. when they’re there trying to focus on God. And I will say this, for women listening, they may not realize how true this is because women may not have the same issues that men do with some of this. But I’ve had many men come to me and tell me it really bothers them when they go to church and they’re trying to worship and the woman standing in front of them is wearing, you know, immodest clothing and so forth. It’s very distracting to them. And most people say, well, that’s his problem. Well, it is. It actually is. It’s his problem. But it is a problem, and almost all men have it. It’s their problem. And so women, you know, who are not just thinking about themselves and their liberty to do what they want and dress how they want, they should be aware, oh, men have problems with this. So maybe I should restrain myself. from doing the kinds of things that stumble people. And it’s interesting that this chapter comes right after a three-chapter section, chapters 8 through 10, where Paul’s talking about the need not to stumble people even when you have liberty. In that case, he’s talking about eating meat sacrificed to idols. He said you have liberty to do it, but don’t do it if it’s going to stumble somebody. And then it gets right into this head covering thing. So he may be, through this whole section, chapters 8 through 11, may be concerned. about just making sure you’re not stumbling blocks anyone. Those are only some thoughts. I don’t have the final word on that. I don’t think anybody does. But we need to take a break. I hope that’s helpful, Greg. You’re listening to The Narrow Path. We have another half hour coming, but we take a break at this point to let you know we’re listener supported. If you’d like to help us out, you can go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. Everything there is free, but you can donate there at thenarrowpath.com. I’ll be back in 30 seconds. Don’t go away. We have another half hour.
SPEAKER 02 :
The Narrow Path is one feature of the teaching ministry of Steve Gregg. Steve’s philosophy of teaching is to educate, not indoctrinate his listeners. He believes that Christians should learn to think for themselves about the Bible and not be dependent on him or any other teacher for their convictions. We hope to teach Christians how to think, not what to think about the Bible.
SPEAKER 06 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’re live for another half hour, taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or you have a difference of opinion from the host and want to call us, we have at this moment one line open. The number is 844-484-5737. Our next caller is Danny from New Rochelle, New York. Hi, Danny.
SPEAKER 10 :
Hey, Steve. Hey, Steve. How are you? Merry Christmas. Merry Christmas.
SPEAKER 06 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 10 :
Same to you. Yeah. Steve, thanks. I actually have two questions today. Yeah, my first one is… Was Jesus actually born on Christmas, December 25th? Because I’m worried that a pagan holiday, because some people say that. I understand. Yeah, I understand what people say.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, okay. Was Jesus born on December 25th? I couldn’t care less whether he was or not. The Bible never indicates that we are supposed to be celebrating his birth, nor does it suggest that it’s wrong to do so. It’s simply a non-issue in the Bible, and it’s a non-issue for me. There is a good possibility that Jesus was born on December 25th, but we don’t have any certainty about it. There are people who say it’s not likely that it was on December 25th because in the wintertime, they say the shepherds wouldn’t have their sheep out on the hillsides, but that’s not necessarily true. because the climate in Israel is very much like the climate in Southern California. And I know I live in Southern California, and there’s many nights in December that would not be too cold to be out on the hillsides with your sheep. So, I mean, we can’t really say. I mean, it was pretty warm yesterday. It was Christmas here. So, you know, we can’t say that it couldn’t have been December 25th. And some people have calculated from some of the hints in the Bible that about when John was conceived and things like that. And they’ve kind of calculated December 25th could easily be the day. But it doesn’t really matter. When people want to make an issue of that, I think yawn. Could we talk about something that actually I care about or that anyone should care about? Anyway, the answer is we don’t know that he was, but we don’t know that he was not born on 25th of December.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. I have another question.
SPEAKER 06 :
Go ahead.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, my other question is, hold on, what did I want to ask you? One minute. Yeah, what is the main reason that we celebrate Christmas? Is it in significance of the birth of Jesus?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, it depends. I mean, people celebrate whatever they celebrate. Christians who celebrate Christmas usually are, in their own minds, celebrating the birth of Jesus. Now, even if he was not born on December 25th, it wouldn’t matter. You could celebrate my birthday on December 25th if you wanted to, but I wasn’t born on December 25th, but who cares? I’m not much of a celebrant of birthdays, including my own, but if you want to celebrate something, And you don’t know what day it happened. You can pick any day you want to celebrate, or you can celebrate it every day if you want to. The question is, why do people celebrate it? Well, it began to be celebrated by Christians to celebrate the birth of Jesus. Now, how devout those early celebrants were and how much they were really focused on the birth of Jesus probably was an individual question, just like it is now. Lots of Christians celebrate Christmas, but their focus sometimes is more on other things than on Jesus. The gifts, just the good vibes of the season, the day off work. If they’re going to Christmas parties, sometimes they like to party. I mean, those things would not be identical with celebrating the birth of Jesus in a proper mindset, in my opinion. Not that you can’t enjoy all those things. You can enjoy the gifts and the good vibes and, frankly, the Christmas party and still say, well, but I’m celebrating the fact that Jesus was born. The truth is, though, we are quite capable of fooling ourselves and attributing to ourselves motivations. that are much higher than probably are also really active in us. So, you know, I don’t know. Again, I’m not really a celebrant of holidays. I mean, I get together with family members on Christmas because they get together. They get together on Christmas, so I like to be with them. But I enjoy it just as much on a different day, any day. It doesn’t really matter to me. But I’m not everybody. Some people, it’s really important to celebrate Christmas, and you have to ask each of them, why are you doing so? One thing I always thought was interesting is when nonbelievers who don’t believe Jesus is not significant to them, why they would celebrate Christmas, since ostensibly they’re doing it because it’s the day that the birth of Jesus is celebrated. And the very fact that they would do something different on that day than they do any other day of the year is only because of its association with the birth of Jesus. Although they may not in their own lives celebrate Jesus, they may not even think he’s important. But that would almost seem kind of hypocritical. I’m taking a day off work. I’m going to give and receive gifts and so forth on this day that Jesus was born, although I don’t really think he’s important. It’s almost that by celebrating Christmas, One is making oneself vulnerable to the criticism that if you’re saying Jesus is important enough that you celebrate that day, but you don’t obey him during the rest of the year, isn’t your celebration of his birthday kind of hypocritical? Maybe it will condemn you. that you’re arguing that his birth is significant enough for you to take a day off work and have a party, but it’s not significant enough for you to do anything about it the rest of your life. Anyway, I don’t sit in criticism of Christmas, nor do I support it. I think it’s a good custom. I mean, even if it’s not a strictly speaking, even if it’s a secular one, but done by Christians to enjoy their families and things like that, I can’t be critical of it. And as far as your question, is it a pagan holiday, I always thought it was. I mean, that is to say, I was raised in the last 50 or more years believing that Christians had co-opted what was formerly a pagan holiday and made it into Christmas. And it’s only very recently, in fact, this year, that I’ve done some research into it and found out that that wasn’t even true. That’s just what I’ve always heard. Right. it doesn’t seem to be true people say well it was you know uh invictus sold the birth of uh the inconquerable son that the romans celebrated at this time or it was saturnalia another pagan festival around this time uh but but as it turns out there’s no evidence that those were pagan holidays that the christians took over there’s uh In fact, there’s not even any evidence of those dates being celebrated by pagans prior to the time that Christians were already celebrating December 25th, which was as early as the early 200s A.D. Christians were identifying December 25th with the birth of Jesus, and those other pagan holidays, there’s no evidence they were celebrated on that date that early. In fact, seemingly after Christianity became the dominant religion, That seems to be when the pagans began to give significance of their own to December 25th. Anyway, it’s a lot different than I once thought, but it’s also not important to me. So I’ll try to answer your question. But, no, I don’t think you have to worry that if you’re celebrating Christmas that you’re somehow engaged in some pagan thing because I’m not sure anyone can prove that any pagan thing was ever associated with what you’re doing on Christmas. Anyway, I appreciate your call, brother. Let’s talk to Dave from Hooksett, New Hampshire. Dave, welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you so much for taking my call, and I won’t belabor you with all the individual questions because I have conflicting interpretations, if you will, from different people that I trust a lot, and I trust you very much in your knowledge. And that is the significance of the three gifts is what is it really because the You know, some say this for that, and others say that for this, as to what… You’re talking about the gold and frankincense and myrrh?
SPEAKER 06 :
Gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Okay, right.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, because…
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, people have guessed and thought that they represent things like, I mean, I think some people have guessed that the gold maybe speaks of his deity and the frankincense of his, maybe of his death because they sometimes embalmed people with frankincense and the myrrh, I forget what they say. But really there’s nothing valid in making those connections that I know of. The wise men who were probably Persians, They came and brought these gifts from the East, and there’s no suggestion that the gifts were symbolic, that they somehow had insight into Jesus’ deity or that he was going to die, and that they’re somehow representing that by their choice of gifts. I mean, preachers have made those associations probably for centuries, because I guess it makes good preaching. But it doesn’t really… connect with any reality that I know of. Nothing in the Bible suggests it. And to my mind, I think these were simply valuable gifts. I think they came to honor Jesus with valuable stuff. I mean, it would have been probably no different in significance if they brought diamonds and silver and gold and things like that. But they brought probably what was valuable in their lands. which is almost certainly Persia. And, you know, so I don’t think there’s deeper significance to those yes. If there is, the Bible makes absolutely no notice of it. And therefore, if we do, we’re being entirely speculative. which is okay to do. People can be speculative all they want. It’s just not my cup of tea to speculate about that kind of thing. I’d rather just pretty much stick with what we’re told, because speculations are just that, speculations. Hey, I appreciate your call, brother. Let’s talk to Gil in Long Island, New York. Hi, Gil. Welcome.
SPEAKER 01 :
Hi. Merry Christmas to you, and Praise God for your program and also the blind caller that called you, so hopefully you remember me for sure. Thanks be to God. Praise the Lord. I send you a big electronic hug, too, over the air. Thank you so much.
SPEAKER 05 :
Didn’t you write a book about your testimony you sent me years ago?
SPEAKER 01 :
No, but I did write my testimony in print. I learned how to use a computer in 2004. And, you know, I show it because I want to share scripture even with non-believers. You know, Jesus said in Matthew 5, 16, let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven. And, you know, I really want to be a lighthouse in the sea of noise, you know, a voice crying in the wilderness.
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, thanks.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah, thank you. I was wondering if you can expound, I have my friend Linda listening to your program too, which is Hi, Linda. She seems to enjoy it. Thanks be to God. If you could talk about expounding on Psalm 46, verse 10, where it says, Be still and know that I am God. And then the other passage is, Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. I believe that’s Matthew 5, 9. And another one, I hope I remember this right. Psalm 29, verse 1, it says, He will bless his people with peace. In light of Christmas and everything we celebrate now.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah. Well, when Jesus said, do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Some people say, well, he said he didn’t come to bring peace. But he actually did come to bring peace, and he’s not denying that there. That’s what we call a limited negative. What he means is, don’t think that I only came to bring peace. I also came to bring peace. I mean, it’s not going to be all roses here, so there’s some thorns in these roses. I came to bring a good thing, but it’s not unmixed because there’s going to be persecution and there’s going to be people who reject you and things like that. But he’s not denying that he came to bring peace because he did bring peace. In fact, he said in the upper room to his disciples, my peace I give unto you. He said, these things I’ve spoken unto you, John 16, 33, that in me you might have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but be of good cheer, I’ve overcome the world. So, you know, he did come to bring peace. He is the prince of peace, according to John. Isaiah chapter 9 and verse 7. And so, yeah, I mean, when the Bible says several places, lots of places that God gives peace to his people, like Psalm 29 you mentioned, that’s true. And, you know, blessed are the peacemakers, they’ll be called the sons of God. Why? Because it is assumed that sons bear some resemblance to their father. And in those days, especially… Sons often took over their father’s business. Jesus said that he was going about his father’s business. And, you know, the business of God is peacemaking. And those who are peacemakers will be recognized to be his apprentice children. They’re learning to be peacemakers, too. Of course, making peace means bringing reconciliation. between parties that are alienated. And God is a peacemaker in two directions. One, he brings peace between us and him. because it says that we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. We were at war with God, and we surrendered, and he absolved us, and we now have peace with him. But then he also brings peace between us and our neighbor. Ephesians 2 is about that, how God the Jews and the Gentiles were hostile to each other, but Jesus broke down the middle wall of partition and made peace between the Jew and the Gentile by making us one new man in him. So, God makes peace between his enemies and himself and between parties that are enemies of each other. And he mediates between them and brings them into one body in peace and loving relationship. So, That’s what being a peacemaker is, and that’s what we should be about. We should be seeking reconciliation with those that are at odds with us, and we should be doing what we can, when possible, to help reconcile people that we see who are at odds with each other. Because peace is a good thing. Now, the statement in Psalm 46.10, Be still and know that I am God. I don’t know that this is exactly… on the same subject we’re discussing here. Because earlier, in the verses before, it says that God makes wars to cease to the end of the earth. He breaks the bow, he cuts the spear in two, he burns the chariot in fire. And if he’s making wars to cease, he’s, I guess, in that sense, making peace. But he says, be still… He apparently is speaking to the warriors, stop fighting, be still, and know that I’m God. Now, people use this verse devotionally, and I’ve heard it put to music many different ways as sort of a devotional verse, sort of saying, be still my soul, be still my heart. Me, I need to be still. and that God is asking me to be still in my inner man so I can know God in a deeper way. This is a very common use of this verse. I don’t think it’s the way that the psalm meant it, but not that there’s anything wrong with the idea that when I quiet my heart and still my soul, I can meditate on God better. So, I mean, I think that’s why so many Christians have taken that verse and applied it that way. I believe in the psalm it’s talking about bringing peace between warring parties and causing wars to cease. And saying, listen, be still. Like when Jesus said to the raging waves, be still. Peace, be still. He wasn’t telling his disciples to have peace and be still in their souls, though that would have served them well, too, at that moment. But he was commanding the storm to be still. And I think that’s kind of the… analog to what’s going on there in Psalm 4610. Anyway, Gil, have a happy new year. I appreciate your call.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 06 :
Let’s talk again sometime. Tony in Greenville, South Carolina. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah. Hi, Steve. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yes, sir.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay. Mark 9, 38 through 41. It’s the whoever is not against us is for us. They go out, the apostles, John basically says, someone’s driving out demons, and he says, we told him to stop. And then Jesus, I guess, rebukes him. And my question is, saying he was not against us is for us. And this kind of goes in against maybe the idea of, and I’ve heard there’s as many as like 30,000 the dominations out there that kind of claim Christianity. At what point do we use this as a rebuke against those self-righteous Christians? There’s many of them on the internet now, especially in YouTube that are, you know, shooting people down. And believe me, I’m not a, I’m not a faith healer type and I’m not into all that other stuff either, but I tend to use this as a passage of rebuke to them to say that, Hey, They’re preaching Christ now. They might have mistakes. And, you know, Paul and I forget, was it Udi Partwith? I’m forgetting the name.
SPEAKER 05 :
Oh, part of us. Yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah. He had his issues, too. Right. So, I mean, whoever’s not against this is for us. What’s your take on that as a rebuke against the self-righteous Christians?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, you mentioned Paul and Barnabas parting company in Acts 15 and going separate ways when they had previously traveled as one team. They did have a bit of a heated disagreement that caused them to split, but they didn’t have an ongoing animosity or anything like that. They both knew that they were on the same team. In fact, Paul later wrote to the Corinthians saying, And he says, you know, he and Apollos also had some differences. He said, but Apollos, I planted, Apollos watered, and God gave the increase. You know, we’re not exactly the same. We’re not doing the same thing, but we’re on the same project. It’s not our project. It’s God’s project. And so we’re each playing our own role. And it was that with Barnabas, too. Paul seemed to speak favorably of Barnabas in 1 Corinthians 9 when he mentioned that most of the apostles… were married and traveled with a wife and received some remuneration for their labors, whereas he said Barnabas and he seemed to be the only ones who didn’t do that, that they didn’t allow themselves the comforts of a marriage or didn’t charge money or didn’t allow money to be given to them when they were traveling because they didn’t want to give the wrong impression as to what their motives were or whatever. Anyway, he seemed to identify with Barnabas as being on the same page in that respect in 1 Corinthians 9, though they had already parted company before that. So, you know, Christians can disagree and still realize, you know, we’re really on the same team here. In fact, if Christians don’t disagree with each other about anything, they’re probably part of a cult. Because the only time you find two or three people who agree about everything, they’re in a cult together. Christians should be free thinkers. But thinking under the discipline of God’s revelation, too. But Christians who equally respect the revelation that God has given don’t always interpret it the same way. So that’s why you’ve got these denominations. They all have the same Bible, but they’re not all interpreting everything the same way. Now, what do you do about that? Well, I think, again, the question is, if they’re not against us, they’re for us. That is to say, if they’re not against… you know, the kingdom of God that we are on the side of, then therefore the kingdom of God. Jesus, when he said us, meant himself and the disciples, which was essentially the kingdom of God, the church. And we’re still part of that. And so anyone who’s really in favor of Christ, anyone who’s really seeking to please Christ, whatever other differences we may have with them, They’re really one of us. They’re with us in the things that matter. Now, you might say, but they don’t agree with us in some other things, even if those things don’t matter as much. Isn’t that important? Well, maybe. I mean, some things have differing degrees of importance. I would say the things that matter most is, does a person love Christ? Have they devoted themselves to him? Is their whole life being lived out with a mind to obey and please him? If that’s true, then I don’t care what other doctrines they hold. Now, on the other hand, that doesn’t mean I won’t discuss with them the differences in doctrine or even debate them if they want to. But we can debate and discuss without alienating. At least we should be able to. If we can’t, we shouldn’t do it. But I can, and I’ve done it with many people. I have a lot of Christian friends who don’t agree with me about stuff. And we debate, we discuss, we try to convince each other. But all the while, we realize that the things that we’re disagreeing about are not things that are essential for that person to come over on our side about. I realize there’s a certain temperament that might say, well, then why even argue? People find arguing unpleasant. It depends. Arguing can be very unpleasant, or it can be educational. I like arguing with somebody I like. I debate a lot of people, and I do not like to debate people that I don’t like. I prefer to debate people I do like. Now, I don’t debate anyone I agree with on the subject, so obviously I disagree with everybody I debate with, but I’ll usually turn down a debate if I know I don’t care for the person. Because I’d like it to be two Christians who respect each other, maybe like each other somewhat. I mean, lots of people I’ve debated I’ve really liked. And I consider myself to be, at least from my side, friends with them, the disagreement. So, I mean, to say, if they’re serving God, if they’re serving Christ, the best they know how. I don’t care how many things they disagree with me about, theologically. If they’re serving Christ, They’re not against us. They’re for us. I guess the question is against us about what and for us about what. If someone’s for us, that is they’re following Christ and they believe what we do about him. They can be against us on other subjects, but that doesn’t define the relationship between us. We don’t think of them as someone who’s an enemy, but as somebody who’s a partner in the gospel. All right. Do I have time for another call? We’ll try. James from Hartford, Connecticut. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.
SPEAKER 12 :
Thank you. I just thank you very much for your program and I want to wish you and all the listeners a very Merry Christmas. Thank you. Thank you. So you sort of got what I was talking about because I’m coming from sort of a different denomination. I wanted to ask about the written… gospel versus the unwritten gospel. Because for the first 300 years, most of what Christians did was unwritten. And I just wanted to get your take on that. Okay.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, it’s not actually true that most of what Christians believed was unwritten for 300 years. It was well into the 4th century before the selection of books that became officially attributed to the New Testament, what we call the canon of Scripture. The selection was not complete until over 300 years after Christ. But all the books that became part of that collection were written in the first century and were available to the church. All four of the Gospels, for example, they were in circulation. They were written in the first century and they were in circulation in the days of the apostles. And so it’s true that there were some books of the New Testament that were also written at that time that there was some uncertainty as to whether they belonged in the collection we call the New Testament. And that final decision about some of the books wasn’t really final until almost 400 A.D. But as far as the Gospels are concerned… Right from the very beginning, they were all recognized as the true writings of the apostles. So there never was any time when the gospel really wasn’t available like that. I’m out of time. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us. Have a good weekend.
