Dive into an engaging episode where Steve Gregg unravels the complexities of amillennialism, explaining its historical stance and scriptural foundations. The discussion extends to a lively analysis on understanding how God’s will and justice intersect with our worldly perspectives, especially in the face of current global events and historical biblical interpretations.
SPEAKER 1 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path Radio Broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we’re live for an hour, commercial free, taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith you’d like to discuss on the program, you see things perhaps differently than the host and want to bring some balance or correction, feel free to do that. The number for you to call to do so is 844-484-5737. I’m looking at a switchboard with a few lines open so you could get through right now if you call. The number is 844-484-5737. A couple of quick announcements. They’re not new. Well, one of them might be. And that is that Wednesday night, tomorrow night, we would normally have our monthly Zoom meeting. We do that the first Wednesday of every month generally, but I will be, because of my travels indisposed, I won’t be able to do that. And therefore, we’re canceling that Zoom meeting for tomorrow night. I apologize. Lord willing. What’s that? Wednesday. This is Tuesday, isn’t it? I think this is Tuesday, yeah. My wife and I can’t agree what day of the week it is. All right, yeah, this is Tuesday, so that’s tomorrow night. We’ve canceled it. And let’s see. Then there’s this weekend on Friday night. I have this debate we’ve been announcing in Onalaska, Wisconsin. And that’s, you know, on Friday night I’m having a debate over the question of the – it’s a matter of premillennialism versus amillennialism, basically, with a man named Joel Richardson. Now, yes, if you’re familiar with Joel Richardson, it’s that one. He’s pretty well known. He wasn’t really very well known to me until he contacted me and wanted me to do this debate. So when I agreed, I looked him up, and I know something. He’s actually written some books and is pretty well known in some circles, mainly premillennial circles. I’m amillennial, so that’s what we’re going to be debating about. That’s this Friday night in Wisconsin. There will be a live stream. You can go to our website. And there should be a link to the live stream if we have one. So there’s that. So no Zoom meeting tomorrow. A couple days later, we do have this debate in Wisconsin. And then I should probably start mentioning that in less than two weeks, I’m doing a teaching itinerary up in Northern California somewhat. I think the earliest date we have scheduled is in Petaluma on March 15th. That’s a Sunday. And then I’m going to be teaching in the Santa Cruz area for most of the week. And then by the end of the week, I’m teaching one place in Monterey and then a place in the San Jose area, Morgan Hill. So those are some of the areas, those of you living in that area certainly know all those places. These will all be listed at our, I think, at our webpage, thenarrowpath.com under the tab that says announcements. So That’s in less than two weeks from now. I’ll be in the northern coast and and the area there. All right. I guess that’s the central coast. Yeah, because the California’s northern coast goes very far north. It’s just the population doesn’t go very far north. But yeah, that’s the central coast of California. All right. We’re going to go to the phones now and we’ll talk to. It looks like our lines are mostly full.
SPEAKER 03 :
uh dwight in denver colorado welcome to the narrow path good to hear from you hi steve uh we know that uh god takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and yet moses the children of israel when pharaoh and his army were drowned they sang a song and appeared to rejoice that they had been drowned in the sea and uh So I’m wondering, with Khomeini and all his wicked men in Iran are being killed, what should our reaction be to that?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, there’s many things that God sees as necessary, which are not pleasant to him. It says in 2 Peter 3 that God’s not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But God also operates in the real universe, in the real world, where unfortunately not everything he would like to happen does, and many do not repent, and therefore many perish. Likewise, in Ezekiel, when God said he had no pleasure in the death of the wicked, he followed that by saying, but rather that the wicked should turn from their evil ways and live. So God really ultimately doesn’t want anyone to die or to be damned or to perish, but on the other hand, he wants them all to repent. Now, In the real world, people don’t all repent. So the next question is, well, what does God think should be done to them? Well, the wages of sin is death, which means all of us who have sinned are going to die. Some people are great, unrepentant sinners. Others have been great sinners but have repented and are in a different status because of that. But everyone’s going to die. Now, those who don’t repent, you know, they’re going to die unprepared to meet God. That’s what God doesn’t want. God doesn’t like to see wicked people perish. He knows everyone’s going to perish, whether they’re wicked or not. But when the wicked perish, they die unprepared to meet God. And God wishes that all would die whenever their time comes on good terms with him. Now, as far as when the best time for anyone in particular is to die, since all are going to at some point, God has his own analysis of those things. God knows very well. what the consequences will be of somebody dying today or being allowed to live longer and dying at some later time. And I believe, not everyone maybe does, but I believe that God makes the choice of that, especially about believers, but possibly even about nonbelievers. I mean, Jesus said that not a sparrow falls to the ground apart from the will of your father. Now, that doesn’t mean that God doesn’t. wants sparrows to die particularly, but he’s saying they don’t die until it’s his will for that to happen. They will. All sparrows die, but they don’t die unless God thinks it’s their time. And Jesus makes that point to say, and how much more are you worth than sparrows? That is, people. People are worth a lot more than sparrows. So if God’s keeping tabs on and even orchestrating the lifespan and the time of death of even sparrows, It can hardly be thought that he doesn’t do the same thing for persons made in his own image who are much more significant than sparrows. That’s the point Jesus is making. So I think that God decides when each should die. Now, we might say, well, then we shouldn’t favor war or capital punishment because let God take them out. Well, actually, sometimes, you know, God takes them out through disease. Sometimes he takes them out through death. accidental deaths. Sometimes he takes them out through, you know, allowing some criminal violence. As he allowed to happen to both Jesus and Stephen and Paul and the apostles, they were all killed by criminal behavior and persecution. And then, of course, some people die in war. In fact, a very large number of people throughout history have died in war, some good, some bad people. The point is it doesn’t, you know, the main concern is not in what way people die. but whether they died at the time that God was ready for them to go, knowing that they were going to do no more good than they have already done. If somebody’s going to get better, if somebody’s going to repent, but they haven’t yet, I don’t think God will let them die. And if he does let people die, I believe it’s because he knows they won’t repent. Again, not everyone agrees with my theology on that, but I believe that. Which means that if somebody dies, a good person or a bad person, In the great scheme of things, God is orchestrating the time of deaths. The fact that everyone’s going to die is a given. But the time of each person’s death is not known to us, but God. So I believe that, let’s just say a war breaks out. Now, every war I’ve ever heard of has injustices involved in it. People die who were not particularly capital criminals necessarily. Civilians die and so forth. there are great injustices that take place which result in many deaths, just like Jesus’ death, which was obviously redeemed by God, but was brought about by injustices of the Sanhedrin and of Pontius Pilate and those who turned on him. Those are injustices. So we know that God doesn’t approve of injustice, but there’s plenty of injustice around, and God will Since people are going about the business of doing unjust things, God sometimes steers them in the direction that will result in what he wants to happen in the end. Now, I don’t know what you’re asking about current events. I don’t know what God wants to happen in the end here. I don’t know what the Middle Eastern endgame is as far as God is concerned. But I have to say that though people… Now, I’m not going to blame anybody for the death of these wicked men. It might have been a perfectly just thing to do. I’m not on the inside of these things. You get the official report in the news from the officials who tell you what they want you to know. So I never assume that I have the full picture, whether it’s about the Ukrainian-Russian war or Israel and Hamas or now this new war in Iran. I figure that the information I will get is the information that people allow me to get. And I would have to do a great deal of research to know, you know, to be able to say, okay, this was definitely not a good idea or this was a good idea. I have to assume the people who are making the decisions have done that kind of consideration. They may be making a good or a bad decision. I don’t know. And I probably, I don’t know if I ever will know because I just don’t have all the intel that they have. From what I understand, and of course, there’s going to be people who tell me I’m wrong about this, but from what I understand from the information given to me, Israel felt that they were threatened by the nuclear program in Iran, and they acted upon it. We’re their allies, and we joined with them in it. Now, as far as if that’s a good thing or a bad thing, again, I don’t know. I think war in general is a bad thing, but some wars are going to happen, and therefore the question of who comes out winning and who comes out losing is, has either more or less desirable results. And God, if we’re praying God’s will be done on earth as it is in heaven, we have to kind of trust that these things that are out of our control will nonetheless be orchestrated in some way for God’s will to be done. And that doesn’t mean that things will look better there after it’s all over. Things could get worse because we don’t know what God’s will is. God might be punishing a nation for their wickedness. God certainly might punish the United States for our wickedness, you know, The fact that the things turn out badly from our perspective doesn’t mean that they aren’t what we deserved or what God intended to come about from this, because God does judge among the nations. And likewise, even if a really seemingly good result comes about from any given war, you know, we just have to say, you know, God apparently wanted that to happen right now. It doesn’t mean he favors us necessarily. I don’t. I don’t try to get behind the curtain where God is and decide what’s God doing back there. Because history, especially geopolitical history, is full of all kinds of surprises. I will say this. I know dispensationalists, which I’m not one, who believe that Trump is the Antichrist and things like that. And that he’s creating a false peace in the Middle East because the dispensationalists always believed that that’s what the Antichrist would do. And, you know, I don’t see the Bible saying that. I don’t see the Bible predicting that. So I don’t have that particular view they do. But what’s interesting about that is most dispensationalists think that Iran or Persia, as they see it in the Bible, or Islam, that they believe that that’s going to play a major role in the end-time scenario of threatening Israel. And, of course, we don’t know how the current skirmishes are going to turn out. But at the moment, it looks like the way things are likely to turn out, would render Iran not really that much of a threat to Israel. They might have to rethink their eschatological maps, depending on how things turn out. We’ll just see.
SPEAKER 03 :
So, with the issue of Moses and the children of Israel, it appears that they are rejoicing and singing and dancing at the result of the Egyptians drowning, and yet that seems to contradict where the Lord says he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, no, the response of the Israelites is not necessarily always going to be the same as that of God. Almost every people I would think of who have been enslaved for hundreds of years and are suddenly liberated, I think would be dancing in the streets. In fact, there are people in Iran who are kind of responding that way to the current events. They feel like they’ve been oppressed for a long time and they’re rejoicing. Now, the fact that they’re rejoicing is a natural thing. People are happy when good things happen to them. And when they look at the smoldering bodies of the people who were killed in their liberation or the floating Egyptians floating in the Dead Sea or on the shores, You know, yeah, it’s true. Their sympathy for their oppressors is probably at a very low ebb and certainly eclipsed by their enjoyment of the freedom that they now have. I mean, that’s normal human reaction to things. And God, he’s already said in the very verse you’re talking about, which is, you know, Ezekiel 33, 11. He says, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked should turn from their evil ways and live. In other words, I have a preference about this. But one of these two things is going to happen. Either they’re going to repent or they’re going to die. And I’d rather they’d repent than die. But that doesn’t mean that if they don’t repent, then he doesn’t want them to die. He knows that one of those two things is going to happen. He says that, you know, and he says, turn at my reproof, for why will you die? That’s the options he’s putting out there to the people. Turn, turn, he says, for why will you die? He doesn’t want them to die. He wants them to turn. But if they don’t turn, they’re going to die. And when people who are committed to evil and will not repent continue to do harm and injustice in the world, there is a certain satisfaction that we would all take, and I think God does a certain amount, in removing the injustice, though he would rather have had to resolve that without them dying. You know, I was thinking about this today. You know, whenever we watch a movie, in most movies, if they’re dramas or if they’re adventure or whatever, there’s some victim and some criminal or bad guy, And the movie begins by showing how bad they are. And then some hero usually arises before the movie’s over. And at the end, the bad guy gets what he deserves. And in the meantime, we’re rooting for the hero to take out the bad guy the whole time. And, you know, it’s at the end when the bad guy gets what he deserves, we feel relieved. We feel like, okay, the scale’s been balanced here. Not really because the victims don’t come back. They don’t get rewarded. But it’s better than nothing. Better that this guy doesn’t keep doing those things. I mean, everybody feels relief when the guy who’s killing and victimizing people is taken out. Now, we might say, yeah, but he had a mother. His mother can’t be happy. And, you know, that could have been my child. Or my child might not be any better than that person. You know, I certainly wouldn’t rejoice to see my child die. True. True, you wouldn’t. And it’s a terrible thing that some people choose an evil life. And those consequences of that evil life befall them. The only thing that would be worse is if they chose that evil life and the consequences of an evil life did not befall them. And they just simply got away with it and there was no justice. So I think that’s how God looks at the whole world scene. There’s people who victimize other people. The victims, if they die, if they’re innocent, they die in good terms with God because God is on the side of the innocent. But those who choose evil and who harm others, God wants them to repent. If they won’t, well, then he wants them out of the picture. And that’s sort of the way world history has gone. And God has his preferences. But the fact that he doesn’t want them to, it doesn’t mean he’s not going to have to, in the course of justice, cause them to die. I need to take another call, Dwight. Thanks for your call. James in Hartford, Connecticut is next. James, welcome.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yes, hi. How are you doing, Steve?
SPEAKER 04 :
I’m fine.
SPEAKER 05 :
Thank you. I wanted to bless you and thank you for all the good things that you’re doing for us, helping us. And I just had a question from what you were talking about yesterday. You were talking about some of your experiences and some things like that, and I just wanted to ask you if you wanted to to share some experiences that, you know, something that, you know, that sort of gives you some more insight into God’s character and stuff like that.
SPEAKER 04 :
The truth is, you know, when I give anecdotes from my life, that’s not really what I’m here for. I mean, I give them sometimes to illustrate something in a question I’m answering. But if people have curiosity about my life, my walk with God, I’ve written a fairly long auto bio that’s posted on our website. It’s like 11 or 12 pages long. It’s not short. And, you know, that tells about how God has worked in my life. I’d rather allow, since I have my lines full, people to do what the program is for, ask Bible questions so I can help them out there.
SPEAKER 05 :
Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you for all you do. You really help us.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, James. Hey, if you go to thenarrowpath.com, there’s a tab that says host bio there, and you’ll find my rather extensive life story there.
SPEAKER 05 :
Okay, thank you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, James. Thanks. God bless you. Let’s see. Rob in Oceanside, California. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Hey, good afternoon, Steve.
SPEAKER 06 :
Hey, regarding Genesis 2, somewhere about verse 9, God has created all the living trees in the Garden of Eden, created the tree of life. He created the tree of life. good and evil, the knowledge of good and evil, tells Adam down a little bit further that he can’t eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but he doesn’t say anything about the tree of life. I just found that interesting coming across that the other day in a study we were doing with some other guys. I wanted to get your take on that, that the tree of life is there all the time and they could have eaten it before. theoretically, the tree where… Let me answer your question there.
SPEAKER 04 :
It is not a case of it not being mentioned. We see in verse 16 and 17, the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden you may freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. So every tree in the garden that they could eat included the tree of life. They were allowed to eat all the trees. Only one tree was forbidden. So it does say something about the tree of life. And then later on, of course, after man sins, because God told him in verse 17 that if they eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they’ll die. Well, as we see, they did eat of that tree. And God said in verse 22 of chapter 3, Chapter 23, verse 22 says, Then the Lord said, Behold, the man has become like one of us to know good and evil. Now lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat and live forever. Then he goes on and bans him from the tree of life. But notice he says, We don’t want men at this point to reach out to the tree of life and eat it. He would live forever then. So we can see that man was made capable of death. He was made mortal. But he could also be immortal if he ate of the tree of life. Man was naturally mortal. Only God is immortal, the Bible says. No one’s immortal except God by nature. But man was made mortal, but not necessarily, you know, mortal in the sense that he could live forever if he ate of the tree of life. In my understanding, the tree of life was to be eaten of regularly, not just once. And the reason I say that is because in the book of Revelation, chapter 22, verses 1 through 3, we see the tree of life is there in the New Jerusalem. And it says it brings forth its fruit 12 times a year. In other words, apparently once a month, it produces fruit. Well, that would suggest that people were expected to eat it regularly or repeatedly. If it was just that everyone takes a bite of it, and then they can dispense with it because they now have eternal life. That would be one thing. That’s kind of like the once saved, always saved idea. We eat of Jesus. Okay, we accepted Jesus, so now we’re saved no matter what we do, some people say. But I believe when Jesus said whoever eats of me, eats my flesh and drinks my blood, will have everlasting life, it’s in the present tense. Whoever is eating, whoever is drinking of me, that is whoever is continually consuming, Him, who is the tree of life, I think, is a picture. I think there’s a real tree, but I think it was a type of Christ. And so Adam and Eve, like us, like everybody, they created mortal, but they could have everlasting life if they eat of the tree of life. And that’s what’s mentioned in Genesis. Now, in our case, of course, it’s if we eat of Christ. Christ is the tree of life for us. And as we partake of him and continue to do so, we will have immortality. In the next life, we will live forever with him. We participate in his immortality. And I think Adam and Eve, I think they were supposed to eat of the tree of life on a regular basis, and as long as they did, it would prolong their lives. Though they were naturally mortal, they would never actually have to die if they continued to eat of that tree. And what happened when God said, in the day you eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you’ll die, What happened that day? God cut them off from the tree of life. And therefore, their natural mortality became their doom. And they would not have an everlasting life because they couldn’t eat the tree of life. That’s how I understand those two trees and what was going on there. Okay.
SPEAKER 06 :
I was just wondering if they had eaten the tree first. the tree of life first, and then did the knowledge of good and evil tree. That might have been a problem.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, not necessarily. Of course, that’s not the way it would happen. Let’s just say they had eaten of the tree of life. Well, that would prolong their life until the next time they ate of it, and that until the next time, and that until the next time. Got it. At some point, whenever they ate of the forbidden tree, they would be cut off from the tree of life so that they’d no longer have you know, the access to keep participating in eternal life. Okay, great. Thank you, Steve. Okay, Rob. Thanks for your call, brother. All right. Good talking to you. All right. We have a break coming up here real quick. And then we have another half hour. We’re halfway. We’re at the bottom of the hour. We have a whole hour program and another half hour to go. You’re listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg. We’ve been doing this Monday through Friday for about 29 years now. And it’s been always pretty much the same. If you listen to our programs that are like 25 years old, it’s pretty much like the ones now. People call in. There’s no commercial breaks, no sponsors, no underwriters. Just an hour of taking calls and answering questions. And it must be working for people because they’ve supported it. It’s a listener-supported ministry. If you’d like to help us stay on the air for another 29 years, I can’t guarantee it because I don’t think I’ll live that long. But you can write to us at The Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. I’ll be right back. We’ve got another half hour. Stay tuned.
SPEAKER 07 :
In a 16-lecture series entitled The Authority of Scriptures, Steve Gregg not only thoroughly presents the case for the Bible’s authority, but also explains specifically how this truth is to be applied to a believer’s daily walk and outlook. The Authority of Scriptures, as well as hundreds of other stimulating lectures, can be downloaded in MP3 format without charge from our website, thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 04 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we’re live for another half hour. Taking your calls. Right now our lines are full, but if you call in a little while, we might find a line has opened up. The number is 844- Our next call is coming from Barbara in Roseville, Michigan. Hi, Barbara. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, hi, Steve. You know, I was listening to the question yesterday about Jesus being in the grave for three days and three nights, and the person wanted to give up on God because she knew it didn’t add up. But I can add some insight to that to clear up that. Jesus said so that he… How did he say this? So Jonah was in the belly of the whale. He would be in the heart of the earth. Jesus defines the heart of the earth. He likens it to Jonah. Jonah wasn’t dead for three days and three nights. He was in a place of intense suffering at the hand of God for the wages of sin. So the three days and the three nights starts in the Garden of Gethsemane when he’s anxious and full of fear, when they whipped him all night and all of that. That’s how you define the heart of the earth. Jesus defines it. It is not death. The heart of the earth, he said, like Jonah. He didn’t say like Lazarus. He said like Jonah. So it’s a place of intense suffering for the wages of sin. So the three days and the three nights is accounted for.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right. Well, thank you. All right. We’ll talk next to David in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Hi, David. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 08 :
Hi, Steve. I just wanted to ask you if you’ve read any books by Jonathan Cahn or if you know much about him and any insight you might have about him. Also, too, in regard to end times and events like the war in Iran right now, I’m sure you get asked questions all the time about, you know, what’s the significance… of this in the Bible. I was just wondering, what kind of response do you usually give to that?
SPEAKER 04 :
All right. Well, as far as Jonathan Cahn is concerned, back when his book Harbinger came out, somebody sent me a copy. I didn’t read it immediately because it didn’t look interesting to me. And then I kept hearing people talk about it. So I thought I will read it. And I did. And it still wasn’t very interesting to me. When I say interesting, I think he’s an interesting writer. I think he makes interesting connections. I think, you know, it’s not a boring book. And that’s why it’s a bestseller. That’s why he became rather famous is from that book. But he’s an interesting writer. But it didn’t interest me in terms of his conclusions or whatever because he takes the Bible in a different way than I do. You know, he takes a verse in Isaiah and then he, like, likens it to 9-11 and America and things like that. Now, I do believe that, I think that some of the things that happen in the Bible can be, there are lessons we can learn from them for any time. for our time or any time, but he was just specifically using Isaiah, which was talking about the northern kingdom of Israel being destroyed by the Assyrians, and saying, and that kind of, he made it sound like he kind of predicted 9-11. Now, I don’t believe that anything in modern history has been predicted in the Bible. Now, I realize, yeah, I said something like that In my debate with Michael Brown, he said, wow, like how dare you say such an outlandish thing. Well, if somebody is surprised to hear that I believe that when Isaiah spoke, he spoke of things that happened to the northern kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians and eventually happened to the southern kingdom of Judah by Babylon. And eventually that Jesus came, as Isaiah predicted. And when you go to Jeremiah, you find that he’s talking. about the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon and the return from Babylon in the Persian rule. And he also mentions the Messiah coming the first time. When you go through all the, Ezekiel, same thing. Ezekiel talks about the destruction of Jerusalem and the return of the exiles from Babylon. He also mentions Jesus coming the first time. And move on through. As you go through the prophets, they’re talking about things that happened. That happened shortly after, or maybe a few centuries after they wrote them. But I don’t believe that they write of things that are specific events in world geopolitics that have anything to do with the period of time after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Now, I will say, Isaiah and Jeremiah and many of these prophets do speak of the inauguration of the Messianic kingdom when Jesus came. And he established his kingdom. Daniel talks about this. I mean, lots of prophets talk about this because that’s the focus of history as far as God’s concerned. Jesus came, died, rose again. He’s seated at the right hand of God. He’s been given all authority in heaven and earth. There’s no more to be given to him. If he’s got all the authority in heaven and earth, there simply isn’t any left that he hasn’t got right now. And he’s been reigning. And, uh, And that’s what the Bible teaches. And so that’s the focal part of history. And, of course, the destruction of Jerusalem shortly after Jesus ascended is also mentioned in many of the prophets. Jesus said that the fall of Jerusalem would be so that all that was written will be fulfilled. He said in Luke 21 when he’s talking about this. So, you know, the major focus of the prophets is about the coming of the Messiah and and the abandoning of the old order as a result and the inauguration of a new covenant. Now, that’s what I find. Now, I didn’t used to see it that way. I was taught dispensational things when I read the prophets. I was told by my teachers that these things were about modern Middle Eastern developments and Russia and China and the European common market, as we called it back then. We call it the European community or whatever now. You know, even America was thought to be in there by some people, though most people marveled that it wasn’t and assumed that that must mean America would be destroyed in the last days before these things happened. But the assumption was, of all my teachers, was when you’re reading these prophets, you’re reading about the end times. And the more I studied the Bible and taught it verse by verse and, you know, put it in its context, the more I realized that, wait, these guys said this was going to happen, and it happened. It happened just like they said. The prophets, their words are fulfilled. And they never came out and said, and there will be another fulfillment in the end times. In fact, to my mind, there’s no indicator in the Old Testament prophets that their prophecies are postponed somehow to the end of the world. And so I don’t see any modern developments as fulfillments of a prophecy. with the exception of the establishment of the church 2,000 years ago and its continuing growth like a mustard seed or like a little stone growing into a great mountain to fill the whole earth. That’s still going on. But as far as something, some event in history being inaugurated at some future point, I don’t think the Old Testament talks about that. Now, obviously, I’m apparently in the minority about that. Almost all the popular teachers will say that’s wrong. But saying I’m wrong. and showing that I’m wrong would be two different things. In other words, they say, that’s nonsense. These passages certainly tarp of the end times. Okay, well, where I want to see the argument made, I don’t want to see assertions. I want to see evidence. I want to see arguments made. I’ve never heard them made. The teachers get up there and they say, this passage in Isaiah or Jeremiah, Ezekiel, tarp of the end times, and they never say why I should believe that when, in fact, all of them were fulfilled. in Babylonian times or in Roman times or some time like that. And those times are long ago. And when they say, but it’s at the end times. Well, where in the passage do you find that? I used to teach what they teach until I asked myself the same question. Where do you find any statements here that tell us these guys are talking about the end of the world? And the answer was, and I discovered that by being forced to to teach the whole Bible, verse by verse, every year. And I didn’t teach every book every year. I taught every book many times. I did teach most of the prophets every year, verse by verse. And I had to ask myself, okay, where is the passage here? Where’s the phrase? Where’s the verse that says this is going to happen at the end of time, at the end of an age of the church? And frankly, as an honest person, not with any agendas at all, I just say, well, there’s nothing in there that says that. And my opinion is that those who insist that these passages are about some future thing, about our present time, are – they either haven’t thought through what they were taught about it, which is probably the case in most instances – or else they don’t care to think it through, and they just realize that what they’re saying draws large crowds who want to make some kind of sense of the craziness of the modern times, and they want to think that the Bible gives a clue as to what’s going to happen next. It does not, in my opinion, nor should it. Jesus said to his disciples, it’s not for you to know the times or the seasons that the Father has put in his own authority, but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you’ll be my witnesses. In Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to the outermost parts of the earth. So in other words, instead of speculating about what might happen in the future, Jesus, that’s not for you to know. God knows that stuff. Just do your business. Just be witnesses to the whole world and get that job done. And then leave it up to the Father. to how things are going to shake out at the end. But in my opinion, because it’s not for us to know, I don’t think God revealed to the prophets the answers to those questions we have. The prophet’s not there for our curiosity. They’re there because God tells people things on a need-to-know basis, and none of us need to know. You know, I have a friend who always wants to talk to me about all this stuff shaping up in the Middle East and so forth, and he quotes all kinds of scriptures all over the Bible for it, scriptures that I’m quite aware of and which, frankly, I know to be about something else. But my main question is, yeah, okay, so let’s just say you’re right about all this. So what? Why do I need to know this? How is this going to change my life? Don’t I have an assignment already from Christ? Shouldn’t I be about that? Is there going to somehow be an improvement of my efforts in obedience to Christ if I have some kind of a chart of the end times given to me? Why do I need to know that? Jesus said it’s not for you to know, and I’m willing for God to be the one who knows. Because, frankly, it doesn’t change anything if I do. So, yeah, I’ve tried to stave off. Just morbid curiosity, which is what most Christians read the Bible, the prophets anyway, in Revelation to satisfy. They’ve got morbid curiosity about what’s going to happen next over there. You know what? If you just serve Christ day by day, you’ll soon find out what’s going to happen there because it’ll happen. And it won’t have made a difference that you didn’t know beforehand. Just follow God. That’s our whole thing. So, no, I don’t think there’s anything over there in the Middle East right now that has any relevance that I know of to anything in the Bible. All right. Let’s talk next to Randall in Tacoma, Washington. Randall, welcome.
SPEAKER 09 :
Hi, Steve. Thank you so much for taking my call. You mentioned at the top of that hour that you are an amillennialist. Can you explain what that is for your listening audience?
SPEAKER 04 :
Sure. Amillennialism is, unbeknownst to many, the view that was held by most of the Christians throughout history. The church held this view. Practically unanimously, from about the 3rd century, or at least the 4th century at the latest, until the 19th century. So, at least 15 centuries, it was the primary view of the church. But since premillennialism, especially dispensational premillennialism, has become more popular since the 1800s, many Western Christians have never even heard anything other than what we call premillennialism. Now, what are the differences between Pre-millennialism, the word millennial, of course, is from the word millennium, which means a thousand years. Where does the pre come in? Well, pre-millennial means that Jesus will come back before the millennium. A pre-millennial return of Christ is what they believe in. So on that view, Jesus will come back. And when he does, it won’t be the end of the world. It won’t even be a new heavens, new earth at all, although the church always believed it would be until the 1800s. Well, not always, but almost always. Well, instead he’s going to set up a thousand year temporary reign on earth. Every verse in the Old Testament that speaks of the Messiah’s reign and its duration says it’s forever and ever and has no end. But they believe it will be a thousand years long. And then at the end of that, something else will happen. The earth will be destroyed and there will be new heavens and new earth and that will last forever. Now, the amillennial view says holds that the only place in the Bible which mentions a thousand years, which is one chapter, is Revelation 20. Revelation 20 is the only chapter in the Bible that mentions a thousand years. So the whole millennium question and what it is, is going to depend on how we interpret that one chapter. Now, for most of history, Christians understood Revelation 20 in a very symbolic way. And why? Well, I think they noticed that Revelation’s got a lot of symbolism in it. They weren’t as averse to symbolism as some modern dispensationalists are. Dispensationalism, as one of its main talking points, is we need to take the Bible literally. And if you don’t take it literally, you’re compromising. Well, no. No, we need to take the Bible the way it was intended to be understood. Some of the Bible’s written in poetry with lots of metaphors and hyperbole and that kind of thing. Some of the Bible’s written in parables. Jesus told a lot of parables. There’s some parables in the prophets, too. A lot of the Bible’s written in apocalyptic style. Not a lot of it, but Daniel and Zechariah and Revelation are written apocalyptic style. Some of it’s letters and some of it’s straight historical narrative. There’s lots of different kinds of literature in the Bible, and you don’t apply the same exact hermeneutic or method of interpretation to every part. And back in the days when people were less simplistic and understood the Bible more nuanced, they recognized that books like Revelation and some others were written as apocalyptic literature, which is written in symbols. That’s why Jesus is called a lamb there, which he was not literally a lamb, but he’s called that a couple dozen times in the book of Revelation called the lamb. In fact, he’s described in Revelation 5-6 as a lamb that has seven eyes and seven horns. I don’t know anybody who believes Jesus really looks like that. It’s a symbol. the beast is an animal, which is a composite of several wild animals, a bear, a lion, a leopard, and some other beast, and seven heads and ten horns. And we know that’s similar because we’re told the seven heads represent seven mountains and seven kings, and the ten horns represent ten kings. The beast is not a real animal, and yet it’s described throughout the book of Revelation as an animal. And so likewise, the whole book is known to be written in symbols. The symbols mean something, but they’re not literal. And so the church has generally understood, and I understand in Revelation 20, the only place in the Bible that mentions the thousand years is that the thousand years is symbolic. It symbolizes a very long time, a very common way that the word thousand is used in the Bible, though usually not of years. But, you know, Catalan 1,000 hills or covenant 2,000 generations or many other thousands mentioned above, they’re never really literal. They just mean a big number. And the binding of Satan at the beginning of Revelation 20, which begins the 1,000 years, is identified as what Jesus accomplished at the cross, which the New Testament tells us he bound the strong man, which is Satan. It tells us he disarmed the principalities and powers and made a triumph over them. In the cross, in Colossians 2.15, it says in Hebrews 2.14 that Jesus, through death, destroyed him who has the power of death, that is, the devil. Now, these are largely metaphors and not literal, but so is the binding of a dragon. Satan’s not literally a dragon. With a chain, probably not a real chain. in a bottomless pit with a lid, this is impressionistic, just like much of the other passages that talk about how Jesus conquered Satan. It’s a picture of what Jesus accomplished at his first coming. And at the end of the thousand years, in verse 9, when Satan is leading a final rebellion again against God and his people, It says fire from heaven comes down, Revelation 20, verse 9, and destroys them. Well, Paul said that’s what happens at the second coming of Christ. In 2 Thessalonians 1.8, it says Jesus will come in flaming fire and all his holy angels in flaming fire. Taking vengeance on those who don’t know God and who don’t obey the gospel. 2 Thessalonians 2 says he’ll destroy the man of sin with the brightness of his appearing. This is depicted, I think, in Revelation 20 verse 9 as fire from heaven. Now, the thousand years falls between the binding of Satan at the first coming of Christ and the destruction of Satan, you know, at his second coming. So the thousand years represents the whole time between the first and second coming of Christ. Then there’s a judgment, a resurrection, those kinds of things, which the rest of the scripture always places at the second coming of Christ. So the church, reasonably enough, I think. always believed the thousand years was symbolic, not of a literal thousand years that Jesus would reign on earth when he comes back, which is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible as ever happening. But it was taking in the elements of the symbolism that are explained in other passages, so that the amillennial view holds that the so-called millennium simply is symbolic for the age we call the age of the church. And by the way, Peter and Paul both knew nothing about a millennium, Peter said in chapter 3 of 2 Peter, 2 Peter 3, verses 10 through 13, he said that, you know, the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. I take that to be the second coming of Christ because Jesus used that imagery. Peter said the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night in which the heavens will be dissolved and the elements will melt with a fervent heat and the earth and all its works will be burned up. And then he says in verse 13, but we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and new earth. Now, according to the premillennial view, the new heavens and new earth come after the millennium. According to the premillennial view, Jesus comes back. He sets up the millennial reign. After that comes the new heavens and new earth. Peter knew nothing of it. He said the Lord’s going to come, and the heavens and the earth are going to dissolve, and we’re looking not for a millennial reign. We’re looking for a new heavens and new earth. Peter knew nothing about a millennium. Likewise, Jesus didn’t either. Jesus said when he comes with all his holy angels with him, this is Matthew 25, 31, He said he’ll call all the nations before him, and he’ll relegate them to separate destinies. One will go to everlasting life. One will go to everlasting punishment. And there’s none going away to a thousand-year interim. What happens when Jesus comes back and judges the sheep and the goats? They both go to eternal destinies, it says, not thousand-year ones. So there simply is no mention of… a thousand-year millennium, anywhere before you get to the end of the Bible, and that mention is in the most symbolic book in the Bible, and those symbols are clearly defined for us in other parts of the Bible that aren’t quite so symbolic. So that’s the amillennial view, and that’s, again, what we’ll be debating in Wisconsin. All right? Yep. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Okay, let’s see how much we can get in here. Daryl from Waco, Texas. Thanks for waiting.
SPEAKER 02 :
Hello, Steve. How are you doing, sir?
SPEAKER 04 :
Good.
SPEAKER 02 :
All right. So my question is, according to the scholars, most scholars that believe that in the later date of Revelation, so my curiosity is why are they so convinced when it’s not even talked about in Revelation. I know you probably talked about it, but I’ve kind of been curious.
SPEAKER 04 :
You mean, why are they so convinced of the later date of writing?
SPEAKER 02 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 04 :
Sure. Okay. Yeah, well, many of our listeners don’t know that there’s a controversy over the date of writing of Revelations. And in many cases, it doesn’t really matter much when a book of the Bible is written. In a lot of cases, it doesn’t change anything. You know, the information is the same regardless when it was penned. But in Revelation, there are many people who believe, as I do, that Revelation, much of it, some people think all of it, I would say much of it, is predicting the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., which would, of course, insist that it was written before that date. You don’t predict something that already happened before. So on this view, it is sometimes argued that Revelation is written during the reign of Nero. Nero committed suicide in 68 A.D., which, of course, if the book’s written during the reign of Nero, it was then prior to 70, because Nero died in 68. And then it leaves open the possibility, it doesn’t prove, but it leaves open the possibility that what Revelation is writing about is the destruction of Jerusalem that took place in 70 A.D. Now, the other view, and this is the one you’re wondering why people are so strong about, is that Revelation was written around 96 A.D. Most of you, if you have studied Bibles and you look at the introduction to Revelation, they’ll probably say it was written in 96 A.D., which is near the end of the reign of Domitian. So the question is, was it written during Nero’s reign or Domitian’s reign? Now, really the only argument I can find for it being written in Domitian’s reign is that Irenaeus appears to have said that it was. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, and Polycarp was a disciple of John, and John wrote Revelation. So the assumption is Irenaeus, only two generations removed from the author of the book, ought to be He ought to be trusted on what he says about it. And there is a passage in Irenaeus that sounds like it says that John saw the visions on Patmos near the end of Domitian’s reign, which would be around 96. Now, other scholars, this is debated, think that Irenaeus is merely saying that John was seen, not that the vision was seen by John, but that John was seen by others. The line is actually that was seen Not so very long ago, almost in our own time in the latter part of the reign of Domitian. That’s what Uranus says. But when he says that was seen, he is referred to John and he’s referred to the vision that John saw. And it’s not clear whether he’s saying the vision was seen by John that late in time. or that John, regardless when he saw the vision, he himself lingered and was seen among them that late. It’s open to question. It’s open to debate. But, you know, it seems interesting because the futurist view, though the dispensationalists hold, if it’s true, it could still be true no matter when it was written. I mean, if dispensationalism has the right view of revelations, It would be the right view whether it was written in 67 A.D. or whether it’s written in 97 A.D. Because, again, if it’s future, it still hasn’t happened. It doesn’t matter how long ago it was written. But if the other view, the preterist view, is correct, that thinks it’s talking about the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem, then the later date has to be ruled out. Or I should say that. I should say the later date rules it out. If John wrote in 96, he certainly was not predicting events that happened a quarter of a century earlier. You don’t predict things that are in the past. So if you can prove that 96 AD is the actual time it was written, then you can prove that it’s not predicting the fall of Jerusalem. That’s why they’re so interested. It’s very important to the futurists. to refute the preterist view, which is the view that’s fulfilled in 7 AD. And the best way to do that, frankly, is to prove a date of writing that’s later than 7 AD. If indeed the book was written in 96 AD, then there’s no possibility of the preterist view being correct. But if it was written either early or late, the future still could be correct. And so that’s why futurists who wish to, of course, defeat preterism would insist on that date because they can’t otherwise defeat it. The arguments from the book itself and from comparing scripture to scripture would seemingly defeat the futurist view. But I’ve got chapters on that. I wrote a book, Revelation 4 Views. The introduction goes through all the reasons for one date or another. I’m out of time, sorry to say. You’ve been listening to The Narrow Path, our website, thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us.
