Menu
Join host Steve Gregg on The Narrow Path as he navigates through listener questions about the Bible and Christian faith. Kicking off with a preview of his upcoming debates in Dallas, Steve sets the stage for insightful discussions on pressing theological issues. Engage with thought-provoking dialogues on Bible prophecy fulfilments and explore the mystery surrounding primary and secondary predictions. Plus, gain clarity on the intriguing relationship between historical laws and current church practices, as the show gets deeper into the pandemic perception of spirituality and beliefs.
SPEAKER 01 :
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. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith, we’d love to talk to you about those things. If you see things differently than the host and want to balance a comment, we’d love to talk to you about that as well. The number to call to be on the air? is 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. Well, if you’ve been listening recently, you know that coming up tomorrow and Saturday, I’ve got three debates in Dallas, Texas, with Dr. Michael Brown about the state of modern Israel, and that’s going to be one of them tomorrow night. Friday and one Saturday morning and one Saturday afternoon. Now, we’ve been saying that you have to register to come. You don’t have to pay anything. It’s free, but you have to register so they’ll know you’re coming. And I was just looking at the status of the registrations just before the program. And there’s only really kind of a few seats left. For tomorrow night, it looks like they have 45 available seats still. And for Saturday morning, 75 available seats. And for Saturday afternoon, 70. So there’s a limited number. But if you want to register to come to that, we’d love to have you there in Dallas, Texas. It’s at Mercy Culture Church in Dallas, Texas. By the way, someone has expressed concern that they have concerns about Mercy Culture Church. They’ve heard bad things about it. I don’t know anything about Mercy Culture Church. I’m not going there in order to make a statement about that church or that movement. I’m there to debate the subject with Dr. Michael Brown of Israel. By the way, some have even expressed concern about me debating Dr. Brown’s because they’ve heard things about him they don’t like and they don’t, you know, they have negative thoughts about him. But I do not know enough firsthand to know much about him, but I’ve never concerned myself with those things when I debate somebody. I’m not there to affirm the person or his, you know, anything about him. I’m simply there to debate the subject. So if people have concerns about the venue or about the person I’m debating, well, I’m surprised. They must not know what debates are about. Debates are not there to affirm the person you’re debating or the place you’re debating. The debates are there to make a point, to get scriptural truth across in whatever venue and whatever way possible. That’s what we’re going to do. So, there is going to be a live stream on YouTube and you don’t have to register for that. So, If you’re not going to Dallas, you can watch the thing on YouTube. You can find out information about that, I believe, at our website. Is that correct? A link to that at thenarrowpath.com under announcements on tomorrow’s date and Saturdays. So that’s coming up. Before you know it, it’ll be here. I will say this. There’s one complication, and that is that the government shutdown has caused there to be a dearth, of air traffic controllers on duty. And I just read news today that the airport I’m flying out of and the airport I’m flying into in Texas are both on a list of 40 airports nationwide that have been ordered or requested by the government to reduce the number of flights by 10% that they send out beginning tomorrow. Now, I’ve checked my flight. I’m leaving California from an airport that’s on that list, but so far I’ve checked. My flight’s still supposed to be on time. It is the earliest flight in the morning, which I don’t know if I – I mean, I don’t have any insight into how these things work, but I would assume that if they have to cancel or delay flights, it’s probably because they get backed up. as the day goes on. So hopefully I won’t have any problem getting there. I was telling my wife if they’d tell me right now that my flight’s canceled, I’d rent a car and drive the 20 hours to Dallas to be there on time tomorrow night. I’m not expecting any problems. Of course, if I do have problems getting there, I’ll announce it on the radio tomorrow. But Michael Brown has already made the flight. He comes from the East Coast. I come from the West Coast. We’re converging in Dallas for this debate. And he flew in today just to make sure, and that’s probably what I should have done. I wasn’t really anticipating the government shutdown being a problem when I made the reservations a few weeks ago. Anyway, that’s where things stand. I’ll do everything I can to get there by hook or by crook. And if I can’t get there by tomorrow night, I don’t know what they’ll do, but I’ll be there by Saturday because I’ll drive there if I have to. Okay, so… Just that much on that, and our lines are full, so we’re going to go to the phone lines now and talk to Lana from Ontario, Canada. Hi, Lana. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 11 :
Hi. Thanks for sharing your Bible knowledge with us. I have a question. Last Sunday in Bible class, one of the ladies shared that most Bible prophecy has a near and a distant fulfillment. Is that true? Yes.
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, maybe from the standpoint of the prophet, a lot of them do. I wouldn’t say most of them do, because when you really look at the bulk of Bible prophecy in the Old Testament, a lot of it has to do with the destruction of Edom and Moab and Ammon and the Philistines and Assyria and Egypt and Babylon, all of which are ancient societies that are gone, or else at least the prophecies against them were already fulfilled hundreds of years before the New Testament times. In other words, they had a near fulfillment, sometimes a couple hundred years off from the prophet’s time, but there’s no basis for expecting an additional fulfillment. So I don’t know, you know, I can’t quantify it. If someone says most prophecy has a near fulfillment and a distant one, there are some prophecies that do have a second fulfillment. And we know about that because of New Testament writers who tell us, that there was a secondary fulfillment, or will be, besides the one that we know happened historically in Old Testament times. Almost all the prophecies in the Old Testament were fulfilled in Old Testament times, at least in their primary fulfillment. There’s really not much in the Old Testament that’s prophesied beyond the return of the exiles from Babylon, in 539 B.C., other than those prophecies that are messianic, meaning they have to do with the Messiah. So there’s quite a few prophecies, of course, about the Messiah and about his reign on earth. Well, his reign. That’s for the messianic era, we could say. Now, some people think the messianic era has not started yet and will occur when Jesus comes back. Most Christians throughout history have thought that the Messianic era began when Jesus came the first time, and we’re living in that time. So there’s two opinions about those. But many would believe, and I would be among them, that in addition to the return of the exiles from Babylon, there is, in many cases, a secondary meaning. The thing is that those who think that Jesus is going to set up the Messianic kingdom at his second coming usually will say, though maybe not always, they’ll usually say the prophecies in the Bible about the return of the exiles from Babylon will have another fulfillment in the end times. And they would even say we’re perhaps seeing that fulfillment now as Jews from all over the world are making their way to Israel, and Israel now has probably the largest Jewish population it’s ever had as we speak. Although, of course, the diaspora, the Jews who are not in Israel, is probably the largest population now. of that type, you know, since ancient times or ever. So some people think that we’re seeing a secondary fulfillment of that. Now, the thing is, in the Bible, when there’s a first fulfillment and a secondary one, All the cases we know of, of the secondary one, are mentioned in the New Testament, and they are mentioned as fulfilled in Christ at his first coming. So, you know, there’s things that happened in Old Testament times that the prophets spoke about. But the New Testament also cites those prophecies as having a deeper or additional fulfillment in Christ himself at his first coming. And even the return of the exiles from Babylon, which happened in 539 B.C., those prophecies often blend into prophecies about the Messiah coming. And my contention is those prophecies about the Messiah were fulfilled in Christ. And so we could say that those prophecies had a more short-range fulfillment within a few hundred years of them being uttered, and then maybe an additional layer of meanings. in the Messiah. But I wouldn’t say that’s most prophecies. There’s a fair number. There’s a fair number like that. But the idea that a prophecy may have an Old Testament fulfillment and a New Testament one is certainly a biblical concept. And we see that being the opinion of the New Testament writers in the way they quote from those passages.
SPEAKER 11 :
Very cool. Thanks for sharing.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay, Lana, thanks for your call. John from Englewood, Florida. Welcome to The Narrow Path.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yes, hi, Steve. I was thinking about the Wailing Wall and the Western Wall, and I thought I was going to look up on Matthew 7.13 to see what you had to say about that. And I was surprised to see that there’s only been one hit on that, and that’s from October 2023. You were talking to Max, and Max asked you about – why that wall is still up when Jesus had said that not one stone would remain up. You know, everything would be torn down. Not one stone would remain on top of another. And then you said that, well, that wall was actually a retaining wall and had nothing to do with actually the temple area. Okay?
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, it did have to do with the temple area, just not the temple itself. It was not part of the temple.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay, you say that when Jesus said every stone would be thrown down, you said that Jesus was basically talking hyperbole. But the Jews say that Jesus lied. So it’s two different things there.
SPEAKER 01 :
Which Jews said that Jesus lied about that?
SPEAKER 06 :
All the Jews say that. They say it’s a lie that Jesus said every stone would be thrown down.
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, because I know a lot of Jews who don’t say that, but I just wonder which Jews do.
SPEAKER 06 :
I was watching on YouTube a thing on the Wailing Wall, and they were interviewing Jews, and on there they said Jesus was a liar when he said that that wall.
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, every Jew who’s not a Christian… would think that Jesus was a liar, obviously, because he claimed to be the Messiah, and they don’t believe he was. So Judaism is an anti-Christian religion. Jesus Christ is despised and blasphemed in the Talmud many times. So, I mean, it’s not surprising to find Jews who reject Christ saying he was a liar. But unless they can show, and maybe sometimes they will, that archaeologists of the past have been mistaken – And I have not heard that that has been. The standard archaeological view is that the Wailing Wall is a retaining wall that supported the Temple Mount, sort of like you might do if you’ve got a hill or something in your yard, and you put a retaining wall. And the Temple was built on that mound. But the mound is a mound. It’s not the wall that holds the mound up. So, I mean, Jesus, now Jesus did say the same thing about Jerusalem itself, though. In Luke 19, he wept over Jerusalem and said, if you’d only known, you know, that which pertains to your peace, but now they’re hidden from your eyes. He said, for the day will come when your enemies will set up mounds about you and so forth and level you to the ground and not one stone will be found on another. Now, that was no doubt hyperbole, because I don’t know if Old Jerusalem, I’ve been to Old Jerusalem, but I think some of it are buildings that are still there from the time of Christ. But it’s very possible that when he said that about Jerusalem, he was saying this more specifically about the temple, which was the central significance of Jerusalem. And he could be using hyperbole, but that would not be a problem if he was. Prophets used hyperbole all the time. In fact, I just used it just now when I said all the time. That’s hyperbole. And so we very commonly use hyperbole. The Bible uses it a lot. Jesus used it a lot. So, you know, he could have used hyperbole or when he said that Jerusalem would not have one stone left on another. Yes. He might have meant the temple. Yeah.
SPEAKER 06 :
But right now, Steve, they’re saying that that fortress, the Antonia Fortress, was built by Herod the Great in 35 B.C., and it was put up for the purpose of maintaining order and to guard the Temple Mount, that that was actually a Roman, that wall belonged to a Roman fortress, Antonia. That’s what they’re finding out now. Well, that’s fine. And Titus himself tore that wall down on the final assault of Jerusalem. Okay? Okay, so what’s the problem with this? Okay, and then Hadrian rebuilt it in the second century. And I’m saying now that the Jews are really beating their heads against an old Roman fortress wall, and it has nothing to do with the temple. Okay. It’s amazing.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay, yeah, I didn’t know that information. I did hear something. And the reason I hedged a little bit in my earlier issue was that I did hear something that I don’t recall that they were, some archaeologists were claiming something different about the Wailing Wall, but I wasn’t sure what it was they were claiming. Maybe that’s what you’re talking about. Okay, well, that’s fine. Yeah, so, I mean, that’s not going to make the Jews stop saying Jesus lied because that’s their religious position.
SPEAKER 06 :
Oh, no, no, they don’t believe in Jesus at all. You’re right. Right.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay. Right, John. Okay, thanks for your call, brother. Good talking to you.
SPEAKER 06 :
Bye.
SPEAKER 01 :
Bye now. Brother Simmons in Little Rock, Arkansas. Welcome to The Narrow Path, Brother Simmons. God bless you, sir.
SPEAKER 05 :
1 Corinthians 14, 34. What is the law in that? What particular law are they referring to? Well, yeah.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah, when it says that the women should be silent in the church, but they must be submissive, as also says the law. Okay. Well, the Bible doesn’t actually say in the law that women should not speak, so that must not be what the law says. But it does say they should be submissive, and that’s probably what it’s referring to. It says, let your women keep silent in the churches. They’re not permitted to speak. They’re to be submissive, as also the law says. Okay, so the law doesn’t say anything about women not being permitted to speak, but it does say they’re to be submissive, and this goes all the way back to the the first portion of the Torah, which is the law, and that’s Genesis chapter 3, where after Adam and Eve sinned, God said to Eve, to the woman, he said, I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception in pain. You shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. So, basically, God has established that the husband would be the ruler of the home. Of course, the New Testament affirms that repeatedly. That does not necessarily translate into the idea that they have to not speak. There are other things in the law that indicate a woman’s subjection to her husband. For example, in Numbers, near the end of the book there – let’s see here. I think it’s near the end of Numbers – There’s a law that if a woman makes a, maybe it’s at the end of Deuteronomy, I could be wrong there. Makes a vow or something? If she makes a vow, the husband has the right to nullify it because she’s subject to him. That would be another case where the law speaks of the woman being submissive. Numbers 30 what? Numbers 30, 13, my wife just looked it up. She’s very submissive, by the way, so she helps me out a lot. But Paul is simply referring to the fact that the law does, both in the opening chapters of the law, which is Genesis 1 through 3, which is part of the Torah, the law, that it consigns the woman to be subject to her husband, and then even later in laws like Numbers 30, her husband is clearly the authority in the home. If a woman makes a vow and her husband hears about it, he can nullify it on the first day he hears about it. If he doesn’t nullify it on the first day he hears about it, it stands. But that makes it very clear. that he can, you know, we could say veto her vows. I appreciate that answer, Steve. All right. All right. Well, thank you, Bruce. Thank you. Good talking to you. Bye now. Okay. Ken in Detroit, Michigan. Welcome to The Narrow Path. I’m sorry you got cut off last night. Is this that, Ken?
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, same again.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay. Let me just say before you speak, last night, I just remembered I should probably say this. If you were on the Zoom meeting, and I imagine about 40 of you were, I apologize. Somebody apparently hacked in or there was something wrong and some inappropriate things were being said just apart from our control. and the Zoom meeting had just been shut down because we didn’t have a way to get the hacker out of there. And I was in the middle of talking to Ken, and I think we’d gone into the Zoom meeting over a half hour, but we were in the middle of your question, Ken. I’m glad you called. Go ahead and bring it up again.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, yeah, first of all, that’s not going to have a negative impact on future Wednesday night Zoom meetings, is it?
SPEAKER 01 :
It might. I don’t know. We’ve got to find a way to make it not happen.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, okay.
SPEAKER 01 :
I don’t make that decision, actually. The brother who hosts those meetings is the one who will decide that.
SPEAKER 1 :
Sure.
SPEAKER 08 :
Okay. I had actually finished my question. I said over. And I was waiting for your answer. Do you remember my question?
SPEAKER 01 :
Yes, you were talking about tongues and how that in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul made it clear that he that speaks in tongues is not speaking to men but to God. And Paul also refers to praying in tongues and giving thanks in tongues and blessing God in tongues, which are all, of course, addressed to God. And therefore, you were pointing out that tongues is a very different thing than prophecy. where God is speaking to men, a person uttering tongues is actually speaking to God. Now, you’re making the point that in Acts chapter 2, this is sometimes spoken of as an exception to that rule. And you were challenging the idea that it was an exception. We are only told in the book of Acts in chapter 2 that those speaking in tongues were speaking of the wonderful works of God. Now, And many times I’ve assumed, maybe wrongfully, that in speaking about the wonderful works of God, they were speaking about them as historical facts in a sense of proclaiming them to the people. If that’s what they were doing, then it’s certainly an exception to what Paul said tongues usually is. On the other hand, it’s also even the fact that this was being spoken in the presence of unbelievers as a sign to them is an exception to what tongues was in 1 Corinthians, because in 1 Corinthians, nobody understands the person speaking in tongues, and they need to have the gift of interpretation, where on Acts 2, no one needed interpretation because the language is though foreign to the speakers. were native languages of the hearers. So it’s obviously an unusual case in many ways different than 1 Corinthians 14. But I think you were suggesting that it might not be different in the sense that we otherwise think. In other words, in speaking about the wonderful works of God, they might have been praising God for those wonderful works, in which case it is not an exception to the general sense of statement that a person who speaks in tongues speaks to God. That was your point, was it not?
SPEAKER 08 :
Right, exactly. With the practical effect that Pentecostal people are left with the impression that if God wants to bring a message to a people, he can use tongues and interpretation, or he can use prophecy, and I don’t believe that. I believe that tongues are for giving thanks to God, which is exactly what was happening on the day of Pentecost, and If people understood what was being said, it was a special situation, special form of interpretation, and that they knew the language. Yeah.
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, I can agree with you about that. I mean, I don’t know it to be true, but it makes sense to me. I mean, what you’re saying could be perfectly valid. And you said that tongues is giving thanks to God. It is. I mean, Paul refers to it as that and blessing, but also praying to God. So, I mean… I have felt this for many years, and I’ve actually said so on the air, that when you go to a Pentecostal or charismatic church and somebody speaks in tongues, that when you hear what purports to be the interpretation of that tongue, it usually sounds more like a prophecy. It’s more like God is allegedly speaking to the people in a prophetic voice. But I believe that that can’t be the true interpretation of a tongue because Paul said when someone speaks in tongues, they’re not speaking to people, they’re speaking to God. And so I agree with you completely on that. I mean, as to what was happening in Acts 2 and the exact manner of how they were uttering their contents, whether it was praising God and thanking God for his mighty works, which could certainly be the case, or whether they were proclaiming those works to others. which seems possible, but I think maybe your theory is probably more likely. I’m with you on that.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay, Ken, thanks for calling back.
SPEAKER 08 :
God bless. Bye-bye.
SPEAKER 01 :
Okay, let’s see. Philip from Oakley, California. Welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Oh, you know what, let me put you on hold because the break is going to come right away, like in the next few seconds. So I’m going to put you on hold. I’ll come right back to you after the break. We take a break at the bottom of the hour every day to let you know that The Narrow Path is a listener-supported ministry. We have no commercial breaks. It’s an hour of broadcasting without interruption. except for this interruption at the bottom of the hour to say we have nothing to sell you, we’re not advertising anything, but we do want you to know that we don’t have sponsors and that the donations from people who listen and who want to support the program are the only means of paying the radio bills. By the way, we have really no other bills except the radio bills, except I did just pay for the post office box bill for the next year just today or yesterday. But apart from things like that, and there are very few, all the donations go directly to buying airtime. There’s no salaried people here. No one associated with the ministry is paid anything for it, including myself. It’s all volunteers. Okay. But it is expensive to stay on the air. And if you’d like to help us pay for that, you may write to us at TheNarrowPath, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or you can donate from the website. Everything at the website is free, but you’re welcome to donate from there at TheNarrowPath.com. We have another half hour coming, so don’t go away. I’ll be back in 30 seconds.
SPEAKER 02 :
If truth did exist, would it matter to you? Whom would you consult as an authority on the subject? 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 how this truth is to be applied to a believer’s daily walk and outlook. The Authority of Scriptures can be downloaded in MP3 format without charge from our website, thenarrowpath.com.
SPEAKER 01 :
Welcome back to the Narrow Path Radio Broadcast. We have another half hour uninterrupted phone calls from people like yourself. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or want to call to disagree with the host, we welcome you to do so. I’m looking at two open lines on our switchboard, so you could get through right now if you call 844- 844-484-5737. That’s 844-484-5737. We were about to talk to Philip in Oakley, California, just before the break, and then I saw the break was upon us, so we put him back on hold. Philip, welcome back. We now complete our conversation with dignity. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay, I just want to ask a question. It seems like the church right now thinks that the tribulation is here, the beast system, and, you know, all these prophecies about the earthquake, California, and all that. But I want to hear your take on it. Do you think we’re living the tribulation is about to start and the mark of the beast now?
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, I’ll tell you, my whole understanding of the tribulation and the mark of the beast, are quite different from the popular view out there. Now, when I say that, it doesn’t mean I hold a minority view. The truth is the view I hold is very widely held and was held for centuries before the popular view arose. So I actually hold an older view and more widely held than the present popular view. Now, The present popular view is that the tribulation is a seven-year period of time just before the second coming of Christ. In fact, at the very end of the tribulation, that’s when Jesus comes, and that is seven years long. And during that time, there will be a lot of judgments poured out, especially unlike others in periods of time before. God will be judging the world. There will arise a satanically inspired leader called the Antichrist, And he will have to give everybody an identification number on their hand or their forehead. And they will not be able to buy or sell without that. This is the popular, what’s called the dispensational futurist view of revelation. Now, that’s a view I used to teach until, well, I have to say until I studied it more. And I don’t hold that view anymore. Now, there are different views of revelation besides mine. And besides that one, there’s actually four different views that are quite different from each other. And if you’re interested in knowing what they all are, I have lectures online about the four views of Revelation, which are, of course, free. You can listen to. Now, my view is different. I don’t know that the Bible anywhere would speak of a seven year tribulation. I can’t find one mentioned in the Bible. The idea of a seven-year tribulation comes from a couple of things. One is in Daniel 9, 24 through 27, there’s approximately about 70 weeks of Daniel, and each week is seven years. And the popular view is that 69 of those 70 weeks have passed, but the 70th, the last of these seven-year periods, is still future. Now, I don’t believe that’s the case. I don’t think the book of Daniel gives the slightest hint that, you know, the 69 weeks are past, but the 70th week is still future. This gap of 2,000 years between the 69th and the 70th weeks is not hinted at. Nothing in the whole Bible gives the slightest hint of it. So I don’t accept this, but many do. And they would say, well, this 70th week of Daniel, which is seven years long, like all the other weeks of Daniel, is the tribulation. Now, again, there’s not anything in the Bible that would tell us that that is true. All right. That’s simply a made up idea. Now, in the book of Revelation. There are five references to a period of three and a half years. Sometimes it’s spoken of as 42 months. Sometimes it’s called 1260 days. Both of those are three and a half years. And then sometimes it’s called time, times, and half a time, which is a stranger way to say three and a half years. But this period of three and a half years is mentioned five times. As far as I can tell, it always refers to the same three and a half years. But I used to believe, because it’s the popular view, that some of the references to three and a half years refer to the first half, and some of the references to three and a half years refer to the second half of the tribulations. Now, Revelation doesn’t give us any clues about that. And again, that only comes from the assumption that the tribulation is seven years long. And that comes from another assumption not supported in Scripture, namely that the tribulation is the 70th week of Daniel. So these are all assumptions that I used to make because that’s what the teachers tell you you’re supposed to believe. And you only believe because they say so, because the Bible doesn’t say a word about that being true. OK, so I don’t I don’t hold that any view that view anymore. In fact, when Jesus mentioned great tribulation, which he did in Matthew 24, 21, it sounds like he’s talking about the tribulation that was going to come upon Israel before their temple was destroyed, because that’s what he’s talking about in Matthew 24. His disciples asked him when the temple would be destroyed. And he says, well, this generation won’t pass before it happens. And he was right. It happened in 70 A.D., just 40 years later. And it was in that discussion he says, Then there shall be great tribulation, such as never was since the world began, nor ever shall be. And there certainly was. There certainly was great tribulation. Now, as I mentioned to an earlier caller, sometimes Jesus uses hyperbole. The particular hyperbole of greater than any before and greater than any shall follow is a very common hyperbole that the prophets used many different things they prophesied. They said, unlike anything before or after. It’s a very common hyperbolic statement, but I don’t think it has to be literal. But even if it was literal, what happened to the Jews during the siege of Jerusalem could easily qualify as If you read about it, the history is well preserved in the works of Josephus. Anyway, so I’m not looking for a future seven-year tribulation or a future Antichrist. The only time the Antichrist is mentioned in the Bible is in 1 John and 2 John. Revelation doesn’t mention it. Jesus doesn’t mention it in Revelation or in Matthew 24 or anywhere else. The only place you’ll ever find the word Antichrist in the Bible is is in 1 John and in 2 John, two little short epistles. And 1 John gives it this way, in 1 John 2, 18, little children, it is the last hour. Now, he’s saying that to his people living in his lifetime. And as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, Or some manuscripts just say, as you’ve heard, that Antichrist is coming. Even now, many Antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. So he’s saying, you know, the mark of the last hour is that Antichrist would come. Well, we know this is it. This is the last hour because many Antichrists have come. Notice that he’s indicating that the coming of Antichrist isn’t about one Antichrist. It’s about many Antichrists. And then he says this in verse 22. Just a few verses later. Who is a liar? But he who denies that Jesus is the Christ, he is Antichrist. Who denies the Father and the Son? So whoever denies Jesus is the Christ, that person is Antichrist. So what about the mark of the beast? Well, I consider the beast to be a representation of government authority inspired by Satan to persecute God’s kingdom, and that that entity transcends the whole age of the church, and it manifests like a whack-a-mole game throughout history. One Antichrist government is raised up, inspired by Satan to persecute the church. It eventually goes down, and another one comes up, And it goes down, another comes up. This is probably how one way we’re supposed to understand the seven heads. Of the beast, each one is a king. And, you know, one can die, but the rest live on. That is to say, in fact, that’s what is described in Revelation 13. One of the heads of the beast has received a mortal head wound. Okay, so one of these kings dies. But there’s six more good ones and bad ones still in good health. And so they continue. The beast continues. No matter how many of its heads die, there’s more where that came from. And so I consider the beast to represent many kingdoms, not just one, not just one man, but like Daniel’s beasts, after which Revelation’s beast is modeled, each of the four beasts in Daniel 7 was an empire. And this beast seems to be a combination of all empires. So I consider the beast in Revelation to be not one man or even one kingdom or living at any one time, but rather through the age of the church. the Antichrist or the beast manifests in many different governments. So, yeah, those things are going on now, and they’ve been going on ever since the time that the book of Revelation was written, according to John. So, anyway, that’s my understanding. If someone says they think we’re in the final seven years or just about to be, they are assuming certain things I don’t think the Bible teaches, namely that there is something in the Bible about a final seven years. and that there is something in the Bible about a final world dictator called Antichrist. I mean, that’s not how I understand those prophecies anymore. It’s one of those things that it’s easy to accept because popular teachers say it. And, of course, the popular teaching is popular for this very reason. that people do not understand the Bible very well, and they assume that Revelation is written in literal language. Of course, no one takes it literally. No one really believes the beast is a real animal with seven heads and ten horns. But the people who don’t believe that it is still say they’re taking it literally because that’s their boast. They take the Bible literally. So even though they do take it symbolically, just like everyone else does, they deny that they do so and say they’re taking it literally instead. Okay. which is not entirely honest, it seems to me. But I don’t think they’re lying. I think they’re not being honest with themselves. I think people need to cross-examine their own beliefs a little more than they do. It’s easy to pass along a popular view. But I think it’s popular partly because people always want to think. that the Bible is talking about the time they are in in a special way, especially if it’s the end times. We’d like to believe Jesus is coming soon, which maybe he is. I don’t know if he is or not. But the thing is, anyone who claims to know that usually gets a lot of people listening to him. And that’s why it’s the popular view. I don’t hold that particular view. I appreciate your call. All right, Philip, thanks for joining us. Our next caller is Barbara in Roseville, Michigan. Hi, Barbara. Welcome.
SPEAKER 10 :
Hi. Thank you, Steve. I was wondering why did the children of Israel have Aaron make a cap, a golden cap, and why do Indian people, Hindus, worship cows? And also, I guess back in like the 70s, my Sunday school teacher was in the Peace Corps over in India. And she said the cows would just be walking up and down the street. The children would be hungry. They would have all the grains all piled up. You know, they couldn’t use it for cereal or bread. It was for the cows. And I just wanted to know if you knew anything about that. And I’m going to hang up and listen because I really want to hear this.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah. Okay. Well, there’s two questions there, and the answers are different from each other. The only thing the questions have in common with each other is they both talk about cows. The Egyptians worshipped cows. They worshipped lots of things. They worshipped the Nile River. They worshipped the crocodile. They worshipped frogs. They worshipped Pharaoh. They worshipped the sun. They had lots of gods. But a calf was one of the Egyptian gods. Now, when the Israelites made the calf, they had just been 400 years in Egypt imbibing Egyptian culture. and superstitions and they had just been released and you know they hardly knew anything about Yahweh and because they were worried because Moses had disappeared they thought they needed to have a God and they were following superstitions of their Egyptian upbringing and so they wanted to make a And it was very commonplace in pagan lands to make idols of their gods. And, you know, a golden calf was very much an Egyptian deity being pictured there, although they were pretending that it represented Yahweh, whom they did not know very well at that time. So that’s why they made a golden calf. probably a calf represents strength. Oxen, you know, would pull plows and things like that. All the heavy lifting was done by oxen. They could do the work of several men, and they didn’t have machines and stuff to do most of it. So I think an ox was just a representation of strength. But there were, you know, and that’s part of the reasons they were worshiped. Now, in India, it’s a very different thing. They don’t serve Egyptian gods and stuff like that. They’re Hindus. And the Indians believe that everything alive today lived before in some other form because they believe in reincarnation. They believe that when we die, we won’t go to heaven or hell. We’ll just come back as something else. If we live well… in this life, perhaps we’ll come back in a better way, a better condition in the next life. If we live badly, then we’ll come back in a worse condition. So they believe that When you see such a thing as a rat, that’s a lot worse than being a person. And they would say, well, that’s somebody whose karma was bad in the last life, and they had to come back in this form. Now, cows, you know, they’re not as low as a rat, certainly. But, in fact, they’re often considered sacred. Part of that is the reincarnation idea. Now, there might be other things in the Hindu religion that elevate cows, like many heathen religions do. But I think the reason they won’t kill either a rat or a cow is because both of them are thought to be reincarnations of someone who’s lived in the past, maybe a relative of theirs, who knows. And they don’t want to kill and eat their relatives, so they just let them go. And you’re right, it does have a terrible effect on the state of the poor because India can produce, or at least import, enough food for everybody. But the rats eat a lot of the food. And they won’t kill the rats. And rats multiply really fast. So a lot of food gets consumed by the rats instead of by hungry people. And likewise, cows, they’re fed a lot of grain too. And so, you know, because of their belief in reincarnation, which is a pagan belief, you know, it really works out badly for children and for people who are starving. But that’s kind of how pagan religions are. They don’t really care about people. They care about deities, false deities. And that’s one reason that Christianity and even Judaism in the Old Testament are different, because God cares about people. Because only God, unlike all the pagan deities, God is love. Yahweh is love. And that being so, he cares about people. And it’s much more important to him that people are fed than that cows or rats are. Now, God is in favor of showing kindness to animals. At least in Proverbs, it says that a wise man shows kindness to his beast, probably meaning his cattle and so forth. But it also says, Jesus said that men are worth more than cattle. You know, there’s a law that says you should not muzzle the ox that treads out its corner. And Jesus said, well, that’s not, I mean, Paul said, not Jesus said, that that’s really talking about something more important than cattle. God doesn’t care so much for cattle as he cares for people. He’s talking about laboring people should not be prevented from being paid for what they do. And he saw that as a principle in the law not to muzzle an ox when it works. Anyway, those are. The things you’re asking about had to do with pagan religions, of which there are many, and many of them do worship cattle for whatever reasons. Let’s talk to Gary in Greenville, Texas. Hi, Gary. Welcome.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hi, Steve. My question is on Revelation 14.8. It says, A second angel followed and said, Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, which made all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries. And I’m absolutely with you on Jerusalem being Babylon, but on this particular verse, I have my own ideas, but I wanted you to just, if you could expand on, if Babylon is Jerusalem, in what way did she make all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adultery?
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, her adultery, of course, is her idolatry. Sure, sure, understood. You know, the Jews, having been scattered throughout the world, have influenced much of the culture of the world with false religion. Now, their false religion is a rejection of Christ. They don’t worship idols in the traditional sense anymore. They did. Up until the Babylonian exile, the Jews worshipped idols just as much as the pagans around them did, and that’s why God sent them into Babylon. However, when they came back from the Babylonian exile in 539 B.C., Israel never really set up idols again. They never set up images again. They seemed to be cured of their idolatry, but they weren’t really. In Ezekiel, who lived at that time in the Babylonian exile, God said, these people have set up idols in their hearts. And, you know, in the New Testament, we’re told that idolatry takes many forms, including, he said, Paul said twice, covetousness is idolatry. So idolatry is, you know, having false gods, worshipping your money, worshipping other things that aren’t God. That’s idolatry, and that, therefore, is the fornication or the adultery. that I think is alluded to here. Now, the Jews are not alone responsible for this, but the Jews have been very much involved in commerce and finance and banking and things like that. I’m not saying this as a criticism of them, but to whatever degree money becomes an idol to people. the dispersed Jews from Jerusalem, or their descendants, have had a major role of influencing that. Now, some people believe, and I’m not among them, that Jews control a great deal more than is obvious. I’m not of that opinion myself. I mean, I can’t say that. I can’t say that they don’t influence more than is obvious, because who knows? If it’s not obvious, I don’t know who controls things, but… But I’m not a follower of a conspiracy that blames everything on the Jews. But it is the case that in many ways the Jews have corrupted cultures. Not all Jews. I’m not speaking of Jews as a race. I’m just talking about individual Jews who happen to be much more corrupt. ingenious in many ways than Gentiles. I mean, when you think about it, I forget what the total is, but something like 80% of all Nobel Prize winners have been Jewish. I mean, that speaks for their brilliance. But that’s also true of the majority of the actors and producers in Hollywood and things like that, which also are agents of corruption of society. and also an awful lot of financial institutions. So I realize that some of the things I’m saying are also said by anti-Semites who think there’s this big conspiracy of the Jews. I’m not saying that. I’m not anti-Semite. I’m not against Jews. But it’s just in trying to understand how Jerusalem might be said to have defiled the nations. Those may be some of the ways that are in mind there. I don’t know.
SPEAKER 04 :
Would you consider the fact that since it attributes the crucifixion of Christ to the Jews during that time, that rejected Christ, but they used the instrument as the Romans. So in a way, they kind of involved the Romans in a, you know, a genocide or a murder of God. Would that go along with how they would, you know, make the nation’s strength line of their adultery?
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, it is true. It is true that they forced the Romans’ hand, or at least bribed Pilate, to crucify Christ. So they’ve corrupted even the Roman authority and so forth. And Roman authority ruled the world at that time. So I don’t know to what degree the statement in Revelation is alluding to, but I can think of ways it could mean. Okay. Thank you. All right, brother. Thanks for your call. Let’s see. We’re going to take as much as we can here. Matthew in City of Industry, California. Welcome.
SPEAKER 07 :
Hi, Steve. Question for you. Regarding Zechariah 12, verse 10, I’ll read it really quickly, particularly where it says, “…so that when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him as one weeps over a firstborn.” I guess my question is, this seems to imply conviction, right? I think so. Yeah, I think so. But they say they will realize this, or they shall look upon.
SPEAKER 01 :
Who’s the they? Those upon whom the Spirit has been poured. He says he’s going to pour out his Spirit on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and supplication. Then they will look on me. whom they have pierced, and they’ll mourn for him. Strangely, it changes from me to him, but we can’t solve that right now. As one mourns for an only son and grieves as one grieves for a firstborn. I believe this is referring to the faithful remnant in Israel who turned to Christ and upon whom God poured out his spirit on the day of Pentecost. Now, I’d say 9 out of 10 people you hear talk about this, maybe 10 out of 10, with maybe the only exception, would say this is talking about a future outpouring of the Spirit on Israel in the end times and of the repentance of the nation. And there are dispensationalists in particular believe that that’s going to happen, and they base it largely on this verse. I believe they’re missing the time frame of the chapter. The chapter is not talking about the end times. It’s talking about the first coming of Christ. And we can see that by continuing the flow of thought through to chapter 13, verse 7. where there’s a prophecy about strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered. And Jesus obviously said in Matthew 26, 31, that’s going to be fulfilled tonight, you know, in the Garden of Gethsemane. And actually there’s quite a few verses in chapters 12 through 14, and even more if you include chapters 9 through 14, that the New Testament writers identify as, as being fulfilled in the first century, and not one that they identify as happening at the end of the world. So I think to try to make these passages as being the end times is to miss the entire context, at least as it was seen by the New Testament writers of Zechariah chapters 12 through 14.
SPEAKER 07 :
Right. I guess my main concern with, well, I shouldn’t say concern, confusion, is if you take this premise of into consideration with the notion of, I know the New Testament talks about the Jews still have a veil over their spiritual blindness, right?
SPEAKER 01 :
Until they turn to the Lord, it says. Until they turn to the Lord, yeah.
SPEAKER 07 :
Okay, so maybe, okay.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah, that’s what Paul says. In 2 Corinthians 3, I think it’s around verse 13 or thereabouts, maybe it’s earlier. Paul says that there remains a veil over the eyes of the Jews in the reading of the Old Testament, but he said that veil is taken away in Christ. It also says even to this day when the Old Testament, when Moses is read, there remains a veil over their heart. He says, but when they turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away. So, yeah, when a Jewish person turns to Christ, they can see clearly. Now, I don’t think the veil that is referred to, is the inability to recognize Christ. I don’t think the Jews have an inability to recognize Christ any more than Gentiles do who are unbelievers. I think that’s something. But I think that what they can’t see when they read the Old Testament, they can’t see what it’s talking about. But that changes when they turn to Christ. Go ahead.
SPEAKER 07 :
Sorry, I was going to say, if I may, that was how I was raised to believe that, interpret that verse. That’s why I’m a little bit, it’s kind of like this molding of my heart is changing, maturing, right? And so I’m trying, the reason I even called you is I’m trying to break free from this, like, you know, as a child, I thought as a child, right? Like, there’s like the preconceived notion of it. And there’s also like actively seeking and wanting to grow and learn spiritually, right? Right.
SPEAKER 01 :
I agree, and I know what most people have heard, and it’s probably the same as what you’ve heard. For those interested in hearing a more full exposition of all those chapters in Zechariah, I have verse-by-verse lectures at our website you can listen to for free on all the books of the Bible, verse-by-verse, but I would highly recommend the ones on Zechariah chapters 12 through 14. They’re verse-by-verse, and they’ll bring some context to these verses that modern teachers usually don’t have or at least don’t present. I’m out of time. Thanks for joining us. Our website is thenarrowpath.com.
