This broadcaster has 144 podcast archives available on-demand.
Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.
June 16, 2020 8:00 am
Good afternoon and welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast my name Steve Greg and we are live for an hour each week afternoon and we have a program where you can calling and call and ask questions about the Bible about the Christian faith, and you can also calling to disagree with the host. If you think the answers given are not very good or not adequate and it I sometimes forget that we have new listeners and some you might say, well, who are you that I should ask you questions about libel.
While I'm not much of anyone I'm I don't have any special credentials. I'm just a guy who Sarah read the Bible and spent my life teaching for the past 50 years.
That doesn't mean I'm right and there are certainly teachers who have done the same as I have, and they have different answers so I don't suggest you call here for the last word on anything but I'll be glad to answer any question you have. According to my understanding and difference you know if you have opted. Ask other people the same question I would encourage you to do so, and then of course test all things and see hold fast what is good.
So our lines are full right now so you can't call in, but I will give the number because lines to open up in the course of the program. We don't have so many lines that your that wonderful. It takes up the whole program so there will be lines opening up and you can get through if you call this number 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 our first color today is John from Marietta. I welcome to the narrow path. John, thanks for calling hello sir, I got a question last fall I was down in Balboa Park in San Diego in the eight years to have a booth there. So when I was talking with them.
One of them brought up an apparent difference between the list of the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 versus Exodus 34. Are you aware of that are how I would answer that and are aware that they bring that up.
However, the list annexes 34 is not a list of the 10 Commandments, so I mean it's it's interesting that people see only God's conflicting list of Exodus 34. It does not give a conflicting list of the 10 commanders here.
It gives a lot of Commandments, but it talks about the view of the commanders of the feast of weeks in and you know feast of unleavened bread and silver. These are not part of the 10 Commandments is just part of the law of God. I'm not sure why atheists think they think they have found another list of the 10 Commandments are anyway yeah they're wrong or mistaken.
And frankly atheists, although they do quote Bible verses a lot are not usually very careful students of the Bible and you know one of the reasons. First, because I don't believe it's true. You study very carefully something that you think is hokum. You know right so that what they do is they the these particularly for Schmidt may never even read through the Bible, even through Exodus, but they've lived there is a long list you can get them online. Find list of so-called contradictions in the Bible and and frankly the they're generally speaking, not contradictions in the Bible at all. They are instances where you know somebody who doesn't read very carefully to study very well has found two passages that to him on the surface look like a contradictory and so he put some in the Liston atheists repeat them throughout the Internet and throughout their arguments. I have two lectures about the alleged discrepancies in the Bible at my website and are free to listen to everything there is free if you go to the narrow path.com Outlook under topical lectures.
Okay okay and under topical lectures. You'll see quite a few series of lectures were the first. I think listed is the authority of Scripture series and if you look in the in the lectures in that series. There is no there's a couple of them on the alleged contradictions in the Bible are alleged discrepancies in the Bible and I deal with, so maybe I'm not sure 30 to 40 examples of the contradictions that skeptics bring up supposedly not explain why they make that mistake.
In these passages now of course there's a lot more than 30 or 40 someone wrote a book addressing 900 alleged contradictions in the Bible, but the outcome of her so goofy it is. All you have to do is really read the passages context to see instantly that there there is no contradiction there and and it makes you wonder why did this person who brought it up think that he knew enough about the Bible to find this is a contradiction when he obviously if you only read the whole passage to be clear that it wasn't an and this is just the way I tell you what I mean we Christians do that too sometimes will be will be argued against some maybe some cult or something like that.
We've never really read their books.
We just gotten you know things we've taken out of context or something sometimes and that's an atheist event of the Bible and if you do find an atheist knows the Bible mount. I don't think you will because frankly it's hard to find a Christian is about much less an atheist and I Christians even study the Bible at least read it regularly. Some of them and if you simply don't do that.
So I would say that a person who studies the Bible is open-minded and has access to background materials about the meaning of the Greek and Hebrew words and things like that. I think that they don't become atheists unless they do so out of bitterness is not because of scholarly study, that's for sure. Right bitterness.
A great all right Cheryl look at the top of the lectures. Thank you very much and I'm sure I'll get some info there. Okay God bless you John thanks your call yet. All right, so talk next to Lisa from Hillsboro, Oregon Lisa, welcome to the narrow path things for calling an old and the question between the ceremony a lot. All I really feel alienated. I would with a friend. We had to drive to Manzanita yesterday and I highly get into getting her teeth and of your life. And on on that that radio program from other people had talked about yesterday that I'm 3D that Helen fell on the honor drive, like Nick, that was a really good lecture. He wanted that with me till he let thank you first and elect.
And you had talked about on when that rich man way asking if I could send someone to tell his brother and how that way you would not have the applicant judgment day hadn't come and help my my friend Ken had a question Philippe I think you like will wait right after we die. Don't we either go to heaven or hell, and I like knowing that I'm kind of aware that there is something else in between, and judgment day but I didn't really have a good answer for her. Wondering if you can talk a little bit what happened in between. When we die and judgment day. Could you talk about. Sure thing right now. Okay, great, great, between the day we die in the day that Jesus comes back and raises our bodies from the dead. There is some dispute. Actually, what happens to us if we are Christians. I believe the Bible teaches that our spirits depart from our bodies course about when you die, your bodies put in the ground and it doesn't go anywhere just dissolves there and just dust okay but your spirit, go somewhere else in the Bible says that when we are absent from the body that the other alternatives to be present with the Lord now. That's, of course, Christians who live for the Lord and live with the Lord in this life we are connected with him forever and therefore when we die as our bodies die, our spirits could be with him.
Now that we may be with them there in heaven really for centuries before he returns certainly are people who have been buried for centuries, but their spirits with Christ because he has not yet returned. But when he does return. Then he comes back here and brings us with him if necessary. We died. In the meantime he brings our spirits with them. He raises our bodies from the dead, he glorifies and he makes them immortal and we live in is bodies again so were only absent from the body. Between the time that we die and the time that God races from the debt because were in the body until we die and were in the body. Aphorism the dead. So this is the interval between our death and the second coming of Christ and then we live forever in our mortal bodies. Now the unbeliever the Bible says very little about. In fact, the story you're talking about Lazarus and the rich man.
That's the only place in the whole Bible that I can find that says anything about the state of the unbeliever who dies immediately afterwards. This man in Hades is the Greek text says, which is not the same thing as hell of a frankly it is translated hell and some in many Bibles, but Hades really is the place where everybody goes when they die their body goes into the grave and in this case, the man is described as conscious there, and tormented in flames, but it is not the case that Jesus depicts this man in his resurrected body. I realize he talks as if he is a bodies got a tongue in a black male, put your finger in water per my tongue in torment of the flames. The frankly, I think that I think the parable uses imagery in my opinion it is a parable okay. Some Christians think it's an actual true story.
I think the evidence and comparing it with the parables of the rabbis suggest that it is a parable of Jesus is taken from the rabbis and putting his own spin on it to make his own point because it's known from the town with that the rabbis told a number parables very much like this. So it seems like Jesus is accommodating them in in order to make a point in his point is not about what happens to people effort die.
That is the scenario of the story and the scenario two people die and they are depicted as alive after death and that you're talking to each other things like that but it's very clear that this is not after the judgment, this is not in hell where people are thrown in the lake of fire. After they die because the rich man is no interceding for his five brothers were still alive. Now if this is after the great white throne judgment that his brothers would not be unsaved and alive, they'd be in him to be like a fire to its obvious that the rich man is concerned that when his brothers die they will end up where he is and so this is you, he has died, but they haven't yet. So this is right after he's died, he finds himself in this condition. Now this may be a literal situation if it is, then this is where the lost are found after they die.
And until the resurrection of Jesus, said the righteous and the unrighteous are to be right raised from the dead. When Jesus comes back.
He said that in John 528 29 but in Revelation says that after their raised those who were not found written in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. It also says in that passage that even death and hell are Hades. Death and Hades are thrown into the lake of fire. Hades is were that Richmond is seen so the lake of fire is future melons there yet. As far as we know, and no one will go there until after the been raised from the dead and judged and found you know unsaved but are they alive, and Hades tormented flames like this man is depicted here. Perhaps I mean Jesus might be giving us an error that is literal but the only passage of the whole Bible that says anything about where the where the wicked are where the unsaved are aptly die and I think it could be figurative. And so we don't know. It's there are many who believe and I think there's some evidence biblically that when unbelievers die there just unconscious until the resurrection. And then the race for the judgment. And then there thrown in the lake of fire and there is a lot of support for that idea. I mean, the Bible does say concerning the dead. They don't know anything and so forth and says they don't live again until the time is over till the end of the at the judgment.
So I think maybe I think the but here's how the Bible depicts human nature. I believe human beings are not born immortal human beings, not born with the innate capacity to live forever. Adam and Eve were not.
And we are not Adam and Eve were created potentially immortal because until they sinned, they were allowed to have access to the tree of life.
So we read in the third chapter of Genesis and but when they sin, they were deprived of access to reflect on if they had eaten of it. They would live forever.
It was by depriving them of that tree that caused them to just naturally die because they were naturally mortal.
They were potentially immortal, but they that they had to eat of the tree to be immortal, not all of us have been born outside the garden. None of us have had access to the tree of life.
So were all mortal.
But Jesus came and said that he would give eternal life to those who believe in him. So now eternal life or immortality is not conditional on eating from that tree in the garden, but from believing in Christ, and so if we believe in Christ, we suddenly have eternal life. So John 316 says you know God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him will not perish but would perish in the Greek needs to be destroyed but will have everlasting life. So if we if we believe in Christ, we won't perish but have everlasting life certainly implies if we don't believe in Christ, we will perish and we won't have eternal life. So it seems to me the Bible teaches that only believers have participated in the immortality that Christ possesses and shares with his saints with his disciples and the unbeliever doesn't have that which could easily mean that when they die they remain unconscious until the time that they are raised from the dead, so that the interval between death and the resurrection would be different for a believer or nonbeliever. A believer would be of Christ unbeliever were not told for the unbelievers, but could very well be that there unconscious until the Lord returns right there also think a lot of people think that their fleet how the judgment day.
He believed that the Bible teaches that absolutely that on Kristin's Argent athlete as well on you think that what you think about that. Why think is mistaken but it is it is an alternative view that some Christians hold it's called the doctor soul sleep.
For example, seven Sanders hold is your grandfather has been thought of as he sends evidence by chance know okay because they they are the only Christian denomination I know that that officially holds that view.
But I do know other people who are not sent to those who hold that view. Also, in my opinion I don't think that the think that case can be sustained in light of the New Testament teaches, but I don't have any objection to it if it if it was taught in Scripture is not something that bothered me. Okay well thank you for your comments. I really thinking okay Lisa, thanks for your call. Good talking to you today. Richard from seal Beach, California.
Welcome to the neuropathic for calling the unrighteous into the lake of fire. What kind of body I demand that nobody knows. So this is happened on the last day and do some structure and burn a little longer than others.
Well, I mean that depends on which the hell is this correct that if you're if you listen enough to know I don't have a commitment to any one of the three major evangelical views of hell.
I think the case for each of them is is so is something that has to be dealt with and I think that the view that people are eternally tormented in hell. I don't think it has as much Scripture to stand on. As I as I once thought I taught it for like I was in my 40s 50s even before seriously questioned it. But the more I studied it, and you may know, I've written a book on the three views of hell now which I I read about what 30 books by different people different views to get the biblical arguments which one I suspect that all of them could be strongly supported but then of course contrary to each other so I think the Bible is unclear on the front in the final analysis on that but in in the view of some which is called the conditional immortality view.
Some believe that wanted unbeliever dies in the raised from the dead, they are not in an immortal body. During a body but they're not immortal, and because they have not believed in Christ.
Therefore they don't possess immortality and not being so they feel that when there thrown in the lake far they just burn up right away every everlasting unbeliever just burns up right away.
Others believe is seems more reasonable to me. And this is actually the view that the Seventh-day Adventist do teach. I'm not one of them, but that so we believe that the unbeliever was thrown in the lake of fire will will suffer proportionately to their guilt. When Jesus did say that some people on the day of judgment will find some lost people will find it more tolerable. On the day of judgment then other lost people.
For example, Jesus had become Sodom and Gomorrah will find it more tolerable in the day of judgment in Capernaum. One of the Jewish cities that rejected Christ, and so if if people in the lake of fire suffer some more than others, some more tolerably than others, then it would seem that the punishment must be proportionate and Jesus said in the Gospel of Luke, the servant who knew his master's will and did not prepare himself and did not do his masters will will be beaten with many stripes but he said that that servant who did not know his masters will be did things worthy of stripes will be beaten with fewer stripes. So it seems to me that there is a proportionate judgment as there should be any court of law.
That's just will recognize that not everybody who's committed crimes is equally wicked. Some are more so than others, but especially crimes that were it done in ignorance are less likely to be punished severely.
So that's how Jesus seems to describe so if if in fact annihilation is the last and of the of the center in hell, it seems reasonable to suggest that some will suffer more and some less before that final end because that would be recognizing proportionate guilt.
All right, let's talk to Ben from Boise, Idaho then welcome to the neuropathic for calling me yes to question her question but questioning stuff in and thinking of all is when they talk about the kingdom of grace, that in the kingdom of God like that idea coming from. Well, there's no there's no reference to the kingdom of grace in the Bible there isn't reference 11 reference to the gospel of grace. Now the gospel in the New Testament is the gospel of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of God is no described not always just names but sometimes describe different ways. The message of the gospel is the message of the kingdom of God according to Scripture. The fact that the gospel message which is a key route is sometimes called the gospel grace of the gospel of peace.
Some of these other terms suggest that grace and peace and in some of these other things are aspects of the kingdom of God. So one could, I suppose, use the term, the kingdom of grace, even though that term is not found in Scripture, it is a good item you know a lot of teachers say that there is a different kingdom of the preached now and then it can eat. It wasn't westernization.
Yeah those are dispensations what they're saying is that Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom of God. But when the kingdom was rejected by the Jews. They say you know the kingdom of God was postponed and then God revealed another gospel to Paul call the gospel of the grace of God and they say that it's different than the gospel of Jesus preached and therefore you can't preach. According to them, you can't preach the gospel. Jesus preached because that was for a different dispensation that Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom that's been postponed.
It won't be relevant again until the millennium, and and so they say you know you have to preach the gospel of grace instead problem is that saying that there's another gospel, not just the gospel that Paul preached what they wanted. Jesus preached in which they believe Peter and James and John preached, but Paul said if anyone preaches any other gospel, let him be accursed. Paulding ring is more than one gospel. Here's what Paul actually said about his own preaching in acts chapter 20 verses 24, 25 Paul said none of these things move me to account my life dear to myself so that I may finish my race with joy and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify. Note to the gospel of the grace of God that that's the only place in the Bible uses the expression gospel grace one time he says I I am going to finish my ministry, which is I've received to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. Verse 25 and indeed now I know that you all, among whom I have been gone, I've gone preaching the kingdom of God will see my face no more that he said he may preach the kingdom of God and he spent preach the gospel of the grace of God is obviously using those terms interchangeably, and rightly so, because only one gospel. You could call the gospel of peace.
As Paul does in a couple places in Isaiah calls it that you call the gospel of grace. He does one time in Scripture more often is called the gospel of the kingdom is only one king is only one gospel effect in Revelation 14 is called the everlasting gospel if it's the everlasting gospel that must be applicable to all times, not one dispensation or another. You know, at the end of the book of acts. The very last summary of what Paul did when he was in prison awaiting his trial the end of the recorded ministry of Paul, it says an extra 2831 it says that he was preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence known for Bennion so Paul's the very last statement of his ministry in the book of acts near the end of his ministry. It says he spent his time preaching the kingdom of God, which is what Jesus did to attention because acts chapter 1 begins by saying that when Jesus rose from the dead. He spent 40 days speaking to the disciples things concerning the kingdom of God. So to say that Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom of Paul preached something else is to be well to not be faithful to Scripture. Unfortunately, there's a whole huge theological camp held by many evangelicals who say exactly that they save the kingdom. The gospel to kingdom was relevant when Jesus will preaching it until the Jews rejected it. The kingdom they say is postponed something the Bible nowhere mentions not one play and it's an amazing thing that they make a claim about that because if it was Pope postponed.
This is a very important thing to mention since Jesus preached nothing but the kingdom of God in his whole ministry. If that was postponed and no longer relevant. Big interesting that no one in the Bible ever said so it's John Nelson Darby said so in the 1830s and that's where they got it. Darby was not forgot.
He's not writing inspired Scripture. Paul did Peter did James did they all preach the gospel of the kingdom of God just like Jesus did is only one gospel. Someone says there's more than one. I think I'd run away from them very fast because Paul said they are anathema all right.
He did that mean something different that you reached your they would say we don't preach the kingdom of God.
But we preach the gospel grace they would say I am not assigned for this call. I'm sorry to say but I have to take a break here the heartbreak at this point but yes sometimes dispensation say there's a difference in the kingdom of God.
The kingdom of heaven which is again mistaking what the Scripture says very plainly on the two are used interchangeably by by Jesus I got to take a break here, but I appreciate your call.
I hope it's helpful been listening to the narrow pathway of another half hour ahead, don't go away. We are listener supported. You can write to us at the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 or go to our website and the narrow path.com and you can donate there'll be right back.
Tell your family.
Tell your friends tell everyone you know about the Bible radio show that has nothing to send everything to give you the narrow path with Steve Grant when today's radio show in Denver go to your social media and send a link to the narrow path.com, one can find free time on your teaching blog article verse by verse teachings and archives of the narrow path radio shows and tell them to listen live right here on the radio. Thank you for sharing.
Listener supported the narrow path. Greg welcome back to the narrow path radio broadcast Steve Greg and we are live for another half hour, still taking calls for another half hour. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or if you have a different viewpoint from the host always welcome to bring that up the number to call is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 then from Boise Idaho was our last call at the end of the last first half hour and that he asked me another question in garage. He said Arnie my materials available in Spanish. At this point not to my knowledge I don't know who may have translated anything of mine from the website in Spanish. The people sometimes do that kind of thing. For example, people will take my lectures and transcribe them and they do that on their own, I die. I don't to authorize it but I don't forget it either. So if anyone is translating my stuff in Spanish.
I'm not aware I I do have a good friend in the ministry, whose who is a kind of professional translator of of of works in Spanish and I know he wants to translate my books into Spanish, which maybe he will.
At this point I don't know if any of my works that are available in Spanish. Now as far as the I mentioned at the break as I usually do that we are listener supported and you can donate from the website.
I just want anyone to know that if you do donate online.
Do not use PayPal or were having issues with PayPal so unfortunately it looks like PayPal is holding some of the donations that were made with we've been receiving gifts to PayPal for decades and for some reason they just kinda decided that I will pass along to. So we been doing what we can to resolve that and we don't know if it will be resolved or observed dragging their feet didn't want to. We give them all the information asked for in that they don't do it. Never get back to us so do not use PayPal in and donating to the narrow path that there's other options at our email@example.com okay. We need to get back to the phones in the next colors Ryan from day morning at Ryan.
Welcome to the neuropathic for calling you good looking up to Nietzsche about a year ago.
Make drive down to Kansas City can't believe only about a year already. But while they you know I got a notebook full of questions. Man and I consider myself a new Christian, but Lisa's call actually from yesterday on the old and New Testament in the moral versus ceremonial laws sparked me to give you call the dates I got two young daughters and I'm kind of building up my personal on this. Premarital sex conversation that I'm probably gonna be having at some point and I can like your take on. You know it's not just about pregnancy or STDs or whatever but it's really a sin against God and and I would like your take on, you know, expand on where in the Bible it really talks about sex outside of marriage being a sin. Helpful dictation is kind of an unnatural sex but doesn't really touch on unmarried sex and then whipping up back to the conversation yesterday on the moral versus ceremonial you know where marriage between a man and a woman. You know if that's a ceremonial leader. Sounds like it's more of a ceremonial thing and if you can have it another way, how would it violate his character and justice, faithfulness and mercy. You know how it helped the opposite of marriage or different kinds of marriages violate God's character does that make sense.
While it is a lot of places go here first of all personally know that God created marriage to be a picture of Christ and the church and in the Old Testament of Israel and God and the sexual union. The sexual union that binds a man and woman together marriage is is that a parallel in the Bible to our worship of God. So if if we are if Israel was God's wife and God the husband, which is the way he tells it.
Then for her to worship only him was the matter being sexually faithful to the husband and if she worship other gods. It was parallel to the woman sleeping with other men and he he referred to it that way. He spoke of his adultery when when Israel worshiped other gods, so it's very clear that there is nothing negotiable about marriage or changing this marriage. In fact, as I was saying to. I think her yesterday marriage is defined for sin met in Genesis 224 and here's the definition that a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife. That means, of course she's married to him and it says and the two shall become one flesh which is Paul identifies with the sex in for scripting. Six. Paul said that a man with a harlot, it becomes one flesh with the return of the sexual act is that which joins people as one flesh. God's teaching is a man leaves his family starts a new family with his wife and then they become one flesh. Sexually, God did not intend for sex to take place outside of marriage. And while there's a lot of sexual sins listed mean like especially the most perverted ones in the law forbidding it is not specifically a law that says people who are unmarried cannot have sex but but you could deduce that the things were not legalists are not just looking for a law were looking for the heart of God and God's heart is for marriage to be maintained as God made it, and marriage is so sex is to happen between a man and a wife only according to Genesis 224 now interestingly we know that's not just sermonic as Jesus enforced inserted Paul if that was a ceremonial law then then Jesus probably would not of mentioned it, and Paul certainly would not of mentioned it, but they both quote Genesis 224 when their talk about what marriages and when Jesus did. It's interesting because he was asked about the grounds for divorce and is it okay to divorce your wife how it's interesting about that is the Old Testament didn't specifically forbid divorce there's laws about divorce interrupt.
Deuteronomy 24 and it does not forbid divorce in the Old Testament, but when Jesus was asked about divorce, he said well have you not read that in the beginning God made them male and female, and said, for this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife and the two become one flesh in and then he said or therefore what God has joined together, let not man put asunder and notice he's he was asked not about marriage, he was asked about divorce but he answered the ethics of divorce from reminding them what God said about marriage and it's the same thing that we don't have specific statements. The Old Testament, you shall not sleep with a woman who you know who's unmarried and not your wife but but it does give a positive statement of what God's will is for sex.
It's in marriage and in Jesus enforced that when he was about divorce, but in a mean basically just by affirming what God's plans for marriage and for sex, which Jesus did what you've done is you've basically said anything that deviates from that is not what God plant and not what God wants. Now in the Old Testament if people committed adultery. That is a married man with a married woman who was not his wife or if even if one of them was married to somebody else that was the death penalty as a severe crime if a man actually slept with a woman who is not betrothed and not married anybody else which is the case at the barrier you had to marry her exactly now the fact that God didn't stone them to death, but didn't say they should be stoned to death means that perhaps it's not as great an offense as the violation of the marriage covenant is but the fact that they had to marry means God did not want people sleeping together unmarried and if they did sleep governor they had to get married.
So it's very clear that God did not want sex separated from marriage in any way without the word fornication.
The Greek report Naya in the New Testament we use the word fornication often to speak of premarital sex or extra Middlesex that's not specifically adultery the word in the word in the Greek Ashley's are more like an umbrella term for any kind of wrongful sex, fornication does not specifically indicate extramarital sex in the sense of you know single people having sex together but it does indicate any violation of God, sexual norms and single people having sex with each other is a violation of of the sexual norm and therefore I believe falls under fornication and Jesus spoke of fornication as an evil thing in Mark chapter 7, you know, Paul said that fornicators will not inherit the kingdom of God in an frustrated chapter 6 verses 910. All six of the same thing in Galatians 5 2019 and 20 thereabout so we have, you know, very clear teaching that fornication is intolerable and fornication is basically a deviation sexual deviation from the norms that God has given.
Now, prostitution is very clearly called fornication, and even though prostitution is a very special kind of criminal behavior and immoral behavior. It generally speaking, does involve an unmarried woman and therefore not necessarily adultery but it would be extramarital sex slave. The main difference between that and a guys sleeping with some other girl is not married with is that one is your charging for the others not. But the Bible doesn't say that the morality of sex depends on whether some of these charging for it or not, the morality is based on God's design of marriage, and his plan for sex and anyone can see I think if there is an objective that when people have sex together when they're not married to each other. It brings spiritual and moral decay and painting and hardship you know if that if a young if the couple have have your article a boyfriend girlfriend are going out together and so forth.
And they don't have sex and they break up they can get over pretty well, but if if a young girl has had sex with her boyfriend in the breakup. It's very devastating to her at least an offer to him.
If she's the one who breaks up on you. You bind yourself to somebody because God not intended that marriage aggressively got into that sex binds a couple together make someone flesh and once Jesus said what you know what God has joined together as one flesh. Don't break it up so you don't want to have sex with him to become one flesh or some unless you're married to him unless you've got a bond that's a lifelong bond. That's what it's for. And when people have sex outside of marriage is a young couple who were not yet married what they're doing is performing a life joining act without life, joining intentions, so they're doing something in a light creating a life creating a Catholic and have kids. And again, a lot of times per silver girls and don't don't have sex unless you do it safely or whatever was never safe enough because you're violating the principles of God's never safe, divided the principles got a lot of times they try to dissuade their daughters for sex because you might get pregnant or like you say they might have an STD or something like that. And of course there is that danger, but the more fundamental danger is that you're abusing the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is your body and your defiling it and God says whoever defiles the temple. He'll destroy so that discussions found in both first prescriptive three verse 16 and in frustrated six. At the end of that chapter so there's no specific info law in the Old Testament.
Thou shalt not sleep with a person. If neither of you married to anyone else, but it's it's a violation of God's purposes and course legalism is what most people practice when their religious and so gorgeous.
It was no law against it so I can do it well. Well, it's not just a matter of laws as a matter of a relationship with God. If you love God and by the way, if you don't, you're probably not saved because that's what the Bible says he that loves knows God is born of God. He does not love does not know God will then if someone doesn't love God, no, I don't care if they do that same fate anyway. But if they do love God does want not say is, can I get away with this because there's no specific rule of site. How can I please God when you love someone you want to please him and God through in Genesis and through Jesus and Paul made it very clear what God is pleased with that such conduct.
So I would say with your daughters.
The main thing you have to be sure of is that they know and love God and that you appeal to them on that basis. If you love God and if you believe God which are the evidences that you're really saved, then you're not gonna want to do things that God didn't want done because he has a good reason is not just try to rain on our parade is trying to protect us from dangers which which experienced sinners. No happen when you violate God's standards and will keep this one on archive here for another three or four years hopefully. But okay will get back to you with the rest of my notebook down the road are a great good to hear from you, Ryan.
Okay, thanks Steve by now. Okay our next collar is J from Las Vegas J.
Welcome to the neuropathic for calling the week with you will question it located in a comment was on the unmetered you are talking about that and the PayPal gives directly to Planned Parenthood so I stopped using them and it hurt my business little it did dampen my good little bit but I alternative workaround there's been molded which is now been acquired by the public, the captives that the company and there's a couple other problems. You're right you're right. PayPal does a gift to Planned Parenthood. I'm not sure you could find any online financial transaction confirm that that you can be sure doesn't get to Planned Parenthood but that if someone knows of one, please email it to me because I would love to only use businesses that do not sponsor Porsche, are you there is a list on family counsel. That award given directly in an ethnic it indirectly when they give indirectly again united United Way which gives directly so family counsel family counseling.org. Thank you for that matter question were running out of time running out of time and were not running out of calls waiting so you have some questions I think you all yeah I do now, is the line of that same thinking I'm a small company and we do IT work and get subcontracted in one of the companies they get the contract. If you want maybe once a year once a is Bank of America do maintenance and BankAmerica is one of the companies as well. They give strictly plan for tonight is one of the no my blood on my hands in some way. You know they paid BankAmerica pays the E contradict company they can't make the contract means the person teases the on-site to say that they have blood on their hands, but I don't and I'm not sure working and let's face it Christians in many cases have to sometimes work for non-Christians and we can't be held responsible for those people do. Unless of course were doing something that's enabling to do it. You know it's it's a rare thing for a Christian to be able be an industry that only interacts with other Christians. I suppose it had been a radio broadcaster in a Christian station probably comes closer than anything. I don't know that any of my any of the donors or listeners or whatever are involved in any non-Christian activities that I'm aware of some of them probably are, but frankly most people don't have that luxury. After work for a boss or at least for clients. If you're self-employed, unless you only work for Christian clients or Christian boss to be working for someone who does things that you don't approve. As a Christian and that's the position were just in that Scott has God has in essence put us in a position in fact the Bible talks about some Christian slaves who have non-Christian masters be like non-Christian employers tells of the faithful's was faithful slaves in a good witness and so forth. Thou let the masters do with our life. That's between them and God. But if you've got to work and you not working for what is in itself an immoral industry and I don't believe that banking is in itself an immoral industry than what the what the corporation or for does with their money. That's that's on them. I don't think it's on you.
I want to add one last comment at the end occasionally move on for the sake of the older generation should consider adding the phone number on website where they could just take the phone number and call in and listen in on like a ridgeline listener program.
Yeah, I'm not really sure I don't doing technological at all.
I just I just talk on the radio. I don't I don't have any idea how that stuck there may be someone. Maybe someone out there who doesn't will will set that up for sets how things that's our website got set up the podcast everything that's done is done by volunteers with no paid staff in the organization will want more information you not like I do help ministries out and without charge inaudible intubated and you know so well. Feel free to email us and until such a mine. Okay firstname.lastname@example.org will do okay Steve that I J got our next collar is John from Oregon city in Oregon hi John, welcome to the narrow path local so question will have time to people questioned the world what would you say the scriptural call stone passages told eschatology is woven through the whole Bible you what what particular point of eschatology are interested in coming.
For example, eschatology includes things like the controversies about the millennium in the tribulation, the rapture and will ripening like I said there's there's 300 passages depending on what aspect of rest and time prophecy time. I don't know of like a handful of verses and somehow encompass the whole field. The Bible teaches Jesus going to come back. That's the most important and time prophecy but you know, apart from that there's going to be any. Depending on which which in time thing you want to talk about would have a whole list of scriptures for one viewing for another view, and so forth. You can listen to my lectures: when shall these things be about eschatology site 14 lectures by give scriptures on both sides of issues like the rapture and in the millennium and such, but I can't give you just a smattering of scriptures about eschatology, convinced that the broad field I be like saying what will you know giving three scriptures on Calvinism well captives has five different points. Each of them supported by dozens of scriptures and each of them refuted by dozens Scripture. So you have to really it's it's more complicated than having a few proof texts okay then told you about Christology will similarly Christology is the doctrine of Christ of you that would include, you know his preexistence and include his humanity. His relationship with father to the Holy Spirit that I don't do. I don't do a few scriptures on a big subject. II. If you go to my website. I have lectures on every one of those subjects and their thorough and full of Scripture, but I mean that Jesus is the son of God is is one thing the Bible teaches, and quite a few scriptures that he is the Lord that he is the Savior that he's the Messiah that he's an old enemy. There's all these things are there scriptures for them but on this about about what is the most whole Bible. I don't know.
All I do. I do Matthew 71 Judge not, that you be not judged. It's a favorite scripture of all unbelievers and more believers and unbelievers, so it's probably the most referenced passage will I move along these questions. Not really very afraid. Very easy to answer our or capable of being answered in the time we have on a show like this can't just have a long list of them. The CGM from LA County. Welcome to the neuropathic for calling.
Yeah, I'm concerned about a false teaching by the Catholic Church. Mother Mary and they do not believe she died of physical which he ascended into like Jesus, not Elijah and Elisha, there's no proof that she there's no evidence that she ascended into heaven. No, so they teach that that's a false teaching was a lot false teachings and a lot of them about Mary.
They teach that Mary was sinless. They teach that Mary is an intermediary between us in Christ afraid to think that it's a false teaching. And I would recommend people not follow the check with you about it and thank you. Okay, thanks for your call Greg from Eugene. Welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling glad we got you much time that I question. I've got is about John the 18P reading from the NASD with what version are you default. I usually have the new King James infirmary.
I have other versions on the shelter. So could you give me your opinion on the NAS being version of that firstů Wait, anything I have the new King James. That's one in front of me. We want to read the lesson yet the NASD yet that something about Jesus being the only begotten God, yeah, in the bosom of the father right Linda King James says you only begotten yes you're right, that is. That's one of the many examples of how the ancient manuscripts that most ancient scripts differ from the ones that were used by the nuclear by the King James in the new King James it is one of those textual variants that exist is a saying that Jesus is the only begotten son or the only begotten God, the oldest manuscript say he's the only begotten or Monaghan Ace in the Greek Monaghan Ace just means the unique one and only God and the later manuscript say the only begotten of the Monaghan Ace son. Yeah, it's hard to know many, many people believe the older men scripts are true or to the original and that John really did write the Monaghan Ace daughter them one and only God.
Others feel that the King James is more accurate but that the thing about these kinds of variance is that they don't make very much difference because either either reading agrees with other Scripture, the Bible, frankly, in the in the same chapter says that the Word was God and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, so that chapter does teach that Jesus is God in the flesh.
So if if the word God is the original, then it's quite agreeable with it. On the other hand, if the word son is in erosion with plenty in the book of John to affirm that Jesus is the son so really, all although it is interesting to be fascinated to know perhaps what the original reading was. I never bother myself with the those kinds differences.
If we don't know because the you when you got two options and they're both okay. They both agree with what John writes in the near context. It's not an issue but but if you're wondering why it's different because there's some ancient manuscripts more ancient than the ones used by the King James translators because they did didn't have in 1611 and sense of things that will that in 325, the Christian church defined it. Jesus Christ couldn't be another God had to be God and if he was the son of God would make him another God the technically Jesus Christ is the son of God but God. All that's that's absolutely not what he decided Nicaea at Nicaea. They affirm that Jesus is God and that is the son of God, and no one could deny that is son of God says that what hundreds of times in the New Testament