Share This Episode
The Narrow Path Steve Gregg Logo

The Narrow Path 6/18

The Narrow Path / Steve Gregg
The Truth Network Radio
June 18, 2020 8:00 am

The Narrow Path 6/18

The Narrow Path / Steve Gregg

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 144 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


June 18, 2020 8:00 am

Enjoy this program from Steve Gregg and The Narrow Path Radio!

COVERED TOPICS / TAGS (Click to Search)
The Narrow Path Steve Gregg
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg
The Narrow Path
Steve Gregg

Good afternoon and welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast lighting Steve Greg and were life for an hour each week afternoon with an open phone line for you if you'd like to call in. If you have questions like ask about the Bible and the Christian faith or you see things differently than the host. Feel free to give me a call. The lines are full right now but take this number down and if you call it if you let you make it through the numbers 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 our first caller today is Bruce who identified himself or call screeners, a Jehovah's Witness from Portland.

Good to hear from you. Bruce thanks for joining us, Michael, great. Might my question is a perspective question on on reading the Bible really based on the two scriptures spoke the book of clerk to chapters the boat book installations.

Chapter 3 but really the whole book of Galatians and in correlation with Revelation chapter 7.

My question is from Galatians doing from 329 BC, an expansion of the Abraham a covenant to elect Christians which are book both made up of Jews and Gentiles for the correct Galatian congregation. There also the date there called Abraham's offspring at that time and in chapter 6 be called the Israel of God might by questioning his perception. Most commentators on Revelation chapter 7 look at the first part of chapter stabbing as being more literal and symbolic and perception why my question to you is do you look at it as symbolic or literal in the first part six is Revelation 7 and if you look at them start.

Oh well, now I get a chance have a follow-up question will answer this book. I know that as a Jehovah's Witness you believe that the hundred 44,000 refers to the true Christian church, not necessarily Jews and your orgasm.

As I jibed I believe the actual, literal Jews of there are some Christian expositors who do not see them as literal Jews would see them the same way you do, but I think they are reference to, just because I think they are contrasted deliberately with the second group that's in the latter part of chapters 2 groups described in the chapter in the first half. You have the hundred 44,000 and in the second Nephi of another group that are mentioned now that there are several contrast between these two groups of the hundred 44,000 as I heard their number so they were innumerable group but the second groups as they were innumerable. No one could number them so the second group is much larger than the first group. Then, of course, are the first group is specifically in and deliberately said to be Jewish because there's 12,000 from his tribe 12,000 electrons are thousand for that progress to the tribes, whereas the second group is said to be from every nation, and language in tribe and so and so forth. So it's obviously a contrast the two groups. One of them is innumerable a large, the other is large but he knows their number. The first group is said to be Jewish and the second group is said to be international or or you know of every tribe and nation, so it strikes me as this is a contrast between two different groups know my own understanding Revelation would differ from yours and that I don't believe it's talking about the end times. I believe Revelation talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and I think that the first group refers to the Jewish remnant who escaped from that Holocaust because they were warned and they had been, as it says sealed by God for preservation because they were followers of Christ we see the same group and chapter 14 of Revelation said that they follow the Lamb wherever he goes of the followers of Jesus and they are Jewish. I believe are the Jewish followers of Jesus, and in chapter 14 says they are the firstfruits unto God. So the not the end of the world group.

Third, beginning of the church age there the beginning of the fruits of the church and that would be that the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem in the first century who escaped from the Holocaust, which is, of course, what's been described that there sealed so that they will not be hurt by the plagues that were coming the other group I take to be of the Gentiles who will come into the kingdom of God. As a result of the Holocaust and the gospel going to all the worlds that that's my understanding of my question back to Galatians 329 which is the right show the connection that the elect Christian that are part of that Galatian congregation, even if they are Gentiles are now considered Jews agree.

Mike lacking my connection. My connection to Revelation 7 the first party looking at it symbolically and would be to me would show that the elect Christians which were both diligent now considered Israel in that first part and perception why group the second group that I would see the second group of Christians that are not elect to ask. Your comments are interesting because there are a lot of parallels in connection when I last question. The last I will take you last question villages answer each assembly could do that.

Galatians is teaching that everyone who is a follower of Christ, whether Jew or Gentile, is now the true history of the new children of Abraham, the true Jews. I agree that's true, but that doesn't preclude other writers are in Paul himself and other passages to speak about Jews as a separate race and he does it all and Romans. He often makes a contrast between the Jews and the Gentiles of the Jews, so shouldn't judge the Gentiles the Gentiles shouldn't look down on the Jews.

He says it's very clear that he does see reasons on occasion to talk about Jews and Gentiles separately.

Although he believes as I do, that Jews and Gentiles who are in Christ are the body of Christ. But that doesn't change the fact that there are no ways to talk about these different ethnic groups in different contexts.

I don't see Galatians 3 as an intentional commentary on Revelation 7 so I would have to use at least I have to start with internal factors in Revelation 7 to get my interpretation.

If there's helpful information outside Revelation than that would be useful to but secondarily I think the passage makes perfectly good sense just taking it with its internal evidence in regard to groups of people.

I'm sorry, just had to put on hold to that sound as well put you back on hang on there you'll be back on just a second okay I think we can do it now. Yet when requested in my search and following the flight I'd gotten to question any kind of what the difference between Jehovah's Witness and mainstream Christianity are sure and disparate that this perception many different doctrinal issues with the biggest issue in this question, perception in which we read Scripture and I continually put myself in the shoes of mainstream Christian my whole Christian life and through this user Jehovah's Witness and I think that that the book the year. The Bible book of the new customer primarily written could be a black and most Pete.

The biggest difference is that people read the Scriptures from an IT perspective now when it should be read from a script perspective I believe of two different groups of Christian the elect Christian and other pitching and that at played out in Revelation 7 all the way to the end of that chapter and so that I just wanted to get your perception and he and I see a lot of parallels medicament sure to say where I differ from you, and you know I won't prove you wrong that where I see the word elect differently. I don't see some Christians as elect and other Christians is nonelected. I believe that the word elect refers to all who are in Christ, we, the Bible indicates that Christ is the one who is elect and those who are in him share in that status of election. Those who are not in him are not Christians at all. So I believe that the election refers to every Christian Jew or Gentile, and not to some elite group of Christians. For example, I know, I know that your group believes that there are 144,000 elect ones or anointed ones. I actually had a chance to talk to one in his home. Many years ago in the 70s when I was invited to the home of one of your hundred 44,000 elect ones in the course.

I talked to Jehovah's Witness dozens of times that length sit tight and then you believe that the hundred 44,000 are the elect and will be in heaven and that the rest of the Christians who are saved will be on the earth, and this is this is not based in my opinion on on strong exegesis of passages but, rather, following what what a certain teacher said I personally am not a defender of everything that you'd find in mainstream Christianity, I am. I think the institutional church has its hazards problems, but I'm not. I'm not really part of an institutional church are part of the home church which is equally valid to any other kind church but I but I lie just to say I'm a follower of Jesus, and that in my own views of the Bible come from my own study the Bible are not sent read other people's views, including yours that I do I try to encounter and interact with the views of everyone that's out there, but that doesn't mean I am persuaded by anyone group of what strike that heft after approval from the Scripture for myself, but I appreciate your call and you're always my pleasure and you're welcome to call and have the future.

Okay you two all right, let's talk to a Robert from Austin Texas. Robert welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling and he again the question about first Timothy chapter 3 and ended what he deals with deacons. Recently, I was appointed to the they wanted me to be a deacon in the church, but I wasn't keep leading to the passages and you know and it just I don't know my pastor and then thing the things that that I feel describe. But on a non-still kind of you know leery about it confounded you.

Now I don't feel like, qualified to do that, you know the church whenever I can, but a cheater you know which of the wings the qualification which the qualifications that Paul lists there. Do you feel you fall short in what he said right was being found blameless and know that you not only you know we so we are all sinners and were still you know all was still working through our salvation. And I know it's that it's a lifelong process. We don't just dig it happens, will happen to contain the lady I mean you know I still have a deep love for the you not falter time to time in that you know and I want to be a good represent Tatian of his charge you nothing. We had the church has so many problems with the you know people that are running to take title of man and they don't even know what actually meaning and didn't know what it is to follow cry to be counted among those that want to be very careful when and accepting something like that because I know it holds the great responsibility in and I think that would be a good thing is everybody who's ever offered a position in the church would have the same reticence about it that you have. Although it's possible that you are more qualified than you think. I mean, it's also possible that you're not and you know better than anyone else for that strike.

I don't know what what areas of your life. You're not blameless in but you're right. Nobody is hundred percent blameless. I think what Paul is talking about in this particular case is find members of the church who don't have any you sent anything scandalous that would be a bad testimony publicly in their lives.

I don't think it means someone who's never doesn't commit ever an error or sin, but you know I'm not really that big on titles anyway. For example, I read what Paul said about elders. I'm not sure that I would. I don't I don't know that I would qualify to be an elder. I might mean I think in most the things that he says I would but there's things that are ambiguous like you know that your family situation. You know I have fun have been married more than once. I'm not saying that Paul's statement husband of one wife excludes people who been married more than once, but I think that it's the I think it's controversial. So I mean I've never I would never have any interest in someone making me an elder in the church because frankly, there would be reason for some people to complain about that, I think, but on the other hand, I can do I can do the work that I'm gifted to do, which is at this point we are teaching the been teaching for 50 years and I think if you feel like serving the church you could be of great help to the church when he accepted the title or not. I think I would ask the pastor of our reviewer whoever's asking is it okay if I just if I just help out in whatever ways you want deacons to help out without having the title. Is that okay because the word the Cadillac.org were deacon in Greek. I'm in the Greek was dioxin switch. This is the Greek word for servant and so is a lot like I don't mind being a servant but I'm not sure. I'm not sure I feel comfortable with that special title about being assertive, I serve don't have a title that would be like. Night advised that I feel the same way I felt like I don't need a title of the chart on the first and right to do it anyway. Title you know I mean I like yourself. I wonder about people who are looking for titles you just don't you have don't you have something to offer that people would recognize as valid without having have a title for it and it seems to me like if you really have a gift. If you really have something to offer the body of Christ that will be discovered and whether people review title or not they'll be open to receiving benefit from your gift that's what you wanted to get your people to benefit it on titles and status people want that are simply not really following Christ very faithfully looks like to me for Jesus and yet, thanks a lot time I really appreciate it. Let the guys on the on the Internet on every day at work and thank you so much for your time and thank you for your call. God bless you and David from Camarillo, California. Even white and while welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling on the thank you have a question, but in the news. Thank you, Diane recently with happen there with the Supreme Court in the last couple of days. Yeah, I heard something about that. Okay so you are aware, never basically thing right now including defense is mostly just letting vision. I go against the spirit of the laws and rules that have been enacted previously, my, my question is, though, is that you are aware that the Supreme Court is made up the majority of six Roman Catholic. Is that correct. I do believe a lot of them are another number that Roman Catholics six Roman Catholic in in in the Supreme Court.

My question is a question but that majority Roman Catholic First Fidelity is not to whatever country they may happen to be input to the church itself depends because there's a lot of there's a lot of Roman Catholics that are not very observant uninsured technical technically technically every Protestants first loyalty is to Jesus not to the country therein. But that's not the way works on their actions and voting know that six Roman Catholic on the Supreme Court. Might be a possibility. One day I then legislating to the point that the mark of the Roman Catholic Church which is simply sacredness and improvement is legislated to the point that it is made mandatory by law.

I think that's extremely unlikely, and in fact the fact that the recent decision was decision favorable toward your own special rights of gays and trans people in the area for employment that that doesn't sound like the way the Catholic Pope would would want things to go in my butt so I don't know that the Catholic legislators on the bench are frankly deciding agreeable with the Catholic Church itself. I know that you sent Dennis believe that there is going to come a time when the United States does require everyone to worship on Sunday to my mind it's unimaginable that there would ever be a law that required people to worship on Sunday. It's but it's shocking enough that there is that there's been a lockdown that is forbidden people to have even church any day have assemblies. It also mean things are going crazy here, but I don't think you're going crazy in the direction of mandating church attendance.

I think that if the if the courts deviate from their program from their constitutional duties. If you go more in the direction of forbidding church attendance not to mandating it so I mean I don't do something for them Saturday Sabbath is everything and so they think that that's everything to God and serving to the Catholic Church for the Catholic Church did re-did somehow feel that they could say that Sunday's Sabbath, which, of course, it isn't box but I don't really think that's a major doctrine that the Catholic Church is trying to force anyone.

I think I think the Catholic Church be a lot more interested in getting all of us to venerate Mary, then to worship on Sunday but I don't really know what the Catholic Church I don't see any reason the word of God to to expect what you're expecting and I know that LNG white did and that's one reason that you do because the Bible doesn't actually say it.

Okay, let's talk to Andy from Buckeye Arizona and he welcome to the narrow path.

Thanks for calling. Steve thinks taking my call today.

Yeah so I have a friend who sent me a social media post that is going around. I'm not on social media, but actually it needed and an acid asked if I would respond to it and my friend.

He's a Christian and want to get your response.

All all positive comments might be helpful, getting further away or something.

I'm not sure no yes okay so the comment is the condo was posted that is going around it says this it says if you are a Christian, and can't hear black lives matter without feeling the need to respond with a criticism that all lives matter than crack open your Bible and hit up Luke 15 there are 100 sheet but one goes missing Jesus leave the 99 and goes after the 199 but what about us, don't we matter. Of course the 99 still matter, but they're not the ones in danger. The one is I'll say it again, black lives matter respond to hearing your response to this and I'll listen well. I'm off the air and think okay and he thinks well of course black lives matter and I don't know anyone who's ever denied that in all of history except maybe some KKK people are some maybe slave owners in the South back 100 and something years ago. I certainly don't know any Christian or are frankly earning non-Christian guy government that would deny the black lives matter, but I do disagree first of all with the slogan, partly because it's disingenuous what it is suggesting, and its whole is whole messages based on the idea that black lives matter that black lives have not matter to the police. You see if they really cared about black lives they be protesting Planned Parenthood skills were black lives every year than probably all of the causes combined. They'd also be trying to do something about fixing the. The black neighborhoods in the inner-city cassettes were most black life black black kids get killed or black young men who are not in known criminals to get shot by gangs and things like that. As far as black lives being killed by police. That's a really small number and I don't know why that I knew that numbers and broadcast so widely and surprisingly doesn't know it. If retirement black lives black men who been shot by a policeman with ask yourselves how many of these people were shot by policeman were shot because they were committing a crime and would've been shot with a black or white because the police are there to stop criminals.

The statistic has not been presented to us so we have no way to know that if the police that the police pick on black criminals more than white criminals.

I know that I've seen some pretty tough brutality against white criminals and against black criminals and against Hispanic criminals and frankly the police can be pretty tough, and sometimes they are wrongfully abusive, but I haven't heard any statistics that would show that the majority of the black lives that have been endangered were somehow non-criminals who were killed in the active lawful behavior, and if they were killed while committing a crime. Then we not really.

We really don't know until investigators case whether a white man would've been killed committing the same crime, so it might have nothing to do with how the police feel about black people.

Now we do know that some innocent black people or at least some people who were some black people were unarmed have been shot by police.

There were 99 of them last year 2019. There were nine black men in the whole United States that were killed who were unarmed, not all of them were not danger some of them were attacking the police and try to get guns, but nine unarmed lightning children. One year does not look like the targeted racial prejudice. There may be prejudice among someplace.

Just like there are among black eyes matter is not paying attention to what's really killing black black people are being killed by gangs that are being killed by police father committing crimes and things like that so someone cannot do something about the culture of the black neighborhoods and I think of things most leaders for black men to be the fathers of their kids and guide their children into lawful behavior. I think that investing is having likewise matters are true slogan. It's just getting a false message across. As if the police are targeting the black. I don't think they are eliciting the narrow path to take another break and will be back for another 30 minutes. Don't go away. Small is the gate and narrow is the path that leads to life, welcome you to have nothing to selling everything in today's radio show is over, we invite you to visit the narrow path.com we'll find time. The audio teachings blog article verse by verse teachings and the archives of learning and enjoying the thank you for supporting the listener supported narrow path. Greg broadcast Steve Greg and would live for another half-hour taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible about the Christian faith. You're welcome to call in, bring them up for conversation here or to bring up something you disagree with the host about have been glad to talk to you.

The number is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 all right or next color today is Logan calling from Cincinnati, Ohio, Logan, welcome to the narrow path that's recalling your grade thank you for taking my call.

I was looking to your program. Recently, it might've been yesterday and you have said either that you were aware of any Old Testament passages that referred to a second coming of Christ, right, or that none existed and that they were all from the New Testament body.

I was wondering if you would consider chapter 5 verses 14 and 15.

Where were given the view of one that behaves as a lion that will care and go away and returned to its place until defendant acknowledged to leave the place and come here and then go back to the place until acknowledgment and tell me how your tribute Nassau know how to respond to my interpretation that speaks of Jesus Christ coming being crucified going all the way and waiting until the defendant acknowledged which would then speak of the second coming, or returned and said in an Hosea Old Testament minor prophet right well I understand the tearing of Ephraim like a lion he frames another word for the northern kingdom of Israel and that's whom José was addressing this process, the northern kingdom. He says I'll be a lot like a lion to Ephraim and like a young lion. I will tear them and go away.

I believe that somebody swing in 722 BC he destroyed them through the Assyrians. That's what I think is the main theme of Hosea's prophecy now and he says I'll go away me to leave them. He wants of you know he won't be with them anymore.

He used to have a promised Israel that he did dwell in their midst, but they they cast them off by their idolatry sources on and I could be with you Aleave. He says I will return again to my place until they acknowledge their offense, then they will seek seek my face in their affliction, and they will diligently seek me this I I take this to be when Jesus came when Jesus came. There was a remnant of Israel that sought God that sought Christ and to so I think that's I think that's the most likely interpretation of the city with those who acknowledge their offense when John the Baptist came in sediment had to repent and that your those who did repent were baptized and then some of them became followers of Christ because they were they diligently sought him and they found so I that's what I think it's talking about. Okay Logan thank you for your call – and all right. Let's talk to Cheryl from Lincoln, California Cheryl, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling helpful as you and Esther back then let that I can't quite reason that why like Esther and her do that with in part, at the time were much later than they are. Then the return thinking direct and it struck me that they really and they were still about and then when I think after I allowed Mordechai to write endocrine they were actually allowed to kill all that there and in Persia and currently my mind and why were they still there in Jerusalem and while in a given that kind of power over the country that bears well.

The Queen was a Jew and the King. King should the king wrapped around her little finger.

You can tell that he's given the gallant repeatedly to so I mean, in fact, that's why Mordechai was given power because he was a Jew and the Queen was a Jew and the reason the Jews were given permission to kill their enemies was because their enemies had been given permission to kill them, and whether there had been a date set by Naaman and are him and see you Haman that Haman had set a date for the Persians to slaughter all the Jews and it was something that Dickie King had foolishly let him make official and does so, the laws of the Medes and Persians could not be changed even by the king. So this day was set in stone and all that the all that Mordechai did was allow the Jews the permission to defend themselves against their enemies because the there was going to be a Jewish slaughter on this particular day, and the government now because of Esther's influence was able to get permission of the Jews to stand up for themselves and defend themselves against that slaughter and there's an average attribute of a civil war between the Jews and the Persian Empire into in the Persians and we read that many of the Persians when they saw that the Queen was a Jew and the person became Jews because they wanted become side of the Jews in this war so it was a crazy situation and it's just another case where God delivered the Jews from's from a Holocaust them and that's what is celebrated by the Jews.

Each year when they simply pure them now as far as the Jews were still in Persia that was that was the case. Esther and Mordecai and the Jews in question were still in Persia, even though much earlier. King Cyrus had given the Jews permission to go back and rebuild their temple and day and some of them had 50,000 of them had gone back to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel and had rebuilt the temple and ran reestablish the city, but the majority of the Jews did not a Daniel.

For example, did not go back. Esther did not. Mordechai did not know why they did not. I don't know I mean I think in some cases, God blamed the Jews who did not go back and for being not very zealous for his house. Now they were comfortable.

By this time they had become part comfortable in babbling and had homes and businesses and families there and they just weren't interested in going back to where they should go and so some of them are blameworthy for that.

But this was now further on this like 60 years later in Cyrus's decree so to select a generation or two later and so Mordechai probably was born after that decree to parents who had not gone back to Jerusalem, and Esther was probably a generation later still so in all likelihood the generation of Jews that were in Persia at that time were simply there for convenience say their parents or grandparents and had the opportunity to go back to Jerusalem and didn't, probably for not not very good reasons, but there they were in Persia and so these these two were born there and lived there and I guess I don't give a lot of thought to the prospect of going back to Jerusalem or not, but apparently didn't seem like something that was an automatic choice that you make so there a lot more Jews still in the Persian Empire than in Jerusalem at that time, but the remnant had gone back and had rebuilt the temple in such which is of course what had been predicted current okay thanks for your call Luke from Scottsdale, Arizona. Welcome to the narrow path high Luke welcome good.

My question today is about the baptism of Jesus. So John the Baptist baptism of the baptism for the correct loaf of repentance you will. Jesus being can you explain the meaning of Jesus being baptized by him. I know the response you get them out. Kind of vague to fulfill all righteousness you plainly think that significant that it right well when Jesus was baptized.

Obviously he was not repenting for sins like evanescence who was me baptizing, and John knew that John, like yourself, was surprise he said why are you here to be peptides that you should baptize me not be bent as you saw me and I think almost all Christians have had that question is why did Jesus come to be baptized in a baptism of repentance when even John the Baptist knew it wasn't something Jesus needed to do so.

Jesus answers you allow it because it's fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness now to fulfill all righteousness sounds like it means to do everything that righteousness requires now righteousness. Of course for people in general. Jesus, he wasn't repenting for a sin, but he did want sinners to do so and he was putting his mark of approval on John's baptism by participating in himself. I think there's a number of things were probably involved.

There's a few commentators who thought that just just as we when were baptized were commemorating burial and resurrection with Christ that Jesus by being baptized was foreshadowing his burial and resurrection, but there's no hint of this in Scripture. It's an interesting suggestion, but there's no hint that that is why he did it. I I think we should put more like this that the shepherd goes ahead of his sheep. Jesus said in John chapter 10 and he doesn't direct his sheep to go places that he hasn't got himself. He is the example as well as the their commander, and so he wants his people to be baptized so he was baptized so that those who follow him would follow him and that act, it didn't have the same meaning or need in his case, but it was something that was harmless to do and something that he, having done it could reasonably require his disciples to do also. So I think that just as the shepherd goes ahead of the sheep that he doesn't send them off places.

He's never been a require them to do things he hasn't done so.

I think that that's probably why he did it. It's something that God required people to do in general. It's not something that Jesus needed for the same reasons. Other people needed, but it was something that for him to set an example and and you walk in the steps that he wanted his followers to walk in it.

That would include going through the waters of baptism. That's my that's my own understanding of that. Okay okay thanks your call okay Bruce from Whittier hello. Welcome to the narrow path rather thanks for taking my call. Are you familiar with the name Anthony Johnson. I don't think so.

Okay well you can Google – he was the very first slave owner and he was black and I heard that the first American slavery was from Angola, Africa, first slave owner and if you Google it and read it. There was more black owned slaves and white and I'm really sick and tired of having the white race be accountable for slavery. Slavery was wrong and I want every body to know that they can Google Anthony Johnson okay and they can check it out. It's not that the white population that dominated slave white people became complicit in it to them and have their share of that you and I don't because I never owned a slave, I mean there are certainly white people who were very guilty of abusing Blacks and and it's also the case that it did become for many white people are racist this you mean because they viewed black slaves as subhuman and since almost all the black people in the country were slaves. At least the majority. They tended look at black people as subhuman, which is a terrible thing to do.

However, you know there was some idiot politician who is given a speech in yesterday regarding the news what he was saying that the United States invented slavery which is so ridiculous that slaves were brought here in ships from European ships and so forth in the slaves had been captured in Africa by other black Africans and the white slave ships sleep slave. They bought their wares from black slave captures black tribal wars and so forth so that one tribe captured the people of another tribe and sold them to whites later.

So, I mean everybody's messed up in this there's no one race that had slaves and to this day there are Asian countries as slaves and certainly the most countries do and and black countries that do mean in Africa.

This, there's black slavery in Africa where Blacks another slaves. Actually, the only people who've ever abolish slavery have been the West European nations in America through the influence largely of Christianity that slavery been abolished, but no other part of the world has abolished slavery. Just as a block of nations as much as the West has so we didn't invent it. Yeah it started, black man, Anthony Johnson and I want all of your listeners to okay that you are to give us permission to Google it and I'm sure some will be interested in doing so, but to say that the first black slave owner in America was a black man doesn't mean that he's the founder of slavery.

Just amazing. Maybe the first guy who brought the slaves to America something we don't we don't know. I don't think any one man found it slavery. I think it's been in all nations, from the beginning of time and that it continued until after the founding of America, so America had slavery just like all the other nations did until America was one of the early ones to decide that was immoral and that they were not so, I appreciate the information and data.

I agree with okay Apollo from Omaha, Nebraska. Welcome to the neuropathic's calling.

I wanted let black lives matter. I am not arguing with you about the fact that it's kind of ambiguous statement that I knew what it prospective that maybe you might not have thought about. I happen to be like my adopted 14 children. On our youngest HR black and they're all young adult now and have been discriminated against all their lives that have come to be in. This is: recently just brought some of that bad that there again to the surface about how they been stopped by police simply because they're driving at night, are they been stopped told the back of the line and that restaurant now. Not a long time ago, the Lord, I, I, my heart breaks for Mike my children and young people like them and we have some very earnest. Discussion like I have a daughter who is been very interested in going and happened to be male dominated tray profession that she has been capturing them time after time because she's a woman, but to be a black and wanting to get in the mail. The patient is difficult. I just wanted tell you there's a lot of sorrow and deep hurt among the black that really justified here and there really latent discrimination.

That's very prevalent. I think that one admits that there is racism in this country. I don't think it's institutional. I think it's personal. I think that personal some people don't like people of another race.

I don't believe that all Blacks hate whites but some Blacks do. I don't believe that all whites hate Blacks, but some whites unfortunately do, however, my stepson is covered with tattoos because he owns a tattoo shop, and is a tattoo artist. He gets stopped by the police for nothing all the time to he's he's white and I mean there's a lot of people that get picked on. There's no reason someone should be picked on for the race and it's very possible. Of course it's with tattoos looks more like a criminal than just your average black person does because black people don't look like criminals. Messerli it's it's a I think that what we have going on here.

Your your children are hurt by this whole thing of with this with the George Floyd, partly because the media has made a big issue of it. Honestly George Floyd is is a case of a person who who received and an injustice at the hands of the police. He's one of the handful this year who probably have been and there's people who are not black would benefit, but only the black ones get the publicity area and all minutes because of the news emphasis and hide. I don't know if we've seen any real news about other people who are black, who have been treated badly by police. By the way the police who treat people badly and unjustly are doing a criminal thing in there and they could be racist, or they might just be bullies but because after all, I don't know if the cop who's responsible for George Floyd's death. I don't know if he would've handled white prisoner differently. He might just be a bully who doesn't stop I don't know that's where that's where we really have to have a court case with objective witnesses send and testimony so forcefully find out. Is this a case of racism or is this just a case of a bully cop would have done the same thing with the white prisoner. I don't know. It's interesting that the other three cops that were with him.

One of them was black and one was Asian so you know it doesn't hear if this cop has a partner was black. I don't know if that would suggest that he's a racist against Blacks. I don't know their more information needs to come out, but the news doesn't care what women have information that they just see white guy hurting a black guy and yet that happens, but you know what sometimes black eyes hurt white guys there black people like policeman who shoot white people to you just can't really oversimplify it. Now obviously you have children that are black and so you're very sensitive times of their abuse. There's some people have a lot of kids who are maybe autistic or have some other issue that they that there sensitized to and we should be against all injustice, but I don't think we need to tear the society apart based on a false assumption that the police proportionately do more harm to black people into of people of other races. The police there tough guys and women sometimes and they often abuse their power and sometimes toward people of a race opposite of their own, but it's not systemic, and anyone who thinks it is they can bring the statistics on hard I'm always open to statistics but don't seem like a black lives matter are looking to hear statistics I think they just want to get people angry and by the way, I'm all for justice to people of all races. I've got no prejudice in me that I know of against any race but I do not like the organizational black lives matter because I've been to their website and you might want to check it out if you haven't, you know that they want to abolish the traditional family that's in their agenda basics on their website and they want to course defund the police started a love for anybody. If that happens, so you're an organization it's got a very wicked agenda items on their platform is not an organization that we should be marching with. I think we should speak up against injustice. We should speak up for the quality of black and white people and all of the races but to march with an organization.

It's basically seeking anarchy is not something I would recommend Christians to do. I believe black lives matter. Again, I'm not sure know anyone who doesn't.

I don't think I've ever met anyone who doesn't believe black lives matter but to take a nice slogan like that and apply to an organization and say what has to go with that organization because that's the name of the organization is a scary manipulation. Because most Americans do not believe in the agenda that black lives matter does.

Even people who are very favorable toward black people usually do not believe that her world and I know Mike and George floated, Floyd brought to issue all that they've been through all their growing up years in have a wonderful close relationship and we talk a lot and that's a good thing that I just want to point out that it all sand court that said any discrimination but I think a lot of people in this country are really unaware of how deep racism run… Just about police detail. I don't think people are okay, unless they have a reason to meet. I don't really understand. Alright, I'm running out of time here, but I will say this to. I think there is institutional persecution of Christians in America and I think there is institutional favoring of Blacks. Although there's prejudice individual prejudice. I mean virtually all the laws that have been made read related to black people and and minorities in my lifetime have been pro-minority and have put you the majority races at a disadvantage in many cases hiring in education. Things like that. There's such a there's a lot of laws of doubt that that there is discrimination against them may still be true based on people who are wicked and who have prejudice but as far as institutional racism. I don't think it's very I personally think the institutions of our government have been bending over backward to eradicate in the injustices done to minorities so that I'm not saying that the government affects people's minds. And in fact at subpoint you use your point is very important.

There's still a lot of racism and just as racism is sin. And there's not a lot of sin in people's hearts and the government can't change that the government can institute policy after policy that's pro-minority was knocking to get rid of what's in people's hearts because the government can't change people's hearts. Only God can do that and that's something I think too many people have not taken into consideration, but there is institutional prejudice against Christians in the schools. The universities and the press and things like that mean I think the Christians believe in.

Sometimes Christians get arrested and put on trial for simply believing Christian. Things like about traditional marriage or something so yeah I think that every minority in the world is is being coddled by the by the government, although of course individuals do bad things, but the government itself I think is forcing upon Christians restriction on expressing our views about things in society and that I think there's this book.

All books have been written, documented that in recent time. Some of them by liberals complaining about it. That's the left of the left is anti-Christian and it's not really pro-black as if they were pro-black they going to Chicago in the cities and do something to try to try to stop the black on black line is that's really for the black lives are being taken to be taken in crime in the inner city and the police to some of it they don't do as much of it as criminals against all running out of time.

I appreciate your call and you listen to the narrow path radio broadcast.

My name is Steve Greg and we are listener supported you like to help us down the air.

You can write to the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 go to our website. The narrow path.com that's the narrow path.com, everything Street the website that you can donate their@thenarrowpath.com and turn it again tomorrow will continue our discussion


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime