Share This Episode
The Narrow Path Steve Gregg Logo

The Narrow Path 8/10

The Narrow Path / Steve Gregg
The Truth Network Radio
August 10, 2020 8:00 am

The Narrow Path 8/10

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.

August 10, 2020 8:00 am

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

What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
Love Worth Finding
Adrian Rogers
Understanding The Times
Jan Markell
Matt Slick Live!
Matt Slick
Matt Slick Live!
Matt Slick
Love Worth Finding
Adrian Rogers

Welcome to the narrowcast radio broadcast line Steve Greg and were live for an hour each week afternoon with open phone line for you to call if you have questions about the Bible or about the Christian faith. I have to say I'm very surprised that there's no call showing on my screen and I wonder if I should trust my screen because this happened once before and it turned out that something in the studio had to be done differently and there were actually calls waiting, so I can't tell you notes okay no college OR and I trust the screen.

And if you'd like to be on the program to great time to call in your questions about the Bible or the Christian faith you'll be welcome to call right now and get right through onto our switch for the numbers 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 now. I received some time ago a letter from a prisoner who had some questions and he is the season Texas I believe. Looks like his name is Lee Kiel are maybe pronouncing it wrongly. Both names are unfamiliar to me but eyes from acting. New York is from Comstock New York, Washington correctional facility. Okay so he brought me a long letter with some questions and I just wanted as the calls are coming in one mention a few. These, he said, can you interpret the following verses. Now he's got three different passages and one of them is second Thessalonians to three through 12 which is the passage about the so-called man of lawlessness, where Paul says that the man of lawlessness has not yet been revealed, at least not in Paul's day, and that and that he would be revealed except there is something that is restraining him from being revealed in due time, and that when that restraint is taken away. Then he will be revealed, and it describes him as coming with the working of Satan in power and signs and lying wonders, and that he will actually sit in the temple of God, pulses is the second Thessalonians 2 verse three through 12 is the passage that the prisoners has asked about how this is, of course, popularly understood by many to be about a future antichrist and and then the reformers had the view that it was about the papacy actually and the truth is that either view could be true. The papacy view actually has a pretty good chance of being true because it says that he will sit in the temple of God. Now Paul uses this expression. Only two other times in his writings in first and second Corinthians. Both times he uses the term temple of God in both places. He tells the church that you are the temple of God, that is, the church is the temple of God. Many futurists who think it's my future antichrist believe that the antichrist will sit in a future of Jewish temple in Jerusalem that there'll be rebuilt Jewish temple and the antichrist will position themselves there and columns of God. Well may be. But Paul never actually referred to the Jewish temple is the temple of God, even Jesus stop talking about it that way at the beginning of Jesus ministry. He told the Jews that they were making his father's house. Identity thieves that mean he was referring to the temple as his father's or God's house, but later in Jesus ministry's book Jesus spoke at the same building. After the Jews have very much rejected him and he is not ready to die. He said your house is left to you desolate in others. He's leaving the temple and the temple is desolate because at your house. Not my father's house. So obviously the temple in Jerusalem was not and never will again be God's temple. The Jews can build the temple and maybe they will and they can offer animal sacrifices, which if they do the be doing in rebellion against God because God has brought an end to that system and that's because Jesus fulfilled it and there remains no more need at all for it. So for the Jews to continue sacrificing in an rebuilt temple would be just their way of saying we reject Jesus in order to go with our old ways. Even though God destroyed them were to build it up again so it's a bid act of defiance against God who at least against Christ and so Christians would never rejoice in that neither would God and yet pulses aggressive in the temple of God and no Jewish temple will ever again be the temple of God, because God it doesn't dwell in temples made with hands, and the sacrifices that are offered. There don't have any relevance anymore because Christ fulfilled so it would sound like pulsing the man of lawlessness will be in the church and that is one reason why the reformers believed was referring to the papacy, which emerged in the church and that which was hindering the rise, the papacy, they said had been in Paul's day, the Roman Empire, which the popes could not rise to power in Europe is large. The emperors held that position but with the fall of Rome and the Empire up Rose, the Bishop of Rome pretty much to fill that power vacuum and so the things that Paul said the man of lawlessness would do actually if you look at the history of the papacy, you'll find that they take all the boxes, everything Paul said they would do or that the messenger they do so is a very strong position and that's why the reformers all believed it may still do at the idea. It's a future antichrist is not impossible. Though it would not be the case that the dispensational ID of the antichrist sitting in a rebuilt temple would find any support here. Since Paul, as I said, only said he would sit in the temple of God, which is not the Jewish temple, but the church according to Paul's own use of that term elsewhere held out take one of these other verses them to go to the phones because we have a bunch of four colors of prisoner also asked about Revelation 1920.

Skews me. I haven't said a word to damning writing all day and having my voice still thinks I just woke up.

Even though I've been up for hours on so it has to clear as I talked Revelation chapter 19 and verse 20 says. Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, which he deceived with which it by which he deceived those who receive the mark of the beast and those who worship the image and these two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

He wants me my interpretation of the beast and the false prophet are the two beasts mentioned in Revelation 13 and delay from the time of their rise to the end of the book of Revelation, at least until chapter 20 are mentioned as the two great allies of Satan in trying to stop the kingdom of God from growing into its destiny to fill the whole earth. The first beast I believe represents a political power and the second beast and religious power which is what's called the false prophet. Prophets usually are associate with religious systems and the beast. The first beast seems be a political system, ruling over kings and so forth.

So my understanding in this is only one understanding of many that are out there is that the two piece represent both phenomena that is anti-Christian governmental persecution powers and anti-Christian religious influences that are aligned with the politicians or the government because essentially all nations throughout history until modern times have had state religions, so the religion would would simply function to give credence to the state and that some that has been manifested in very many cases in history. The beast and the false prophet exist at all times in different forms wherever there is a government somewhere that persecute Christians over there's a false rich religion that's opposing Christianity is a that those are the allies of Satan the beast and the false prophet. These systems come to an end when Jesus returns, and there depicted as being thrown into the lake of fire now and I think will appear in front of the lake of fire.

They must be individual people, but we need to be careful about making that conclusion since, and in the same chapter tells us of the devil being thrown in the lake of fire, where the beast and the false prophet, which is chapter 20 we find later on.

It says in verse three, nine, 14 is his death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. So death and Hades which are not individual people by any means are also casting.

What we see is revelations very symbolic drama and in it we have Christ, symbolically described as a lamb and many enemies of Christ symbolically depicted as a dragon beast, a false prophet and also as riders on the fourth horse that was death followed by Hades. Now none of those entities are human individuals, summer concepts, death, and Hades are not individuals or groups of individuals they are phenomena but but they are personified in the drama, and as in all good dramas. The bad guys finally get there. Do so at the end of Revelation death and Hades in the beast and the false prophet and the Dragon. They all are thrown into the lake of fire. This is the way the stories being told. Using symbolic images. Nobody really believes the devil is a dragon and an assortment can be both anyway and and I hope nobody believes Jesus is really a lamb with seven eyes and seven horns as he is depicted. Revelation and I would think we also don't believe that the beast of the false prophet are individual people because after all, the beast has seven heads and 10 horns, and the seven heads are seven kings and the 10 horns are 10 kings and they're all part of the beast so the beast is made up of many kings and kingdoms not merely one man. So that's how I understand the beast of the false prophet we needed move along here right there is another call. Another question this. The brother asked him to save for another time working to go and talk to warrant from Magus, Roseville, California, worn look into the neuropathic for calling my call with you get through so quickly.

My question is God totally email or weakness in his sight on enjoyable talked about how clean and produced Vincent himself along with the Angels is that God is not some thin-skinned that he can't be in the presence of evil in that's proof right there and many other places arming the Bible since the eyes of the Lord are in every place. Beholding the evil and the good. So it's not as if God can't look about can't be in the presence or see evil. I think many people who who think that about God are thinking of the prophet Habakkuk who said your eyes are too pure than to behold evil, and I think it's from that statement them. If you say will.

God can't be in the presence of evil can't can't see evil can't look at it, but he can't look out and then the criminals get away with an awful lot because God can't see what they're doing but they he does. His eyes are in every place. Behold evil with good. Habakkuk 20 says your eyes are too pure to behold evil should better be translated and in modern translations. It is your eyes are too pure than to countenance evil or to look favorably on evil. You can see it but you can't look favorably upon and that's what the statement is so for forgot to look on Satan or Ptolemy remember the garden of Eden. God confronted the serpent and told them on your belly or to go on in. There's never been a problem with Todd being in the presence of the devil, of the problems with the devil being the principle of God's will is the problems but it's yes it's not really the problem that you think I understand like the conversation that they had because my understanding there in heaven and you know decided to come up to my bedroom.

It's like a hawk is how to even go to heaven well going to heaven is a term we use for being saved. It's a bad term for the convenience it doesn't mean going to heaven, but most Christians usually think of going to heaven as salvation and, therefore, so how could the health of the devil go to heaven heaven is simply a place where God and the and the angels dwell, it does not necessarily speak speak of salvation for the devil to be the devil is not saved when he goes there we find in Revelation chapter 12 that when Jesus died and rose again. Satan was cast out of heaven that he was accusing the brethren before our God day and night. Up to that point.

So the devil has always had access to heaven to accuse the brethren as he accused Joe or is he accused Joshua in the book of Zechariah chapter 3.

Some of the others in the Bible is never suggested. The devil Can go to heaven and I think if I think you probably heaven is you think of going to heaven as something that only good people or say people because we've been led to believe that salvation essentially means going to heaven actually salvation doesn't mean that but in the Bible doesn't parts. Heaven is simply a location where God is in it and that Satan can come and bring accusations before before God is affirmed in the Old Testament number of times call sure. Thanks for your call Michael from Texas. Welcome to the neuropathic for calling detected. Thank you.

Hey, you have got to add questions today. The first one has to do with them to use Roberto Garrity amounts Christians I have encountered two camps around this issue slanting at this kind of what value the puritanical cancer. His throat totally rejects any usable Garrity at all in the other camp there is some the other side, totally reject that they viewed as kind of straining at a gnat and not being concerned with more important issues or stand and then the second question I have used them.

Note this issue of women's dress, especially in church and that you know that you may be like to be dressed to adopt provocative clothing and things like that and the personal experience that have been in church where a family, and presumably the young teenage daughter as part of this family and know the mother and father very well dressed, and that the girl within the miniskirt and reviewing type address and the parents seem to know. Give their located so could you comment on those to think okay yeah as far as using vulgarity here, profanity or whatever words that are considered to be rude or unclean. The Bible gives no list of words that are unclean and there and if it did it would in Hebrew or Greek. So we went have them our language anyway. In a society. Every society has its own words in his own language in its own times that are considered to be rude or improperly. Now the question is whether Christians should avoid using words like that that are proper. Well, you mentioned two groups. One group is the Puritans who are shocked and appalled by such language. Others are people who don't think much of it they just think, well, it's only words is much bigger fish to fry than that. Some who can get well, I'm not. If either can't find one summer in the middle which is why think the Bible is the Bible does not indicate that the use of whatever word you use is the biggest imaginable sin but it is not. It's not nothing, and you as a Christian I don't make a list of a hierarchy of since these ones are really bad. This is not a bad and therefore I'll do all avoid the big ones and I'll go ahead and allow myself the small if the sin is even a little bit offensive to God. I want to avoid it, and I can imagine anyone making excuses unless they just want to do what they want to do and they don't care what God wants it. If they think they got Karen skinny. I want to continue If they feel that God doesn't care at all welcome to your mouth and there. Quite wrong about that running one of the 10 Commandments has to do with speech, taking the name of the Lord, and it's not you know it's not really referring to using cuss words like we use whatever but it is us. It has to do with the purity of your speech and also there's other another commandment about your speech and that is not to bear false witness, which is another verbal sin. So apparently what you say may have very profound implications. Jesus said in Matthew chapter 12 that out of the abundance of the mouth. The heart speaks from starts the other way is the heart the mouth speaks and and that therefore every idle word that proceeds of our mouth will be judged because it reflects comes out of her heart knelt by sin every idle word will be judged as mean that every idle word receipt is bad hopefully very few or no words we speak of the bed, but every careless word we speak will show it's in our heart.

Now if somebody knows that certain words are just plain offensive to all decent people, including most Christians in this a Autocare. It's a small matter. Mr. sounds coming on my mouth wash. I care what they think will that person is showing something exists in her heart, and as with their self-centered, selfish, narcissistic people who don't care who they offend and they don't they don't bother mind to the bother either language. But Paul address this matter. He said in verse in Ephesians 5, verse four.

He said well I give you three, three and four fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be named among you, as is fitting for Saints.

Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor course testing which is not fitting but rather giving of thanks. Now that doesn't mention particularly using vulgarity well desk a course testing itself is vulgar but doesn't talk about but your site cuss words per se, but he does say that certain things should not be coming out of the mouth of the Christian what should be is the giving of thanks and if you look back at Ephesians 4. He is more specific in Ephesians 429. He says let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers. Now when you speak, he says there's one thing it shouldn't be anything should it should not be corrupt but it should be such language as edifies the people who hear you and ministers grace to them. That's the standard.

Now I'm not saying that everything a Christian says meets that standard should mean we don't we don't live perfectly and we don't speak perfectly, but we should not make excuses for not doing so. If we are true disciples that means our total commitment.

Life is to do what is pleasing to God and what everything he reveals to be his desire what he makes very clear his desires for us to speak nothing corrupt and to speak only things that are edifying and that Mr. grace we can say that there are many words are language which have the opposite effect. They irritate they speak there there just corrupt. It's a strange thing because it's not the words themselves of crap. It's the intention of the heart that speaks them you know if somebody comes our our our our country does, nor language will and one of the first words he learns is the SH word and uses it to speak of fecal material and that's what he thinks is our our word for it, and he uses it when others do anything offensive. He doesn't notice there's nothing wrong with his heart in the matter he does, nor language. Well, he doesn't know our culture. What he doesn't know yet that that's an extremely foul word in the English language and I think I done the same thing even going to place like Australia or England. I mean here in our learning are culture.

The word bomb is not a dirty word. But when I was in Australia was told it is a dirty word. So it's innocent you know if it comes to your heart because you don't know it's objectionable and there's no sin in it. But if you but there's certainly nothing desirable about living in a culture you don't know when you're fending people.

We should if we know that certain words are considered foul. We should have in every case.

Try to avoid them because at the very least we cannot claim that they edify, or Mr. grace to hearers, which is the goal so I am I'm not Puritanical, but I am interested in being obedient to Christ. Now people think that being obedient to Christ and being obedient what the apostle say is Puritanical then they don't know very much about the normal use of the term Puritanical, but there's certainly nothing wrong with obeying Christ.

Jesus said, he that hears these words of mine and does them and obeys them is like a wise man that built his house on the rock. But he that hears these words of mine and doesn't do them. Vince doesn't obey him, built his house on sand. When the flood scurries going down so I think that in obedience to Christ is the goal of the Christian and pleasing God in all things, especially all things we say because out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks and draws a judge every idle word we speak.

So I would you know I I generally speak.

I don't really have better sleep on my mouth because they never really been part of my vocabulary except was in junior high, but I outgrew that because they seem so stupid and you know them by the time of his refreshing-I just wasn't my Christian convictions. It was just the words just it just seems stupid to use that language and still does.

So they're not really they don't slip out of my mouth accidentally, but if somebody who's always spoken with bad words. Occasionally it slips out of their mouth, and they realize it's not something we want to do in retirement.

To do that microbial Puritanical shocked but on the other hand, I do believe that if organ elect the Scriptures guidance and the will of God guide us organ want to eliminate that, language from our our mouths also just know in modest women's dress in the church. It gets tricky when you've got a Christian family and the parents are well-dressed arabesques modestly dressed but their teenaged daughters are not because frankly they prompt their teenage daughter might not even be Christian, and the only reason she's in the church at all, may well be that her families make a go church made it is so she's on her own. She wanted to come to church anymore and you know what a person is not a Christian. We can't place the same standards upon them, as we should, upon those who try to please Christ. Christians have a heart to please God gives us a soft heart and take to the heart of stone non-Christians don't have that and it would be entirely legalistic to tell somebody who has no interest in pleasing God that they have to dress a certain way because there's got bigger problems than the way they dress if they don't work God and I think the church has to be gracious toward people who, for whatever reason slip in there who aren't really part of the body of Christ, but our visitors and frankly the tenet the unsaved teenage children of Christian couples in the church those unsaved teenage children are visitors and they're not part of the church really mean they may think they are, but if they're not followers of Christ. Now somebody is a follower of Christ and have a blind spot.

Many young people do not realize how the choices they are making in their clothing and so forth are impacting people, in which case someone should speak them and tell them that the way you dress sends a message and if you try to please Christ. The way her dresser and I was sending the wrong message. Listen, I need to take a break here. I should for the music. By now I don't but I know we gotta take a break in about 30 seconds so I need to tell you that the narrow path is listener supported and if you'd like to write to us our addresses the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593. You can also donate if you wish from the website but everything there is free, the website is the narrow and I'll be back with you about 30 seconds. We have another half-hour coming. No go away nearly leads to life near Pat everything in today's media share is over there and enjoying my visit in the narrow find free tactical audio teaching blog articles is diverse teachings in our times, the narrow Panamanian shadows. We think you for supporting the listener supported near Pat Steve Greg remembered the narrow back to the narrow path radio broadcast Steve Greg and will live for another half-hour and that we are taking calls at half-hour as usual, our lines appear to be full which means if you call right now. You will not find an open line, but you might later before the show is over. If you take this number down and collated the numbers 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 our next caller is Mike from New Hampshire, Mike.

Welcome to the narrow path extra calling the shadow and on the grip of a fellow on the several Calvary Chapel and whether with Calvary Chapel are differently and at the same belief that in one week. That you're the becoming a Christian in this church is that there are thin belief that now that they would find that heresy and I with it and by that I think they may have a new revelation on the night yeah well I was next. He saved the cover chaplain saved very young in the Baptist Church. Growing up, but I did transfer start going to Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa 1970 when I was 16 years old. About 50 years ago actually at that time the Jesus movement was just starting there. There was only one Calvary Chapel pastor Butchart Smith and I got in on the ground floor that that movement and I was there for many years.

When I say that my views have changed or are different and some that I learned to cover Chapel.

You're right that the book of Revelation has a lot to do with it, Calvary Chapel movement is very strongly what we call dispensational list. In their view, especially of the end times and that the dispensational spew II held. Also, I was taught it mitotic myself but I was fortunate at some point to be able to hear some teaching from outside cover Chapel because they don't really encourage and cover Chapel more than one view to be freely exposed. The view of almost all cover Chapel pastors I've talked to is that they don't want the sheep to be confused which is what they believe would happen if they let the sheep know there's more than one view of any given thing now. My impression is that's kind of insulting the sheep.

The pastor allegedly knows there's more than one view and he's doing okay, but the sheep are too stupid sheep just can't process it wide say any good teacher should be able to present different views in a way that the sheep can understand and can process and in fact the sheep are not real sheep, the people and they have rational mind so I think that it's very very fair and I have to say. When I came out of cover.

Chaplain discovered similar views. They taught me were certainly not the majority view of the of the body of Christ that I was a little briefly. I was a little upset that they that they didn't trust me with that information within us that is very very stupid. And of course one way of looking at is that they think the sheep are much stupider than the pastor because he professes to know what I found out was that most pastors don't know either. I mean, you talk to the pastor about any view of Revelation different from his own.

From the cover Chapel view and the truth is he he he he hardly knows anything about it. He he knows the words he knows the word predators, and he knows the word all millennial heroes.

He might know the word post-millennial, and he certainly knows the word of replacement theology and those are different views different than cover Chapel's but they are the majority view of the church throughout history. For the most part most of our ROI. Once a printer is him is the majority view of the church history, but all millennial's excitement was and what their current replacement certainly was. And there's a good reason. It was discussed with the Bible teaches. But it was in the 1830s that the dispensational view was created out of nothing by John Nelson Darby and it became so popular that many denominations adopted as their official document. Calvary Chapel is one of those it's just that that many denominations at least allow that their view is not the only one that can conceivably be considered but that's why would different my difference with coverage that the reason the reason I can't really be a part of Chapels not because I disagree with them, at least not from my side I always attend churches happily that believe certain things I don't agree with, and certainly reviews of the end times are not a problem to me, not something I'd break fellowship over certainly, but it is something they would break fellowship, and so that's the difference of the date the fact that they don't want other views than their own to exist within the sphere of their congregations being exposed to.

It means that I would be persona non grata even though I'm of cover Chapel Prichard from the past and even though there are some comfortable pastors that I led to the Lord many decades ago not to. Some people keep growing and some get stuck in my opinion the movement got stuck. I have great respect for Chuck Smith very much and for some of the other cover Chapel pastors, but I certainly don't agree with the cover Chapel philosophy that human beings in their church are too stupid to be trusted with the information that there's more than one view at their especially if the view their concealing from them is the one held by the most Christians throughout history and the view that there really view their letting them here is the newest kid on the block that arose from the same time as Mormonism did so it's interesting to Mormonism and dispensationalism. Both were started by men who claim that the apostles taught their doctrines, but that the church lost those doctrines for about 1800 years until they were revealed for in the case of Mormonism to Joseph Smith in the case of a dispensational Darby. The other got their ducks in a row. They certainly know how to make targets. I know all the organs I used to use them. But I also know the flaws in arguments so that's why would different. I love cover Chapel people and very indebted to Chuck Smithies, my hero very much my mentor in many respects but as far as the eschatology goes, it's not either separate from them. But just by changing my mind. I unfortunately came unwelcome data and one more quick question. It will own it will all take many within that would mean that Angel has on the ability to change it and my question is, what with the an angel in the future from doing the things in the devil have done could not even happen. You mean after Jesus comes back and there's the new earth and all that well or even before then reason for long accident and believe in the code. I really thought about whether with before or after that.

Not that it happened again while we we know from second Peter chapter 2 verse four and Jude verse six that there are angels that fell so we know that there that angels have free well they can choose to disobey God, but we don't read of it happening on any occasion more than once. It may well be that only one group of angels stupid enough to consider it and then you what happened to them became well-known among the Angels and evidence realize that's a dumb thing to consider. I don't know. I really don't know.

I mean even whether the fallen angels could repent is not really discussed in Scripture, we usually assume the can't but as far as we know angels must have free will or else they could have rebelled and now I'm pretty sure there won't be anymore angels rebelling in the future, but I couldn't say why or how, but it's not presented in the Bible as something that we need to be worried about it now. Researcher call to publish. All right this evening. Talk to Boyd from Marysville, Washington Boyd, welcome to the neuropathic circling medical labs to questions today that are related to each other. The first point is to get your opinion about the teaching uncircumcised and the second one is about teachings about removing objects your house to spiritually cleanse okay so these are these are things that are related often to the deliverance ministry movement or to inner healing movements. The removal of objects from the house I think would be more often tied with deliverance ministries, where people are trying to the others.

Deliverance ministries are focused on casting demons out of people and sometimes out of houses to and they may point out that God told Israel that they should not bring any abominable thing into their house and that what some people out there in the house are all cult objects or Buddhas thing from other religions and so forth, and that these things are in the ultimate spiritual realm. These are associated with the demonic, and so people who do these deliverance measures often will indicate that if you have these kinds of things in your house, your in an essence welcoming the demonic forces that attach themselves to them, in which case, if you're trying to deliver yourself from demons or get coming Somebody deliver you from demons or or your house eradicate them from the house keeping those things in your house is only going to be counterproductive and you get rid of those. Just like it would also be argued that if you became demon possessed through through up through getting involved in the occult that in order to be delivered. They often so you have to renounce the occult things are passed. The idea is that demons can't really get a foothold in your life unless you somehow have opened the door for that, and given them grounds for it and if you been involved in cults. They say well that that's invited if you've got these all cult objects in your house that invites them in there for you to do rid yourself of that. So the three rid of the demons.

That's that's the view now. I can't tell you where that's true or not. The Bible doesn't tell us that the Bible does say we shouldn't have any abominable thing in our house and because of a lover of God. I wouldn't want one in my house anyway so if I found when I print want to be rid of it but I'm not really afraid of demons as if you're walking with Jesus, filled with spirit. I don't have to worry about being demonized, but I'm I'm not persuaded, and the caller before us. Another issue I disagree come Chapel.

I'm not persuaded as the cover Chapel that Christians are entirely exempt from demonization. The Bible does not teach, whether that is so or not and I have heard of Christians who in known Christians who were seemingly delivered edema site. I won't make any absent statements on the Bible is silent but I I'm I'm not persuaded that Christians cannot have demons and I'm also not persuaded that if a Christian does have demons that those who have these deliverance ministries are are incorrect, are they not be correct. These things might be useful things. I think probably some of the experimentation with this kind of thing occurred initially on the mission field. An old dealer with which doctors and voodoo cultures and in no other demonic cultures that they found it having a accursed object in their house was actually something the demons attach the poster. This is extra biblical. What I mean is, it's not found in the Bible, and therefore one can take it with his many grains of salt. As you may wish I would take it somewhat seriously, only because the Bible tells us a little about this mysterious matter and and that missionaries have had certain experiences with it that I have not had and therefore I would think will. Maybe they did learn something about her experience out now what is in cover Chapel Chuck Smith who believed the Christian's can never have demons he said well I know there's cases are used to him since all time.

I know there's cases were seemingly Christians, seemingly demons Raise and Do You Mass Me Right. How I Explain Those He Said Well I Don't Have To Explain Because They're in Scriptural and Are Based on People's Experiences Not on the Bible so I Think A Lot Of A Lot Of People Think Well Even Though the Bible Doesn't Teach Very Clearly on It. All These Things These Deliverance Ministry Are Based on Experience, Not Scripture. Yeah Well the Thing Is, the Bible Doesn't Give the Teaching a Thorough Teaching about Demons Arbitration How It Happens and Why It Doesn't Always Try to Be Deliverance over Doesn't Give a Complete Teaching Anywhere, Just like It Doesn't Give a Complete Teaching on Epilepsy. The Bible Mentions Epileptics, but It Doesn't Say Anything about You Know the Brain Wiring of an Epileptic or Anything like That to Me That Those Are Things Are Discovered by Experience by Doctors and so Forth. So Me That the Bible Mentions a Phenomenon but Doesn't Tell Much about It Does Not Rule out the People Who Do Have Expense with Might Learn Genuinely Valid Things about Sorry I I'm Not Gonna Rule out Everything That Missionaries and Others Have Discovered in Their Expensive Statements I Have Had Very Limited Expense.

The Demons I Don't Consider Myself an Expert. I'm I'm Pretty Expert on the Things the Bible Says about It but I I'm I Know Enough about That to Know the Volatility Relatively Little about Some of the Questions We Have Now As Far As Soul Ties Soul Ties Are Usually Associate. I Guess with Deliverance Measures and Inner Healing Ministries.

These Are Suggestive of a Mystical Bond That Exists and and an Unclean One between You and Somebody That You Should Have a Bond of Maybe Somebody Had an Affair with.

Maybe Somebody That You Had an Unhealthy Dependency on or Something like That and and That Although They're Not in Your Life. Perhaps Anymore You Have a Soul Tied to Them and That in Order for You to Be Healed, or Whatever You're Trying to Do with You. You Need to You Need a Break That's All Time Now. The Bible Says Nothing in at All about This.

While the Bible Does Talk about Demon Possession, It Doesn't Tell Us As Much As I'd like to Know about It, but It Does It Does Thousand Mention It As a Phenomena. The Whole Issue of Soul Ties Are Not Mentioned As a Phenomena in the Bible Little and so Do They Exist or Not.

I Honestly I Don't Know. I Suppose I'm Sure It's a Psychological Phenomenon That Some People Probably Have an Unhealthy Attachment to People in the past, but They'd Be Good to Get Rid of, but to Make a Special Mystical Kind of an Issue That We Have To Deal with in Some Kind of Spiritual Way. Especially Whenever I Think Whenever I Hear People Say Things about Those Things I Think Okay If This Really Is True, Why Didn't Jesus Mention Why Didn't Paul or Peter or Anyone Liquid and the Prophets Mentioned As If Soul Ties Exist As a Phenomena That Have To Be Specifically Broken in Order for Us to Be Spiritually Healthy. How Did Jesus and Paul and the Apostles Get People to Be Spiritually Healthy without Ever Dealing with Such Things and and I Have To Say It Raises My Suspicion Level Rather High That These Are Not Genuinely Difficult Issues.

So When People Talk Russell Ties Him. I'm Not Usually Listen to Carefully Take It All Right. Thank You for Your Call Everett from San Diego. Welcome to the Neuropathic for Calling.

Yeah, I'm Wondering about the King of the Earth. Now, Yes. Ours Is Okay.

In Other Words, Because There Was a Bear That Had a Couple with the Teacher That Said That He Wasn't Looking. Now That He Would Be like You Talk about the Big Revelation about Setting up His Kingdom and Then He Would Be Getting an Ear Jesus Position Right Now like the Person Who Said That Is Almost Certainly a Premillennialist and an Almost Certainly Dispensational Premillennialists Because They Believe That Jesus Came to Establish His Kingdom. But the Jews Rejected Them, and Because the Jews Rejected Him. The Whole Program Was Put on Hold. It Was Postponed.

The Kingdom Was Taken Away. It Was a Valid Bona Fide Offer, Jesus Made Israel, but They Didn't They Didn't Pick up on It and so He Just Took the Kingdom Away with Him When He Went and He'll Bring It Back and Set up for Thousand Years. When He Comes Back and so They Would Identify the Millennium after Jesus Comes Back with the Kingdom and They Would Say. Then He'll Be on Earth and Heavy Rain on the Earth from Jerusalem That Were to Be the King of the Earth.

However, I Don't Believe the Bible Teaches Anythe Bible Does Not Ever Say That the Kingdom Was Postponed Just Because Most the Jews Rejected A Lot Of Jews Accepted It. His Disciples Were Jews and on the Day of Pentecost. There Were 3000 More Jews Who Accepted It, and a Growing Number Going into the Hundreds of Thousands. Yet Some Jews Rejected It, but A Lot Of Jews Did Not Reject It.

So I Meant to Say That the Jews Rejected Christ As King Is Frankly Not Very Agreeable to Anything the Bible Says. And Even If They Did.

There's Nothing That Says and Therefore They Thwarted His Plan and He Was Not Able to Set the Kingdom. Note Jesus at the End of His Life Was Praying and in John 1740 Some Father and I Finished the Work You Sent Me to Do Okay What What Was He Sent to Do Here Sent to to Accept the Kingdom of God, and He Finished It. He Did It at the End of His Life He Had Done That That Very Thing.

He Did Not Fail so I Mean I Don't See I Think It's Overly Simplistic to Say, the Jews Rejected His Kingdom.

Some Did, Some Didn't. But Even If Even If They All Had That Doesn't Mean He Couldn't Continue. You Know the Bible Says When He Rose from the Dead Jesus and All Authority.

Now Authority Needs the Right to Rule Okay Authorities What's Held My a Ruler King or Some like That All Authority in Heaven and on Earth Is Given to Me He Is Called the King of Kings and Most the Kings Are Here on Earth, so He's Ruling over the Kings of the Earth. He's the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords.

All Authority in Heaven and Earth Is Given He's Raining from Heaven at the Right Hand of God's Reign over Us on Earth and Training Now Correct.

Of Course Are Absolutely and That's Why on the Day of Pentecost. After Jesus Had Ascended at a Time When the Dispensations Think That the Kingdom Should Have Been You Know Taken Away or Something Peter Said His Final Words of the Sermon on Pending Diseases. Therefore Let the House of Israel Is Surely No That God Has Made This Jesus Whom You Crucified, Both Lord and Christ or Messiah Mean the King the Word and Sign Is Key. The Anointed King, and so Peter's Announcement on the Day of Pentecost Is That Christ Is in Fact Been Made the Lord. That Means That the Ruler and the Messiah, He Said, Which Is the Anointed One, Who Is the King. So If God Has Made Jesus the Ruler the Lord the King. Why Would MSAs Not the King and over One and over What Realm Does He Rule Well.

He Said All Authority in Heaven and Earth Belong Him so I'd Say That the Suggestion That the Kingdom Was Postponed and Won't Be Here till the Millennium and Adjacent Rental Arrears Event Is Not to My Mind Is Totally a Mistaken Notion. And Again, It Belongs to the Dispensational Paradigm. I Have One Other Question and Explaining Very Quickly. The and Ambassador Have a Great Yeah I Will an Investor Has As Much Authority As Is Given to Him.

He Represents the Country of Origin in a Country That's Domiciled Country for Him so Master Sent Let Let's Just Say It's the US Ambassador Is Appointed by the United States President to Go and Represent the United States Interest in France or England or Somewhere.

Well, That Person Speaks with the Authority of the of the President Now. It May Be That Doesn't Mean the Investor Makes It up As He Goes along. In the Present Has a Rubberstamp or If It May Be That Some Some Policy Is Being Considered That There Is a Very Important Policy Are No Doubt, the Investor Contacts the Person I Would Assume This Is Noted about This, and Once He Knows That He Would Then Immediately Announced It Understand That about Investor in That Respect, but As an Ambassador Have Authority over Demons. Well, All People Who Are Christians Potentially Have the Authority over Demons Carrying out Demons Cast out Demons Is Part of the Authority of Christ That's Invested in His Name. I Don't Believe That All Christians Are Involved in Casting out Demons Very Often, and No Doubt Some Christians Never Do Whatever I Do Believe That the Authority over Demons Is Something That Christ Gave to the Church As a Whole Would Have Been Special in 19 Are Special Calling, I Couldn't Answer That the Bible Doesn't Tell Us Whether That Is Sore Not. I Know That There Are People Who Were Certainly the Apostles Cast out Demons Were There Also People Who Are Not Apostles like Philip Who Did so. So You Not, I Wouldn't Be Surprised If There Are Certain People Whose Special Gifting Is More in That Area Than in Than Than Other People's Would Be Because God Does Kinda Have Juicy Specialists That's of the Gifts Are for Each Person Is a Gift of Some Kind, and Certainly Not All the Gifts Are Listed in Scripture, but, but, for Example, Teaching Is Said to Be a Gift Which Some People Have, but All Christians Can Teach Them Some at Some Level It's Just Not Our That's Not the Main Thing to Do so. I Think Probably Same Thing with Casting out Demons, or They Call Christians Might Do so in Citrus and God Puts Them in in the Name of Jesus, but I Don't Think That All Christians Are to Be Equally Involved or Equally Encounter the Demon Possessed. Appreciate Your Call, but I'm Almost on Time and Got Some People Waiting Need to Type Talk to Paul from Massachusetts. Welcome to the Neuropathic for Calling It Good Question What Is Right with Them, but They That God Created Right It's Disaster. I Mean the King James Is Evil. For Those Who Don't Know, Those in Another Verse As I God Says I Form the Light and Create Darkness, I Make Peace and Create Evil. The King Dances. I Am the Lord. I Do All These Things Now Every Modern Translation I Know of Probably Translates the Word Evil As Calamity Because He's Contrasting It Is Not Contrasting It with Good We Can Think of Evil Is Absolute Good, but in the Bible Evil Is Often the Opposite of Peace. He Says I Make Peace, and I Create Evil and the Word Evil in the Hebrew Often Does Mean Disaster or Calamity or Something like That.

So If the City Is Facing Calamity. It's the Opposite of Being at Peace Anything I I Create Both Circumstances, He Is Not Saying He Created Moral Evil. It's a Totally Different Concept and Intently. God Didn't Create Moral Evil. He Moral Evil Isn't the Created Thing at All. In Fact, I Left. I Had a Guy at Work by That Particular by That Scripture He Even Got One That's One That's One of the Disadvantages of the King James Version. I like I like the King James Version for Many Years, of My Favorite I Would Say It's Still Still Very Precious to Me. I Love the King James, but It Is up It's Problematic Because It's an Old Translation That Uses English Words That Are Not Always You English Changes and Intransitive 1611, and Those 500 Years or 400 Years You Know English Language Words Nuances of Change and so Forth and so to Use a Bible That Old Is to Invite Confusion from Someone Who Doesn't Know Much like an Unbeliever Who Suits Reading Sees a Verse like That but and and That's Where a More Moderate Position May Be Helpful Okay on Your You Are God When You Would Be Well First of All, Jesus Didn't Say You Are God's. He Said It Is Written in Your Law. I Said You Are God's. He's Quoting Something for Each Coding Psalm 82, Six Which Says I Said You Are God's. It's Just a Single Line from the Song Is Courtney Jesus Is Not Telling Anybody That They Are God's.

He's Saying You'll Find It in Your Bible. This Statement, I Said, You Are God, Not That Is Not Really Affirming That Humans Are God's. Because the in the Psalm Says That You Will Die like Men so the Gods Don't Die like Men and God Often Makes a Huge Distinction between Gods and Men. For Example, in Ezekiel, God Tells the King of Tyre You Think Your God That You're Not Dog Your Man. So Jesus Is Making a Point That I Don't Have Time to Explain Right Now Happened There Many Times and Not the Music of Panama for 30 Seconds to Go to Jesus Seat. Jesus Did Not Say You Are God's. He Said He Reminded the Pharisees of Their Bible Has That Line in It and He Is Making a Point about It Which Has Nothing to Do with People Being God's Unfortunate Target for Another Time Listening to the Narrow Path Mining Steve Greg Run Monday through Friday at the Same Time Become a Regular Listener. If You Haven't Already, You Can Also Become Supported. We Are Listener Supported with Your Go to Our Website. The Narrow You Can See How to Support Us and Keep Us on the Thanks for Joining Us. Let's Talk Again Tomorrow. This

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