The Narrow Path 8/21

Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast.

My name is Steve Greg and we're live for an hour each weekday afternoon and we take your calls during this hour. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or you have a disagreement, a challenge you'd like to bring to the host. Feel free to do that. We'd be glad to entertain your call. The number is eight four four.

Four, eight, four.

Fifty seven. Thirty seven. That's eight four.

Four four. Eight. Four.

Fifty seven. Thirty seven. And our first caller today is Michael from Atlanta, Georgia. Michael, welcome to the Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Thank you, Steve. Yes. I spoke with you yesterday and you gave me some good words of advice about remarrying and things of that nature. So I want to call in again. First of all, I love your show because you have the interaction between your callers and yourself. Give good advice. So my next question is, I am a Christian. Go to church in. But I like to have a Marguerita every once in a while when I go to a Mexican restaurant and have a beer. So how do you feel? How do you think God feels about.

I mean, not getting swamped, but, you know, having a drink with your meal or, you know, something like that.

Well, I've had a margarita myself before and I don't drink alcohol very much cause I don't I don't like alcohol, actually. Probably a margarita is the most hard liquor I've ever tasted. I've had a beer or wine once in a while, but I don't like them much. I don't like any hard liquor either. I don't like the smell of the stuff. But I guess when you mix the stuff you do with it, it's not bad. I'm not much of a drinker, but I'm not a legalist about it. Why should I be? The Bible doesn't forbid it.

Churches sometimes forbid things that God does not forbid. And drinking alcohol is one of those things. Yes, I believe that that is the essence of legalism. When we add to the commands of scripture, you know, the first person to do that. That we know of was Eve. God said, do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. When she repeated the command, she says, you should not eat of it or touch it. Now she went beyond the command of scripture. No doubt what she suggested it may be. Well, that maybe the way that Adam communicated it, too, because he he was the one who was told this by God and that before she was created. And then when she is created, he must have told her. Perhaps he added the tag line. Don't touch it. If so, we understand his motivation. You know, hey, this tree is danger. This tree is poison. Don't even touch it. And that's how people are sometimes about things that can be abused. We want to build a hedge around the actual forbidden thing. That's what the Pharisees did. The traditions of the Pharisees were sometimes referred to as building a hedge around the law, meaning the law said, don't do this, but let's just kind of keep this much further away from it and forbid anything that approaches it.

And so we have people saying, well, the Bible forbids drunkenness. So we should not even touch alcohol. We should not even drink alcohol. Well, I would say if you can't drink alcohol without getting drunk, then that's a very good rule for you to make for yourself, because you've got a weakness. But not one has that weakness. There are people who who drink a little bit of alcohol and they'd never, ever get drunk. And what my Jesus was one of those.

My church frowns upon that drinking period. But it's okay for them to smoke out in front of the church and smoke in the parking lot. And I'm like, well, what would do worse of the two evils? You know, if you're going to frown upon one, you should frown upon the other one, should you?

That is. That is a strange selectivity they have there. I mean, usually churches that are against drinking are also against smoking and chewing tobacco and all kinds of things like that, cultural things which the Bible does not outright forbid. Now a good case can be made for not smoking, just based on stewardship of your finances and of your health. You know, smoking is not generally good for people. Drinking a little bit of wine. According to Paul, can be good for people. Paul said that Timothy had some frequent stomach problems, which could be helped by drinking a little bit of wine. Now no one's going to get drunk on drinking a little bit of wine, but they might it might experience some health benefits. So, I mean, we alcohol, when it's not in alcoholic drinks, is probably allowed in many of these people's homes in the form of cough sirups and things like that. You know, now if you drink enough cops, cough sirup, I suppose you get drunk and die. Probably. But, you know, having a moderate amount of alcohol is not forbidden. Once again, I'm not advocating alcohol and I'm not a user. I mean, when I say I'm not a user. I'm not saying I've never, never, ever drunk. I had a wine or a beer once in a while in my lifetime. It's very rare. And I just don't I don't care for it. So if I drink with somebody who serves me something and they're doing it, I'm not only legalist and I don't I don't condemn anyone who likes it, but of course, getting drunk is forbidden. So I would say anyone who says you cannot drink alcohol at all is simply making up rules out of their own head, which is what legalism is. It's what the Pharisees did. On the other hand, I would say that there is a very large number of people who are not able to drink alcohol moderately. They have Rila addictive personality or something. In the end, there's just something in them that when they drink wondering, they want to go for more intent and they don't know when to quit. Well, those people should probably, you know, discipline themselves to stay away from drinking alcohol and maybe even from blood that made us safer places where other people are doing it.

Yes. And they told me, well, if you're out drinking and somebody who is trying to quit or stop drinking intellectually, you take a drink. And then I make calls that cause them to follow or go back into.

That is a possibility. That is a possibility. And one should be mindful of that. If a person is trying to remain sober, I'm not sure why they're going to places where people drinking if they're weak themselves. I think the person has a weakness toward alcohol. Probably not going to parties or places where people drink would be a really excellent thing to decide on. On the other hand, you know, I I agree I agree that there are people who are trying to stop drinking and knowing that some friend of theirs is a Christian and drinks might make them feel like, well, I can do that, too.

But of course, yes, they should be wiser than that. They can't do that. And they know it there. They have a truck. They have a problem with a person is really in denial if they don't know what their own weaknesses are.

Isn't there a scripture of something that says that you should not do something to cause you or your brother to fall or something like that?

Yeah. Yeah. The Bible definitely says that. Paul says it in First Corinthians, chapters eight through 11. A whole discussion on it. Eight through ten. And and Romans, 14 through 15. Now, they're not talking about drinking alcohol in those places, but other things which are controversial in the sight of some Christians and which some Christians feel they should not do and are trying not to do, but which are not in themselves bad to my mind, it's a lot like the issue of watching television.

I think that if if you're the kind of person that when you turn the TV on, you get sucked right in and that's the end of your evening, you know, your next thing you know, you're asleep on the chair and turn off the TV and go to bed. You get sucked in, you're addicted, you know.

And now the words, anything that you overdo can be a Senate at some point, right?

I mean, the Bible doesn't forbid watching a television program, but. Right. But a person at another weaknesses. You know, when I was raising my children, which was over a period, about 30 something years, I didn't only television because I not because I, I was too holy, but because I was not holy enough. I knew that I would have a weakness to watch too much. So I just thought, well, right. I'm not going to do that. I also felt like it be beneficial to my children not to have it in the house. But I mean, not my own weakness was an awareness I had. And we should be aware of our weaknesses. I don't. But but I never condemned anybody else. I television. I thought, well, maybe they can. Whereas I cannot. That's that's none of my business. What they can do.

Well, thanks a lot so much, Steve. I appreciate it and enjoy your show.

OK, Michael, thanks for your call. Good talking to you, brother. All right, Richard from SEAL Beach, California. Welcome to the Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Yes, Steve, a lot of your callers have been asking questions about divorce lately. And here's another one based on JEREMI, three point eight and God himself seems to be divorced.

So my question is, who is he divorced from? And is idolatry and adultery or are they related? And I'll listen to you on the radio. Thanks, Steve.

Sure. Yeah, well, definitely. In God's mind, idolatry is adultery when it's his people who are supposed to be his wife. You have to realize that Israel was unique in Old Testament times. It was the only nation in the world that God had a special relationship with and that special relations was based on a covenant that he made. When the country is founded at Mount Sinai and that covenant was seen as a marriage covenant, you, Israel's relation to God on the basis of the Covenant was like a wife's really ship to her husband. And and God made it very clear. The one thing, first commandment and second one, too, for that matter, is you don't have any other gods beside me. And certainly that's the first thing a man or woman promised to each other when they marry. I, I will forsake all others. I will not have another. I'll be faithful to you for the rest my life. That's a marriage vow. And Israel made that vow. And so they were viewed as a wife who is supposedly faithful to their husband. God. Now. God recognized and one them to recognize that any compromise on their part in the direction of idolatry was like a woman flirting with another man instead of her husband, and that if they would actually worship idols, it was like a woman actually going to bed with another man other than her husband. So the prophets like you, Zeke Hill and Jeremiah and Isaiah all and Hosanna especially, they all said that Israel, in its compromise with idolatry, was like a harlot, like a wife who'd gone astray and was sleeping with other men. That's how God viewed it. So idolatry in the context of Israel and really and God's relationship as a married couple, as it were, a covenant. Parties idolatry was, in fact, adultery now. Yeah. And God does say that because Israel did that he did divorce Israel. He said he gave them a writing of divorce, but he put them away.

Now, that was actually referring to sending them into Babylon in five eighty six B.C. when he sent them away into battle and ended their nation. It was it was like divorce him or was actually like killing the nation. Ezekiel likened it to a harlot who is stoned to death under the law. It's like Israel came to nothing. Israel as a nation died. But in another sense, they were just alive somewhere else as a people. And God did through Hosanna, promised to welcome them back. If they repent, they can come back like a strain. Wife could come back to her husband if he's generous as God is. So they did come back, but but they continued to be unfaithful. And for that reason, God made a new covenant with the few in the nation that were really faithful. Israel, of course, was a mixed batch. Like every nation, some of them were faithful to God somewhere, not the ones who were faithful. God called the faithful remnant. And he made promises to the remnant. And eventually he made a new covenant with the remnant of Israel. And that remnant was that cabinet is made through Christ with his disciples who were the remnant of Israel in his time. And they became the disciples of Jesus or what we call the church. So. That's I think that I think that covers the ground that your question was about. All right, let's talk to Earl from Roseville, California. Earl, welcome to the Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Yes. Hello, Steve. Hi. I once read a book called The Liberation of Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey, Christian Evangelist. I'm not. I'll read another book by Joyce Meyer called God is Not Mad at You. It needs books. The author is have said God forgives all of our sins past, present and future once we are saved. So if that is true, then why would Christians need to stand before God during the white throne? Judgment. As mentioned in Revelation.

Yeah. Well, the idea that God has forgiven all our past and present and future sins when we repent is not a statement of scripture. It's a common statement made by a certain kind of preachers. They are usually the kind of preachers who are giving people more permission to send than they probably intend to. I don't know of any preacher that really wants to give people permission to sin, but that's essentially what happens when you say, oh, any sins you commit from now on, they're already forgiven now. Sin? No, no problem. I mean, some of these preachers I don't know how says that Hal Lindsey or Joyce Meyer, but there are some other preachers who teach this and who say it's never necessary to say to confess your sins after your Christian or to repent because, you know, I guess being saved as never having to say you're sorry, but that's not what the Bible teaches. Now, what's the problem with the teaching? The teaching? The problem is this. They are saying that God has looked at all of our sins. And in 2000 years ago when Jesus died, he just you know, he he wiped them all off the off the record when he died. Well, that's not exactly what the Bible says when Jesus died. He paid the price, which allows for the forgiveness of all of our sins. But none of our sins, even our past or present ones. None of them was none. None were forgiven before we became Christians, even though Jesus paid the price for them long before we became Christians. We have to buy faith and and repentance. The Bible makes it very clear we have to appropriate that forgiveness. God hasn't. In fact, I consider it like this that it's as if a president of the United States, since he has the right to pardon criminals, if he just issued a general pardon to anybody who is in prison, if they will promise to change their ways and be loyal. You know, law abiding citizens. Let's just say that was what a president did. Well, no doubt you think we'll all the criminals walk free then? Well, they might, but they would perhaps be some who are saying, why would he do a thing like that? I don't trust him. I'm not going outside. If I walk out of this cell, probably shoot me and say I was trying to escape. I'm staying right here. You know, I've got an alleged pardon, but I'm not taking it because I don't trust or they might even say, you know, if this was a if this was Barack Obama who issued it, I might do it. But this is Trump. I don't want to. I don't want handouts from Trump. I don't want to. I anything from him. And they might say, I'm gonna stay right where I am.

In other words, if they don't believe in the pardon or if they believe it, but they have no interest in pleasing the person who issued it. Or meeting the conditions. Well, then the pardon stands. But they remain in prison. They might even be on death row. They might even go to the electric chair because they will not walk out of death row. Now, I think that we could say when Jesus died, he issued that pardon to those who will come to him. To those who will repent of their sins and believe in him. Some people believe it. Some people don't. Some people may think it's true, but they're not interested, given the terms upon which it's offered. They want to live in sin. They don't want to stop living in sin. So they're not going to take it. And so the point here is it's not that now that I accept the pardon, that suddenly every sin I'll ever commit is now expunged. That's not what the Bible says. The Bible says that if we walk in the light as he is in the light, that's that's an ongoing Christian walk. OK. Walking in lies. What we as Christians are supposed to from the day we're convert till the day we die. It says at first, John, one seven. If we walk in the light as is in the light, says the blood of Jesus Christ, his son cleanses us. That's present tense, cleanses us from all sin. So as I'm walking in the light, I am being cleansed. But what if I don't walk in the light? What if I decide to, you know, go the wrong way, do the wrong thing, go you know, take a leap back in the darkness or whatever? Well, then the blood of Jesus isn't cleansing my sins. Like the cleansing is contemporary with the walking in the light. That's what John said. And it makes perfectly good sense as as long as my children remain, you know, the same adult children or children about eight times, if they remain obedient to the house rules, they can they can live there. But if they don't, then they have to not live there. They're welcomed. The hospitality offered to them is on the basis of their continuing to remain in good relationship with me and with the rules I made at my house. Okay, so that's how it is with parents and children. That's how it is with humans in general. That's how it is with God. God says, listen, you repent of your sins, you trust in me, and we'll we'll get along just great, you know? But you have to walk in the light. And as you do, walking like the blood of Jesus continues to cleanse you of all soon. Well, what if you depart from the faith? Well, there's no promises for that. There's no promise for former believers. People who used to walk in the light and used to be Clintons to Ballston by Jesus. You see, God hasn't somehow forgiven the sins I haven't committed yet because there's nothing to nothing there. There's nothing to forgive. There's no sin that's committed tomorrow or the next day. There may be a sin committed tomorrow or the next day, but there isn't one now. So there's nothing there to forgive. Forgiveness comes when a person has done something wrong and they now regret it and they seek forgiveness for it. And so that's why the Bible says if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just forgive us our sins and to cleanse us small and righteousness. And first, John, one night. So it's a relationship. It's not it's not a business transaction. It's not a legal transaction. Well, I do want to say it's not legal. There's a legal aspect to it, of course. But the point is our relation salvation is not just a legal event of conversion. Salvation is a relationship with our creator.

That's what salvation is for. To restore us. The bobbies that would reconcile us to be reconciled to God knows we're back in a proper relationship with them. And what kind of relationship is that? Well, the only proper relation with the king is total submission. And he has anything else as rebellion and defection. So, you know, Jesus has arranged for us to be absolved of our past rebellion and to be restored into a proper relation with God. And as we continue to live with him, his blood cleanse is a small sin. But if we decide not to live with him anymore. Well, I mean, there's certainly the Bible doesn't make any promises about that. And so, you know, I'm not sure that I'm not sure how how Lindsay or Joyce Meyer said those things. I didn't read that book. I read a number. Helen's a book back in 1970, but I didn't read the one you mentioned. And I've never heard him say that. But I can imagine he could say it because sometimes the people who say that are extreme dispensation lists. And when Lindsay wrote his book Late Great Planet Earth, he he dedicated it to a man that he described as his mentor, who is an extreme dispensation, is who who does teach what a concept called super grace, which indicates that it really doesn't matter what you said or not as a Christian. So how Lindsay might hold that view. And and I have certainly known people who did. And it's a very dangerous view. When Paul said, shall we then sin? Because we're not under law. But under grace in Romans 615, he said, God forbid. Don't you know that the one you're serving is your master? If you're serving sin, your master is sin, not God of you know. So, I mean, if you're living in sin, you're not a Christian because a Christian one who has repented of living in sin, they've changed their mind and stopped doing that. They stumble. They sometimes sin, but they don't live in sin. And so. I mean, that's that's the plain teaching of the New Testament. It's amazing how many American evangelicals have not read the New Testament very well except to to call out of it, you know, a handful of verses that sound like they're saying something different than that than they are. And then the rest of the New Testament teaches anyone who reads the whole New Testament with their eyes open can see easily that the Bible teaches that obedience to God. Faithfulness to Christ. These are the things that we are called to as Christians and that if we reject that call, we are not Christians. And that, you know, we're not perfect. The Bible doesn't say we are perfect. It says we should aim at it. But God, God's not going to bust us for our weakness. But he will definitely notice if we're not committed to him. That's different than being weak.

OK, for example, if a person has a a job that's pretty demanding and they put in like 60, 70 hours a week in their job. And they commit maybe two or three scenes a day or maybe more. I don't know. But then because their lives are so involved with their activities, their job, et cetera, et cetera, they just say the Lord's Prayer once a week. Would that cover those scenes or do they need to repent every day or.

Well, you need to repent every time you soon. And that is every time you know you've done wrong. I believe you should, you know, just ask God to forgive you and to help you not do that anymore. I don't think a Christian should be sinning several times a day. I mean, it depends on what you're calling sin. If you're calling sin being not entirely perfect, well, then, yeah, we're kind of imperfect most.

That's what I would. But, you know, it's not perfect in your relations with either.

But a lot of times people think they have sinned when what really has happened is they've been tempted. Remember, Jesus was tempted and all points like we. But he didn't sin. Being tempted is not a sin to have a bad thought. Come to your mind, which you know is wrong and you don't want it to be there means that the devil is tempting you or your flesh is tempting you. But that doesn't mean you're sinning when you sin is when you actually decide to do the rebellious thing, when you decide to violate God's law. Now, I don't think Christians do that very many times a day. In fact, I don't think they even have to do it very many times a week. I think that I think that we often think we sin all the time because we're mistaking. Temptations for sins. But if you are sitting many times a day, then you need to repent. Many times a day, I believe. Now, I'm not saying that if you don't repent and you die before you do that, you're going to hell. What I'm saying is this. If you're a real Christian, you have a real relationship with God. And that relationship is one that you love him. Do you have a wife?

No, I'm single. OK. Have you ever been married? No, I haven't.

OK, well, when you get married, I hope you love your wife. And if you do love your wife, he'll know that you don't want to hurt her. You know, her. Her hurting is going to be is gonna hurt you. And I don't mean that she's going to hurt you. I mean. I mean, you're gonna it's gonna hurt inside for you to know that someone you love is hurting. If you have a relationship with God, such as the Bible describes you love God with all your heart, soul, mind, strength. Anything that disappointed will disappoint you. And therefore, when you realize that you've disappointed or when you've fallen short, that's something that you're not happy about and you'll you'll repent about it. However, you're not saved because you repented of the last thing you did. You're saved because you have that relationship with God and that relation with God manifests itself in that kind of activity. Salvation is a relationship with God based on your recognition of him as your king and your lord and your love for him and your trust in him. And I mean, that's what a relationship is, a covenant relationship where a covenant relation with God. And so, you know, that's what you need to check into, not, you know, how many times do I send today? And did I remember to forget to repent of each one?

The question is, if I'm singing, why am I sitting? Is it because I want to? Or is it because I'm weak and I'm trying not to? I mean, am I committed to God or am I not committed to God? Am I trying to follow Christ? I'm not trying to follow Christ. That's the question that needs to be answered. Because if you belong to Christ and you're walking in the light, which includes repentance, when you sin, that's walking in the light. Well, then the blood of Jesus cleanses you from all sin on a regular, continuous basis. And that's what you need. I need to take a break here.

You're listening to the narrow path. We have another half hour coming up, so don't go away. The narrow path is listener supported. You can write to us at the narrow path. P.O. Box 17 30, Temecula, California. Nine to five nine three. Or you can donate from the Web site where everything is free. It's the narrow path. Dot com. Stay tuned and I'll be back in 30 seconds to take more calls.

The book of Hebrews tells us, do not forget to do good and to share with others. So let's all do good and share the narrow path with Steve, Greg with family and friends. When the show is over today, tell one in all to go to the narrow path dot com where they can study, learn and enjoy with free topical audio teachings. Blog articles, verse by verse teachings and archives of all the narrow path radio shows. And be sure to tell them to tune into the show right here on the radio. Sure, listeners supported the narrow path with Steve. Greg share and do good.

Welcome back to the Narrow Path. Radio broadcast, my name is Steve Greg and we are live for another half hour, taking calls from people just like you who dial the number.

I realize if you're under, let's say, 40, you probably don't know what the word dial means when we talk about dialing a number or when you enter the number on your keypad.

Eight four. Four four. Eight. Four.

Fifty seven. Thirty seven. That's eight four.

Four four. Eight four.

Fifty seven. Thirty seven. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or if you want to challenge or disagree with something, the whole set, you are always welcome to join us and do just that. OK. Our next caller is Dave from Fallbrook, California. Dave, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Thank you, Steve. Take my call. I have a question. But last week, unfortunately, when I lived in Spokane, I was going to get Shefi movement.

Oh, yes, my team, they're still churches like that. All in the 70s. Yeah.

This is a 70, 76, 82. Yeah. Oh, you went to something called Inner Healing last week. So there's a name attached to that. Tell me what that word was.

Well, inner healing. Not everyone uses the term the same way. But there was a movement in the late 70s, early 80s called the Inner Healing Movement. And this was it involved what was called guided visualization. I don't know if that's the term you're thinking of. It was. It was. And basically a merging of union ideas called young and charismatic Christian ideas, and and it had more of young than a Christianity in it. They did introduce Jesus in the picture, but it was it was really Carl Young's techniques. Now, Carl Jung was a cultist. He he communicated with poltergeists and with spirit guides and so forth. That's why he broke company with Freud. He was a younger kind of a protege of Sigmund Freud. But Freud was an atheist and a naturalist, didn't believe in the supernatural. But Jung knew better. Jung knew there was a supernatural. He had grown up in a house that was haunted and that he had had dealings with spirits, very graphic dealings with spirits in his house. And he when he was separated from Freud, he he began to teach something that that he said he learned from his spirit guide. He actually had a name for his spirit. His spirit guide was named Filemon, he said, and he said his spirit guide for Lehman, you know, informed him of things that people don't ordinary know. And what what what what Young introduced that Freud did not Freud Freud created the concept of the subconscious or the unconscious mind. Young extended that to the whole human race, having a collective unconscious mind, which means that whereas Freud thought that the things that you experienced in the first six years of your life or so have marked you, they they make you what you are in a round that you do not know about. It's in the subconscious. However, even though you don't know about it, it dictates many things about you and the problems you have and so forth. But it's it's your personal, I guess we say non memories, things that happened that you don't remember and are in the subconscious. You can't no wealth young believe that the whole human race collectively has that so that I could suffer from repressed memories of someone else who's lived at any some other time in history or frankly, from someone who who will live in the future. You know, all humanity from the beginning to end of history. I have this one. Collective unconsciousness. Young thought. And therefore you can actually, in a sense, contact people who have lived before. Of course, this is very, very close to medium ship. This is a cultic practice. But you can contact people. You can you can visualize under a certain directed practitioner. You can visualize yourself in a room and the door opens and in walks and you name it. It could be Thomas Edison. It could be George Washington. It could be Alexander the Great, whoever you want. You pick them, you you visualize them coming in. And they actually are there because they and you are all part of the same collective unconsciousness so that you are tapping into their collective unconscious, their own personal unconsciousness. That's part of the collective. And you can communicate with them. They actually participate in interaction with you. Now, of course, this is a very daemonic thing. It's very much like psychic healing and some other things. Right. But anyway, that's what Young was about. Now, Young was a Presbyterian, I believe, but he was not really a follower of Christ. But there was a woman named Agnes Sanford back in the 60s who introduced a form of therapy to the church. She was a charismatic and charismatic. Eat this stuff up. And I have to say, I'm a charismatic, but I didn't eat this up. I did not approve because it's not biblical. It's more our cultic. But in the charismatic movement, they are very typically a very low level of discernment. Charismatics are often not always, but often people who just love a new experience. And so sometimes they love experiences more than they love truth in some cases. And some they'll they'll go for experiences without questioning their legitimacy. And many people seem to be helped by this. But Agnes Sanford introduced this guided visualization under the term inner healing into charismatic circles. She was mentored herself by her son and her pastor.

Her pastor was Martin Kelsi. Her son was Jack Sanford. And and they were they had studied at Carl Jay Jung University in Switzerland. So they were young in analysis, our analysts. And she was mentored by them. They're both professing Christians, but they're more influenced by Carl Jung. And so she introduced into the charismatic movement this idea of guided visualization where you can visualize Jesus. Now, Roman Catholics, if they wish, can visualize Mary, you know, an American Indian can visualize a coyote if they want to because it works just the same. You know what? As long as you're doing the occult practice, you get the same results, even if Jesus is the person you're visualizing walking into the room.

And ah, ah, ah ah, you're eating. We went through. So it is lotame. Yes. We went to is getting Bodmin Purple Heart under Dale.

I like Bob Uncomfort. I like Bob Mumford and I numbers. I listen to his tapes a lot back in the 70s. I never heard him talk about your healing.

He got started in a dairy Prince Charles Simpson. Baxter. There's there's five of them.

And we were there. I listened to all that. I listened to all those guys back then. But I didn't ever hear them mentioned in her healing. I had never heard of inner healing until Agnes Sanford introduced it. But she may have influenced them without my knowing it. But yeah. Yeah, those guys were a lot more scriptural than Agnes Sanford was. Right. So they may have had something else. They were calling in her healing. But the movement of inner healing was brought in by Agnes Sanford and promoted by John and Paula Sanford and even Jimmy Carter's sister, Ruth Carter. Hazel, what's your last name? Frigatebirds. And it was she she she was a practitioner of that. And there there's a Catholic charismatic guy named Francis McNutt, who is a former priest. These people were all disciples of Agnes Sanford and they spread it now. Bob Mumford and those guys, I don't think they were disciples of Agnes. And so maybe they maybe they picked up on the name, but but used a more scriptural practice. I don't really know. I don't remember them ever talking about it.

It could have been. So I've got one real quick question. Okay, okay, okay. Is interpreting tongues a gift to the spirit? What was first? Yes, biblically. OK. Can you tell me for the life of me, see if I can not find where it's ever used? Definitely policies did not. I guess the word cessation or something like that. I thought I was Keres make. I'm not really sure if I am anymore because the speaking it is something I've never seen done after Pentecost and interpretation. So that's my life. I can't find it in the Bible where it was ever used. You know where I find it.

Well, you can find where it is recommended to be used. We don't have we don't. In the Book of Acts, we don't have reference to people speaking in tongues and other people interpreting tongues. That's, you know, the Book of Acts is very limited and what it tells. We also don't we don't read of anyone, you know, drinking poison and not harming them either. But there are statements in scripture about these things in first grade in 14. First Corinthians 14, Paul said in verse twenty seven and twenty eight. If anyone speaks in a tongue and he means in the church service, if anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or more at the most three excuse me, each in turn and let one interpret. But if there's no interpreter, then let him keep silence in the church and let him speak to himself and to God. So he says this is how the church service was to be regulated, that only a few people would speak in tongues one at a time. In each case, there had to be an interpretation from an intern.

Why did that happen? Now I've when I can, OK? I've been to somebody called Semitic guys. Not sure there's a Pentecostal church and it's going to cause you're healing. And it was everybody would sing and pray in tone. I mean, I didn't know how and I didn't do it.

Well, the Assemblies of God, this thing is going to are the largest Pentecostal denomination. They are definitely Pentecostal. They're not as wild as some. I mean, you go to United Pentecostal Church or something like that. It's not as big a denomination as many members. And the reason is probably same people are largely scared away by the behavior there. But the Assemblies of God don't have quite as much nonsense going on. But they do have the distinctive Pentecostal obsession with tongues. And the Pentecostal denominations have this doctrine that tongues is the initial evidence of the baptismal Holy Spirit. The Bible doesn't teach that. And and yet it's the distinctive of the Pentecostal movement.

So they don't follow don't follow Paul's instructions.

They don't follow Paul's instructions about speaking in tongues in Pentecostal churches usually.

Well, then Steve is speaking in tongues. Still a viable gift as it maybe happens in South Africa are after yourself to make that red like here at Fulbeck state, for example.

Well, he's speaking in tongues. Tongue speaking in tongues is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. And the Bible would indicate that the gifts of the Spirit belong to the church as long as there's a church. I mean, in first Corinthians, one seven. Paul said to the church that you come short in, no gift, eagerly awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now I'm still waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. And he said that the church should come behind. That is lack in no gift. That means all the gifts are valid. It doesn't mean, though, that you're going to see them all equally frequently. They're not always they're not all useful in every situation. I mean, tongues will have its place. It doesn't have the kind of prominent place in the New Testament that it has in Pentecostal churches. And therefore, a person who's gone to Pentecostal church and they encourage anyone to speak in tongues in every service. And there's no interpretation at all that stuff. You know, they're just unfortunate Pentecostals. Again, their denominations are they're distinctive. Is this belief in speaking in tongues as a as necessary evidence, the baptism Holy Spirit. So, you know, every church has its own imbalances and that's the imbalance in Pentecostal churches. I believe in speaking in tongues. I have to tell you, I myself have spoken in tongues, but not in not in public. I don't think any human being has ever heard me do it. It's part of prayer. But, you know, Paul did not indicate that any of the gifts will be taken away before the revelation of Jesus Christ from heaven. So I believe in him. But but if I go to a church for six years and never hear anyone speak in tongues, I don't think, oh, there's a problem here. No, I just assume, you know, if there are people who speak in tongues and they do it in a biblical way, then I'm I'm OK with it. If if no one speaks in tongues, the Bible doesn't say people have to speak in tongues in church. It's like I don't if I go to church, I've never seen anyone work a miracle. And I have say I've been a church all my life and I've never seen anyone in a church work out a real miracle. Right. But but that doesn't mean I don't believe in the gift of miracles. It just means that, you know, wherever God wants to do a miracle, he can give that gift to somebody. It's apparently not in the church, even in Pentecostal churches. There's not much in the way of real miracles. Just fine. Sometimes. Sometimes you might. Yeah. I mean, I don't I don't doubt that real miracles occur, but I don't believe that every spectacular gift is supposed to be headlined or featured in every gathering of Christians. And frankly, I think Christians can profitably gather for years on end without necessarily having a miracle or having someone speak in tongues. I'm not saying it shouldn't be any more than that. I don't know. But I just don't I'm not worried about. I'm not someone who's got a checklist when I go to church. OK. How many people spoke in tongues? How many people prophesied? Did anyone give it to wisdom here? You know, I mean, that's not my. The Bible does not encourage us to approach it that way. It's more that if you have a gift to the Holy Spirit, you are encouraged to use it to the edification of the body of Christ. Now, Paul said that speaking in tongues is a gift that does not edify the body of Christ unless it's accompanied by an interpretation. But he said there's no interpreter. Then speak in tongues to yourself and to God. In other words, you don't do it in the church what you're doing, the church you do for the edification of the whole body. And if you're I speak in tongues, you'd better have an interpretation that accompanies it. If you don't. Well, then something else will happen that will edify. The body doesn't have any tongues and interpretation. There's lots of things.

Thank you very much for your answer. Clarified a lot. What does the word sensation or something where you do not believe that gives you think of sensation ism?

Cessna's. Yes.

Yeah. Yeah. I don't want to be that way. I, I've never that way but I've started kind of lean in that way. I don't want to.

Well I have to say a lot of charismatic behavior makes you want to be a cessation ist. I mean not not only because the gifts frankly, I mean the if the wildest thing that happened Pentecostal churches was people were speaking in tongues, in worship of God all at once without interpretation. You know, I don't find that scary or creepy necessarily. Some people would be. I don't think they should do it, but I don't you know, that wouldn't worry me so much. But when you find people rolling on the floor barking like dogs, you know, acting like they're drunk, just laughing, their heads off is over. I mean, frankly, none of those things are gifts of the spirit in the Bible. And they not only look ridiculous, but they scare me. I think what in the world is taken over these people? They think it's the Holy Spirit. I don't.

Well, Campbell, thank you very much. I'll let you get back to the colors. I appreciate it very much.

OK, Dave. Good talk to you, brother. Thanks for your call. All right. Our next caller is Crystal from Northern California. Crystal, welcome to the Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Hi, Steve. Hi. I wanted to ask you about Hebrews one versus one. And to me, I read it. Sure.

God excuse me. Who at Sunday Times in a diverse manner speak in time passed onto the fathers by the prophets. Cap in these last days spoken unto us by his son, whom he has appointed air assault, things like. Also he made the world. Doesn't this mean that God no longer speaks to us? The prophets, but only through his son.

Jesus is the word. And we have his word now in written form, the Bible. I'll take your answer to your radio. Thanks so much.

OK, Crystal. Great question. You know, I. I debated a cessation list once, a Presbyterian pastor at Santa Cruz. We had a someone set up a debate for us about this very subject. And I thought he was going to argue from First Corinthians 13, which they usually do. But he didn't even use that scripture. He just said, listen, the Bible says that we have the word of God. And if we have the word of God, we don't need these other gifts and so forth, you know? And I thought, well, wait, we do have the word of God. It's true. But that doesn't automatically mean that we don't need the gifts. For example, the gift of prophecy in the New Testament. We don't find many examples of it given except in one man agat this he gave two provinces. And the things he prophesied were that there's gonna be a famine on the first occasion. The thing that MIF a prophecy that Paul was gonna be bound when he came to Jerusalem by the Jews. Now, those were things you'd never learn from reading any Bible verse, because the Bible is written to be, you know, the normative pattern of things for all Christians of all times. The prophets spoke things that were, you know, individual or timely or something that would have an application to a certain group, but not the kind of things that become rules or norms for the whole church. And and so it's to say, well, now that way the Bible, we don't need a prophet like Akeley's or why or how does his activity overlap with that of the Bible? Sometimes they say, you know, if there's still prophets, then the canon of the scripture is not closed. There might be more books added to the New Testament nonsense. The new test was not read by prophets. There could be a million prophets and it wouldn't at any books. The New Testament. There were lots of prophets and Paul's day, he said to the Corinthians Church. They gave two or three prophets speak every meeting. And the other prophets would judge him. And they had a bunch of prophets, apparently, but none of them wrote scripture because no, no New Testament book was written by a prophet. The New Testament read by apostles. And we don't have any more of those, not of the kind we had in the first century. We may have prophets, you know, coming up the lawsuit. But but that doesn't mean that there's room for more books. The Bible, the apostles laid the foundation of the church with their writings in it. Frankly, I don't think they'll ever be outgrown. I don't think they'll ever be obsolete. I think the norms that we have for all time are all their profits. However, they they don't come along to write more books of the Bible. They come to prophesy, to people, into churches about things that they need to know are happening, things you wouldn't get from reading any book of the Bible. So there's not an overlap there. Now, in Hebrews Chapter one, it does say God in times past spoke to the prophets. But in these last days, he has spoken by his son. Well, that's certainly true. But the fact that he is spoken by his son, which the writer of Hebrews indicates is far superior. To speaking through prophets, and that's what he goes into. This is the this guy Jesus. He's not a prophet only. He's he's the express image of God's person and the bright shining of his glory. And, you know, he's overall things. He's making it very clear that speaking through Jesus was the high point of God's revelation, that there were many prophets before Jesus. And when he came here, what he said is a lot more valuable. Lot more weighty in a sense. He's a way to your messenger than they were. But he's not saying that now that Jesus spoke and we'll have no more prophets because the Book of Acts, which records things in the church after Jesus was gone and it was done speaking on Earth in person, we read about agonists, who is a prophet. We read about Philip having four daughters who prophesied a Silas was called a prophet also. We don't have samples of their prophecies, but we are called prophets. And then, of course, Paul tells that the church in Corinth, every service of the art. You get two or three of your prophets speak. And these are all after Jesus had ascended. So the coming of Jesus was certainly the most authoritative messenger that world will ever hear from. But his coming didn't eliminate prophets. In fact, he still speaks to the church through prophets. If prophecy is genuine, if the spirit of Christ is speaking through a genuine gift prophecy, then Jesus is speaking. And you know, God still speaks through his to his son, through prophets. Now, I mean, someone can say that that's not true. But I mean, the scriptures I gave pretty much make it clear that the coming of Jesus did not bring an end to the legitimacy of the gift of prophecy. As Paul mentions to the Corinthians, decades after Jesus ascended. And by the way, they did a K, which was the very authoritative church document in the late first or early second century, referred to the church has been visit by prophets on a regular basis. Some of them, he said it says, were false prophets. But some are true prophets. They they accepted the fact that they were genuine prophets, even at the turn of the first century, long after the apostles were dead. The dedicate, which profess to be the teaching of the apostles in which all the early church is revered and followed. It had instructions about if a prophet comes here, here's how you know he's a real winner or a false one. For example, if he asked for money. He was a false prophet. Says if you stayed more than three days without work and he was a false prophet. So it's interesting how the early church saw this. You also find that, you know, other church fathers later on after the dedicate sometimes mention the prophets that would come and speak at the church. So the idea that the gift of prophecy and other similar gifts simply became obsolete when Jesus came, or maybe when the apostles died or when the New Testament was written. The early church never heard any such Doctorow's that they didn't believe that for was for centuries afterwards. I believe it was, I think, erroneous or or just a martyr. Mentioned mentioned prophets in the churches and so forth. So I mean. If prophecy has ceased. No one in the Bible heard about it, nor did the church for a few centuries after that. And therefore, I suspect that the idea that prophecies have ceased, that the church must come from someone more modern. Who. Who were the prophecies have in fact, ceased in their church. So, you know, it's very common first thing. Well, our church is as good as it gets. So if we don't have it, no one does. We're not supposed to, because if we don't and when we're supposed to, then we're deficient. And God forbid that we would ever admit that about ourselves. Robert from Inglewood, California, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling.

Hey, this is Robert. I don't know. I'm driving right now. So I got to pull the scripture from memory, but it Joshua and 14. And I don't know if you could read it, but there's something in there that I remember reading that it said I got confused where God will no more listen to man or something like that.

I don't remember. But I'm gonna say and make him a question not.

Oh, okay. N14 okay. Yeah. You're talking about the long day of Joshua. It says in verse 14. There was there has been no day like that before or after it that the Lord heeded the voice of a man for the Lord fought for Israel.

Now that the Lord heeded the voice of a man, of course, got his heated voices, voices, a man every time he answers a prayer. He's heeding the voice of a man. What it means is that God heeded the voice of a man in in terms of, you know, stopping the sun, that God would actually change the whole course of nature at the request of a man. Joshua prayed that the sun would stop in the sky, and it did. And, you know, that's never happened before since. Now got answers. Lots of prayers. He answers lots of prayers from people. But he has not really just stopped the course of nature, which is something that isn't something people would ask for very often, probably. And if they do, it probably wouldn't be the will of God in most cases. So it's not going to do it. But yeah, heeding the voice of a man is a little too, let's just say. A nuanced. It needs to be nuanced more. That God has never since or before done such a thing as change all the course of nature because a man asked him to. Now, whenever God has worked a miracle at Jesus request or a library license request or anyone else's request, the apostles request that in a sense it goes against the natural course of things, but doesn't change the whole function of the solar system. I mean, when when Peter walked on water because he said to Jesus, if you're if that's you, Jesus, command me to walk on the water. So Jesus said, okay, come on, Peter, walk on water. That was a violation of natural law. It would seem. But again, it didn't. It didn't change the universe or the galaxy or the solar system or even the world. It just changed that part. That lake where he was walking.

All right, well, thank you. I'll read it, reread it again and see it, though. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah. The way it reads is the way you think it, Larry. I mean, it reads as if you're saying God never, never did anything in response to a man's request.

But we know that that can't be what's meant because the writer of Joshua knew very well many times that God is an awesome person. So we have to say, well, OK, what is he saying? We know what he isn't saying. All right. I appreciate your call. We're out of time for the program. You're listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. If you're not familiar, the program maybe just stumbled onto today, run everyday Monday through Friday, not on the weekends at this same time. You can also hear us on at the Web site, which is the narrow path dot com. There's also a free mobile app. You can listen to the program live or in archives on the on your device, on your phone or iPod.

It the the free app is the narrow path that comp search for. Download it and it's yours for free. You can help stay on the air by contributing to the cost of being on the air. You can go to our Web site, the Narrow Path dot com and click on the donate tab and help us out. Have a good weekend. Let's talk again Monday.