The Narrow Path 10/19

Music Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we are live for an hour each weekday afternoon during which we take your calls.

If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith and you would like to discuss those with me, you want to bring them up as questions or differences of opinion, feel free to give me a call. The number is 844-484-5737. That's 844-484-5737. And I'm in Oregon at the moment, though I'm not finished with my cross-country trip. I was yesterday in Indianapolis and actually this morning I was there. I flew out here to Oregon because I'm speaking a few times here in Oregon just this week and then going back to Indianapolis to drive home to California. I know, it sounds crazy, but this is when youth with a mission in Salem, Oregon wanted me to come.

So I came. And while I'm in the Salem area, I'm going to have a couple of evenings speaking. One of them is tonight and the other is tomorrow night.

And they're both in the Albany area. Now the one tonight is very small. In fact, I haven't heard, it may already be filled up, but it's an RSVP only because it's in a home. You can still call and find out if it's full or not. Tomorrow night, we're in a church in Shed actually just outside Albany.

And that's got plenty of room. And so if you're interested in joining us, you go to our website, thenarrowpath.com. And there you will want to click on the tab that says Announcements.

And then you'll find all the information you need about these events. So just want you to know about that if you happen to be in Oregon. And of course, a lot of our listeners are. So that's tonight and tomorrow night.

All right. And as for today, right now we're going to go to our callers. Our first caller is from Oregon, Lisa from Hillsboro, Oregon.

Welcome to The Narrow Path, Lisa. Thanks for calling. Hi, Steve. I'm I'm actually coming to see you tomorrow night with one of my friends. My husband can't make it. So I'm excited to do that. Do you have any idea what you'll be speaking on? Or is it just gonna be a question and answer? Tomorrow night is just question and answer.

Okay, cool. Well, my question is about the like, whether or not does God, I believe that he is all knowing, but I also believe that he has changed his mind in the Bible and changes his mind sometimes about things that we petition him for. But sometimes it's hard for my brain to understand how those two things can be. How can he know the future and yet still change his mind on things? Could you talk about that? And I'm going to go ahead and hang up and then just listen. Okay, that's fine.

Thanks, Lisa. Well, it certainly does seem like God changes his mind in Scripture because it actually uses the language of him changing his mind. You know, when Nineveh repented, it says God changed his mind and repented of what he's going to do to Nineveh.

And there's other places like that. In fact, in Jeremiah 18 verses seven through 10, it says that any time God says he's going to wipe somebody out, if they repent, he will change his mind and not do it. Now, most scholars would say, excuse me, that this language of God changing his mind is simply accommodating language.

It's anthropomorphic. God is speaking of himself or they're speaking about God as if he has the same kind of mentality we do, which he does not in every respect, but he does in some respects. And so when it says that God changed his mind, I think what many people would say is this is anthropomorphic language that's saying that God did what we would do if we changed our mind. He seemed to change his mind, and it's speaking as if he was a man relating to us as humans. So excuse me, that is one viewpoint.

Another viewpoint is that of the openness theologians. Excuse me, I got up at four in the morning today and haven't slept. And this is the first time I've spoken. My voice has not been used today.

I've been on an airplane wearing a mask. Anyway, the other view is the openness view, and they believe that God doesn't know everything about the future. They believe he knows everything that is really knowable, that is to say something that is predictable because he's going to do it, let's say, or something that would happen by the natural course of events, like where the planets are going to be a thousand years from now. Even a good computer on Earth could predict that, but God knows instantly. But they would say he doesn't know the decisions that people are going to make before they make them, and that's called the openness view. And it's got a lot of adherence today.

I don't myself hold it, but they would solve the problem that you raised differently than the first suggestion I made. They would say, well, God did change his mind because he thought something was happening, and then unpredictably someone changed their way they repented or whatever, and then he changed his plans, changed his mind. I've always tended to take the first view that God does know all things, but that the Bible speaks of him often as if he doesn't know certain things that he actually does.

And we have examples of that plenty, as when God came looking for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden after they sinned, he said, Adam, where are you? He asked as if he didn't know. And Adam said, I'm here in the bushes. I'm naked. And God said, how did you know you're naked?

Did you eat of the tree that I told you not to eat of? Now, see, God is talking like he doesn't know. This doesn't even have anything to do with him knowing the future.

This just has to do with him knowing where Adam is at the moment. And of course, God knew that. But he sometimes speaks, and sometimes the Bible speaks about him as it would of a man who doesn't know things. And this is just perhaps because God is so much bigger than us that he has to kind of reduce himself to our size in some respects in order to relate with us. And I think that that would be the main answer that orthodox Christianity normally would give, is that these cases where it says God changed his mind, really he knew what he was going to do. He knew what was going to happen. But from the standpoint of the reader, from the standpoint of man, he seems to have changed his mind.

And that's called anthropomorphism. If a person doesn't take that view, they'll probably take an openness view, which would be that God doesn't really know everything that's going to happen until some of it he doesn't know until it actually happens. So those are the two possibilities, I suppose.

I don't know of a third one. Now, some people say, well, there is a third view, and that is that God, that he does know the future, but that he can deliberately shield himself from knowing the future about certain things. The problem I have with that is it still suggests he can know the future. So, I mean, that would be, we'd still have the issue of how does God know the future. But it also would have raised the question, why would God shield himself from knowing, if he knows? Why would he, why would he just forget on purpose? That view has never struck me as a very likely one.

So those are maybe three possible views. Let's talk to Darryl from Sacramento, California. Darryl, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Thank you, Steve.

I'd like to submit two questions briefly, if you'd like. Does God think, and we had the scuffle in repentance, and I want to know what the repentance came out of Jesus and John, that they were saying, repent for the kingdom of God is at hand. What was the context of that? Or does that apply to everybody? Well, yeah, I mean, to repent means to change your mind. And as a result of changing your mind to change your direction. Basically, John and Jesus were both saying that the people who heard them needed to change because they weren't ready to enter the kingdom of God. And they had to make the proper change of thinking and of living to accommodate the fact that the King had come and he's calling upon them to live under his Lordship.

Yeah, that would be universally true. Because until we are submitted to Christ, we are, well, we're living for ourselves. We're not living for him. And since he's the King, if we don't live in obedience to him, that's a crime.

That's treason against the King. And so in order to be on right terms with God, we need to stop being treasonous. We need to repent and be submitted to Christ. So that's a change of mind and direction that everyone needs to make in order to come to Christ. I see. So the authority comes from him and that we have surrendered our lives to his plan, right?

Well, right. Jesus said all authority in heaven and on earth were given to him after he rose from the dead. And so if he has all authority, that means he's the boss. I mean, that's what authority means. He's the one who makes the calls. And if he's the boss and we haven't been obeying him, then we're, well, we're in rebellion.

Like I said, we're treasonous against the King. So that's why we're called to repent. Okay, the first question, does God think? Does God think?

I'm not sure what you mean. Yeah, he's a thinking being. He's an intelligent being.

What do you call him thinking? He foreknows every thought. He thought everything through before he even created it. Well, I don't know to what degree that's true, but thinking is a process of processing information. And God definitely seems to process information. He's a thinking being. He's an intelligent being. I'm not sure how something could be intelligent and not think. Well, if he knows all four thoughts. Well, even if he knows, even if he knows the future, that's thinking. Knowing something is thought, consciousness, awareness.

Yeah, so I mean, the answer is yes, God thinks. All right, I appreciate your call. Let's talk to Earl from Roseville, California. A lot of California, next call is from California also. Hi, Earl, welcome.

Hi. Okay, there's a verse in the Bible that says, fornicators will not enter the kingdom of God. But suppose a single Christian man enters into a sexual relationship with a woman outside of marriage. What's to prevent them or prevent him from entering the kingdom of God since churches today allow just about anyone to be part of their congregation and the church is supposed to represent the kingdom of God? Well, the kingdom of God is the actual church, not the visible church. I mean, there's lots of buildings that have the word church in front of them and people meet there.

And some of the people who meet there are real Christians and some of them probably are not. The true Christians comprise the global church. The true followers of Christ or disciples of Jesus collectively are the true church. They are the true kingdom.

They are the ones following the king. And the true church follows the head, which, of course, the same people that follow him as head obviously follow him as king since there's not any difference between those two things. So, the true followers of Christ are His kingdom and belong to His kingdom. Now, what churches may do, what institutional churches may do is irrelevant to that because they are not equivalent to the kingdom of God.

An institutional church is just a corporation formed by some people and put the word church in front of it and they have meetings there. I mean, the real church is founded by Jesus Christ, formed by the Holy Spirit, and people are in it as soon as they become true believers. As soon as they're believers and they're baptized and they come into the kingdom, they are part of the true church. And that's true regardless where they go to church or even if they don't go to church sometimes.

I think we should be in fellowship, but the point is that a church that allows people to fornicate and still consider themselves members of that church is obviously demonstrating that it's not really the true church because the true church, Paul said, those who are fornicators are not in the kingdom of God. So, they're not in the body of Christ. That is if they don't repent, of course. I mean, if people are, you know, people fall into all kinds of sins who are true Christians, I mean, people are weak. Jesus said the Spirit is willing about His disciples, but the flesh is weak. And we find that Christians do stumble into sin, but they repent if they do so because they don't want to sin, because they want to please God.

If somebody doesn't want to please God, if that's not their whole life goal, well, then they haven't been converted yet. They still have the old heart that they had before they pretended to become a Christian. So, you know, a real Christian is not going to be a fornicator by habit. A Christian might fall, but they will repent and cease to do it. But if, you know, a lot of times churches have people in the churches that are living in fornication. They're living with their boyfriends or their girlfriends and having sex outside of marriage, and that's just not, that's not what Christians do.

That's not a follower of Christ. Okay, so, you're saying then that the true church should not be affected by sinners mingling among the true Christians, and God would already know anyway. So, um, and maybe... Well, I'm not sure what you mean by the true church. You mean the defining of the true church? Yeah, what you said at the beginning, that the defining of the true church are Christians who do follow Christ, and the sinners, people who do not follow Christ, but yet keep going to church and mingle among true Christians. Well, any church, any congregation that aspires to be the representatives of Christ or a segment of the true church, would practice church discipline.

You know, that is, you know, if a church really wants to be a church, they really want to be a sampling of the body of Christ and have the real Christians attending there. Well, then they'll have to do what Jesus said to do, of course. You can't follow Jesus without doing what He said to do. And He said that when people are unrepentant sinners, they should be, their sin should be brought up before the whole church, and they should be called to be, to repentance.

And if they don't repent, they should be excluded, like a publican or a heathen. So, I mean, that's Jesus' instructions, but Paul repeated them. Paul also spoke several times about the need for church discipline. Now, a lot of organizations that call themselves churches don't practice church discipline, because maybe some of the biggest tithers in their congregation are also living in sin, and they'd have to kick them out, and they'd lose some money on that deal.

So, they just ignore it. But they're not following Christ, of course. And a church, a church is, any true assembly that has, that calls itself a church, has got to be a sampling of the whole global church.

And the global church is made up of true followers of Jesus. As I said, true followers of Jesus sometimes stumble and fall, but they repent. And that's what, even when Jesus talked about church discipline, He said that if someone sins, you go to them privately and try to get them to repent. Hopefully, they will. If they do, it's all good. If they don't, then it has to be taken another step. And if they still don't after that, then you take it before the church. And if they don't hear the church, then you kick them out. That's what Jesus said. So, a lot of churches simply, they will announce, if you ask them, that they don't practice that.

They don't want to practice that. So, they should simply take the word church off of their sign. They can say, we're a religious Jesus fan club, but we're not a church.

Yeah, yeah. There's, I think there's a, is there a verse in the Bible, too, that says, if you are a Christian and then you come across someone who is having sex outside of marriage, you're not supposed to, you know, hang out with them or just keep your distance from them. Don't hang out with sinners, I guess, unless you are evangelizing to them. That's not quite how it reads. In 1 Corinthians 5, it says, he says, I wrote to you an epistle. This is in verse 9. He says, I wrote to you an epistle not to associate with fornicators. He said, I didn't mean the fornicators of the world. He said, to avoid them, you'd have to go out of the world altogether. But he said, if anyone calls himself a brother, that is, if anyone calls himself a Christian and they're a fornicator, he says, don't have anything to do with them.

Don't even eat with them, he said. It's strictly an issue of whether someone's claiming to be a part of the church, claiming to be a Christian, because the church consists of Christians. You know, that's what the church is. So, if they claim to be a Christian, but they're not living for Christ, and they're living in fornication, don't repent, well then, of course, you're supposed to not associate with them.

That's what he said in 1 Corinthians 5. Okay, let's talk to Margaret from West Covina, California. Margaret, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Hi, Steve. God bless you, and thank you so much for your knowledge of the Bible and helping everyone. Well, thanks. Anyway, I just wondered, is there any place in the Bible that they talk about cremation?

No, not directly. I mean, as you read through the Bible, it seems evident that people look forward to being buried honorably, and usually they want to be buried with their family or with their ancestors, if possible, if they weren't too far away. But this was simply a cultural preference. You know, the Middle East back then, and many Eastern countries now, are what we call honor- and shame-based cultures.

You know, honor and shame are extreme, strong motivators. And to have an honorable burial, so that people will remember you respectfully, was something that really mattered to people, not because it mattered to God particularly, I mean, not because God cares what happens to your body when it dies. I don't care what happens to my body when it dies.

I'm not going to be in it anymore. And God will raise it from the dead, whatever happens to it. So, you know, the Bible doesn't tell us to be worried about those kinds of things. But in the culture of the Middle East, which is where the Bible stories are, you do find, you know, Joseph wanting to be buried back in the Promised Land, though he died in Egypt.

And, you know, Jacob also was taken back to the Promised Land when he died in Egypt. So, you know, where you were buried, how you were buried, how much mourning was done about it, how many people respected you, that was all something that people during their lifetime wanted to know. I mean, they wanted to know that when they died, they'd be respectfully treated. And burying the body rather than burning it was considered to be the more respectful way to inter the dead. And so, they sometimes would burn the bodies of people they wanted to dishonor, you know, some enemy or something they might burn their bodies. And that would just be a way of showing disrespect to them.

But that's all very cultural. The Bible doesn't anywhere say that it's, you know, more desirable in the sight of God to be buried than cremated, or that it's offensive in the sight of God to be cremated. A lot of pastors, I know, feel very strongly against cremation. And I've talked to them, and I've never been able to get an answer of why that would be an issue to them or to God. But sometimes they say, well, because your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Well, it is while you're in it. The Holy Spirit doesn't stay there when you're gone. You know, the dead body is not a temple of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit isn't living there at the time when the body is dead. And some say, well, but God's going to have to raise the dead, so we don't want to burn it up. Well, God is going to raise the dead, and it doesn't matter if it's burned up. What can He do for the martyrs who are burned at the stake if He can't raise ashes from the dead? He made human bodies from dust in the first place, and He shouldn't have any trouble doing that. So, I mean, everybody who has died a hundred years or more ago is dust and ashes already. So, even if they weren't burned, God's going to have to raise dust and ashes. So, I mean, these arguments against cremation don't—they don't make any biblical sense, and to my mind they don't even make logical sense.

But, like I said, to some people it's a very important thing. I don't see anything in the Bible that would forbid cremation or would make it inappropriate for Christians. Yeah, it's hard to make a decision for somebody else. Like, my son was killed when he was very young in a car accident, and I, you know, it's very expensive to have a burial, but I never asked him. I mean, you don't think of asking your youngest child, you know, do you want to be buried or cremated? And my daughter's had a fit because I spent so much money, but I just told myself I never asked him, and I'm going to have a burial. And they said, well, we'll never visit it, or you either, if you're going to be buried, because you're not really there.

Yeah. Well, I mean, they are technically correct, but, I mean, there's nothing wrong with honoring your parents or your child or anyone who's an honorable person by giving them a burial, which is done respectfully and so forth. There's nothing wrong with that.

But it's not one of those things that is commanded in the Bible. So your choice was quite legitimate, and so was theirs. I mean, if they said, hey, why spend so much money on a burial? I kind of feel that way, too. I mean, if it was legal to just bury me in my backyard, then I guess I'd go for that. But you can't do that legally, so I think, you know, I might prefer to be cremated. I don't really know.

I figure that once I'm gone, I don't care what they do to me. Yeah. Okay. Thanks a million, and God bless you, Steve. God bless you, Margaret. Thanks for calling. Thank you. Thanks. God bless. Bye now.

All right. Let's talk to Joe from Seattle, Washington. Joe, welcome to The Narrow Path. Oh, you know what? I may just have to interrupt our call and pick you up on the other side of the break, but let's get started. What are you calling about?

Oh, you know what, Joe? I hit the wrong button. There we go. Start over again, please. Okay. Yeah. Thanks again for taking my call. I've got a two-part question today.

Hopefully they're both pretty quick. Several places in Scripture where it says essentially God gave them up, gave them over to their sins, like Romans 1.28 is one example. Part one of the question is, is it possible when a person has been given up in that manner for them to turn things around, to repent and actually, you know, get back in and get in fellowship with God? And then part two, is it the same to say God gave them up and God hardened their hearts?

Well, yeah. When God gives someone up, it means He's going to stop trying to convict them about what they're doing. He's going to just let them go their own way. I suspect that once that happens, they won't repent because they won't feel any conviction. Is that hardening their heart? Yeah, it could be the same phenomenon, different language, but certainly when God hardens someone's heart, it's because they have been rejecting Him and He's pretty much taken away their free choice to repent. So I would say that giving someone over to a reprobate mind or giving them up or hardening their heart would all probably refer to very similar, if not identical, phenomena where God has just decided, okay, I gave you a chance, I gave you a lot of chances, you didn't want them, so I'm taking your chances away.

And I think that He ceases to convict them of sin after that, which would mean, of course, then they won't repent. I need to take a break, but I hope that's helpful, Joe. You're listening to The Narrow Path. We take a break, but we have another half hour coming up. Don't go away.

The Narrow Path is listener supported. If you go to our website thenarrowpath.com, you can find out how to help us stay on the air. I'll be back in 30 seconds. Stay tuned. Welcome back to The Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg, and we're live for another half hour taking your calls. If you'd like to call in with your questions about the Bible or the Christian faith, or if you have a different viewpoint from the host and you'd like to talk about that, feel free to do so. We have some lines open as I speak, so you could get through if you call right now this number 844-484-5737. That's 844-484-5737. Our next call comes from Don in Sacramento, California. Don, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Thank you, Steve. I have a question about a particular verse. I would just like to know how you understand the verse where Paul said that he's showing us a great mystery that we shall not all sleep, that we shall all be changed.

Yeah. Well, that's 1 Corinthians 15, around verse 50, where he says, I show you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump, for the dead will rise, and then we who are alive remain. Or he goes on and says, we shall be changed.

That's what he says there. There's two passages that talk about this, but the language you're using is coming from 1 Corinthians 15. So you're wondering why that's a mystery or what it is he's actually describing or what? I'm just wondering how you understand that passage.

Okay. Well, I would mix it together with his discussion on the same subject in 1 Thessalonians, chapter 4, verses 16 and 17. In both places, he talks about the resurrection of the dead. He's basically addressing the question of what happens to Christians who've died. When Jesus comes back, what happens to them? And he says, well, they'll be raised. Their bodies will be raised, and then the living Christians will also be changed and raised at that time. In 1 Corinthians 15, he says, will be changed. In 1 Thessalonians 4, he says, will be raised. So obviously we're raised and changed at the same moment. And this is when Jesus comes back. When Jesus comes back, he raises all the dead, and he raptures, as they call it, the church. And so that's what Paul is talking about in those places. So does that have anything to do with the Lord being all in all?

Well... I recall hearing that, you know, at a certain time. Yeah, it says in 1 Corinthians 15, earlier, that when Jesus returns, when he's conquered all his enemies, he'll hand over the kingdom to his Father so that God may be all in all. Yeah, so it's the same time, I believe.

I believe it's the same day, the last day. Okay, thank you very much. All right, well thank you for your call. All right, let's talk to Brett from Everett, Washington.

Brett, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling. Thank you for taking my call, Steve.

I have called before. I don't agree with everything you say theologically, but I was curious to get your take as just an American, a knowledgeable American who knows our history and knows the Scriptures. So 1 Peter 2.13 talks about how, let every person be subject to the higher powers. Then it gives the example to the emperor as supreme, or to governors who are below him, who act as intermediaries.

So my question is, in America today, who or what is in the place of the emperor in Rome 2,000 years ago? Well, I think that if there had been some other form of government in Peter's day, he would have given the same instructions. He's just talking about governmental leaders. He's, I think, somewhat influenced in his writing of 1 Peter by some of Paul's writings, especially Ephesians and Romans. But Paul, in Romans 13, said that all government officials are ordained by God to be executioners of God's wrath on those who do evil. So when Paul and Peter wrote, we have, you know, Emperor Nero was the emperor, and so that was the one in authority. But if it had been some other ruler, I believe they would have said the same thing because Paul said there is no authority but that which is of God.

Even Jesus, when he stood before Pontius Pilate, a governor procurator from, in Jerusalem, he said you would have no power if it wasn't given to you from above. So I think that in any nation there are legitimate authorities, and the Bible says that they exist because God wants there to be legitimate authorities who will punish the evildoers, and that's what Peter says in the next verse beyond the one you quoted. In verse 14 he says they are sent to punish evildoers and to praise those who do well.

In Romans 13 he says they are God's executioners of justice, of wrath on those who practice evil. So the government officials, whoever they are, who are authorized to perform criminal justice and protect the citizens, that's who he would be talking about. So there would be different forms of government in different countries and different times, but the general principle is that all authorities are appointed by God for that purpose. So in our country, of course the people are the rulers, and we choose public servants, and we give them authority to do certain things. If they are acting within the realm of their authority, then we submit to that. If they're not acting within the realm of their authority, then we don't have to submit because they don't have any inherent authority other than what's given to them. And especially if they make laws that forbid good behavior and punish good behavior, and they don't punish criminals, well then of course those authorities are not the ones that Paul and Peter are writing about, because he's talking about those... Absolutely.

Yeah, okay. I'm just curious how we judge, as Americans today, what is a valid, lawful command. For example, obviously you're familiar with John MacArthur and the saga that he's undergone, obviously the stand he's taken. I don't know if you remember about four months ago, President Trump, it was a Friday afternoon, this was maybe early May, President Trump said to a reporter in an interview, I want to see churches open this weekend. And John MacArthur, the Lord bless him, he took President Trump at his word and said, we're going to open this weekend. And the state of California put in an emergency injunction, obviously gave Pastor MacArthur a call and the lawyers had their say and Pastor MacArthur at that point in May backed off. So my question is, when governors or even if the president were to give a command or pass a law that obviously conflicts with what is the standard of judicial authority in our country, the Constitution, would a Christian be justified in disobeying that law? I personally think so, because the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. And every office holder puts his hand on a Bible and says, he swears that he will uphold the Constitution. So even the office holder, when he takes office, is essentially saying in this office, I will support the Constitution. So wherever they don't support the Constitution, they're going against their own oath, and they're violating the law of the land, because the Constitution is the law of the land. And so the person who holds office would then be, of course, a usurper, and would be a criminal.

Yeah, I agree 100%. I've heard a lot of commentary over the last several months that totally neglects that point, that treats America under the Constitution the same as Rome under an emperor, and saying that there's a one to one correlation. And whatever the governor says, whatever the president says, we have to obey. Well, you have to realize that a lot of Christian teaching is so simplistic that it's clear when you hear it that they haven't thought very carefully about any of the principles of the Bible.

They're just finding proof texts, which they quote, that sound like they make them what they want to make. But no, you have to really understand what Paul was talking about, what Peter was talking about, what God's talking about, when he gives authority to authorities. Now, we are an unusual nation in history, because we are a constitutional republic, and therefore, you said, who would be Caesar today?

Well, in America, the Constitution is Caesar. Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. Thank you so much, Steve. Okay, Brett, thanks for your call. Have a great day. You too. Bye now. Okay, our next caller is Tony from Henderson, Nevada. Welcome to The Narrow Path, Tony. Thank you, Steve, and thank you for your ministry.

I've learned so much over the years listening to you. Steve, is it true that the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit only came upon the prophets in the Old Testament? Well, not only on the prophets, but chiefly on the prophets. The Holy Spirit came on some of the judges, too. The Holy Spirit came on Othniel and came on Gideon and came on Samson and so forth, and they were not prophets, but they were judges. And then, when Saul was anointed king, the Holy Spirit came upon him.

But later, when he rebelled and David was anointed king, the Holy Spirit left Saul and came on David. So, you can see that in the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit wasn't on everybody who was a believer, but certain people were anointed by the Holy Spirit for certain special ministries. And that's where the Old Testament is different from the New Covenant, because in the New Covenant, every Christian, every follower of Christ has the Holy Spirit. And that was one of the things that it says in John 7, 39. It says that Jesus, when He spoke about giving living water to the thirsty, He was speaking about the Holy Spirit.

It says, for He was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified. So, until Jesus was ascended into heaven and poured out the Holy Spirit of the church, the Holy Spirit did not dwell in all of God's people, but He did come upon some of them for special tasks in the Old Testament. So, the salvation of the people in the Old Testament, would that be dependent upon them just following people filled with the Holy Spirit? Well, it would be—I mean, Abraham was justified by faith.

It says Abraham believed in the Lord, and it was counted to him for righteousness. So, when it comes to justification, they were saved the same way we are now, by faith in God. Now, obedience to God was the way that it would be demonstrated that somebody had faith in God. If somebody had faith in God and they didn't obey Him, well, we'd have to say there's a disjunction of reality there.

They must not really believe. In Hebrews chapter 11, Hebrews chapter 11 goes through the Old Testament characters from the beginning through the prophets, and talks about how each of these characters, by faith, did whatever it was they did. And what we find them doing by faith is obeying God, you know? By faith, Abraham, when he was told to leave his country, left his country.

By faith, when he was told to offer Isaac, he offered up Isaac. By faith, Noah was told to build an ark and did so, and so forth. I mean, what we find is that when people have faith, they obey.

That's true now also. I mean, if a person says they have faith but they don't obey, well, then the Bible says there's no reason to believe that they have faith. Same in the Old Testament. So, for the general population, though, it seems like it would be very difficult for them to follow God without the Holy Spirit. Well, before the law was given, you just have to pretty much follow whatever instructions God might give if you had them, or follow your conscience.

Like Job, for example. Job was a righteous man. We don't have any evidence that he had the Spirit of God upon him, but he might have. You know, he said that at one time the secret of the Lord dwelt in his tent. I don't know what that means, but it sounds like God was communing with him. God was letting him in on his secrets and stuff. So, some people did hear from God, but the ones who didn't, I think, would just be expected to follow what they knew was right and what they had every reason to believe was right, to honor God.

I get it. So, when Jesus is talking to Nicodemus in John 3, and he's talking about the Holy Spirit, and then he tells Nicodemus, how don't you understand these things? You're supposed to be a teacher of Israel. Well, if he doesn't have the Holy Spirit, how would he understand those things? Or was he supposed to not be a teacher and understand that John the Baptist was a teacher and was filled with the Spirit?

Well, Nicodemus was a student of the Law and the Prophets, and Jesus was surprised that anyone as familiar with the Law and the Prophets as Nicodemus should have been, or frankly, any of the rabbis should have been, they should have known that the age of the Messiah would be the age of the Holy Spirit, that God frequently talked about how he's going to pour out his Spirit in the time when the Messiah comes. I mean, it's stated in Joel. It's stated in Zechariah. It's stated in Isaiah. It's stated in Ezekiel and other places. God said at that time, when he sends the Messiah, he's going to send the Holy Spirit, and that's what Jesus was talking about. You have to be born of the Spirit. Now, of course, Jesus was using language that was difficult for Nicodemus to process, being born of the Spirit. That's not language of the Old Testament.

But the idea that one has to have the Holy Spirit or has to receive the Holy Spirit or that the coming of the Kingdom of God would be accompanied by the coming of the Holy Spirit would be information from the Old Testament that Nicodemus should have been aware of. Okay, great. Thank you, Steve. One last personal question, if I may. Two or three weeks ago, I heard one of your callers say that he was blown away after your answer. I've been blown away many times listening to you too. In your daily radio program, how often after a call do you go, wow, thank you, Jesus, for that answer, or thank you, Holy Spirit, for giving me understanding when I was talking with that person? Well, I don't know how often that happens after a radio show. That happens from time to time when I'm aware of having said something that really affected somebody. I have to say that a lot of times when people say that they got blown away, I'm not even sure what it was about what I said that made them—I'm not even aware sometimes of having said anything that was profound. Most of the answers I give are just from my own study and teaching of the Bible through the years.

I don't know, I guess I'm not always aware when something is going to hit somebody very profoundly. But yeah, I do definitely give credit to God, and I thank God for that, because I have many times in my life learned wonderful things from the teaching of the Holy Spirit as I've studied the Bible, and a lot of those things are the things that people say impact them. So yeah, I give all the credit to God. Okay, thank you again, Stephen. God bless you and for continued protection. Thanks, Tony. God bless you. All right, our next caller is Tim from Fort Worth, Texas. Tim, welcome to The Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Hey, Mr. Gregg, quick question. What is the correct Christian response to the homeless or handlers on the street corners? On one hand, I know we're supposed to help the needy, but on the other hand, we don't know if we're providing money that could contribute to their drug and alcohol addictions.

Right. In the Bible, of course, giving to beggars, giving to the needy or to the poor is advocated all the time, but people in that society were not beggars. Unless they were blind or crippled or had some disability, they'd be ashamed to. I mean, that society simply didn't honor laziness or people who just wouldn't work. Now, panhandlers out on the street, some of them probably can't work. I mean, they may have obvious disabilities or they may have disabilities that we don't know about, but it's not always obvious that they can't work. You know, when people were begging in the Bible times and people were told to give to them, it was because they really didn't have any way of making a living other than that.

They'd go hungry. They couldn't work. Remember, there was a time in Luke 16 that a man was told he was going to be fired from his job, and he wasn't sure how he'd get along. He says, what am I going to do?

I can't dig. You know, he was probably too old to do heavy labor. And he says, I'm ashamed to beg, so what am I going to do? And he calculated another way to get along. But it's interesting that Jesus telling that story, which is a parable, he says to the man, as soon as he knew he was going to be unemployed, he said, I can't dig, and I'm ashamed to beg, so what do I do?

He was probably about like everyone else in that story. They wouldn't beg if they didn't have to. It was shameful to have to beg.

It was a humbling thing. Now, in our society, there's people who have just gotten used to the fact that if you don't want to work, something or someone, the government or someone was going to take care of you. And, in fact, I would say that when I don't know how many conversations you have with the homeless people, if someone's standing at the bottom of an off-ramp and wants money, I've been told they make a lot of money. I don't know that I'd give money in that situation.

Not much, anyway. Maybe a buck or two if he looked like he really needed it, but they fool you. They do fool you.

I've been fooled before. But, I mean, I would give to the poor if it was somebody that I knew something about their situation, and I knew that they were deserving, you know? I mean, if they are truly incapable of working, then I would want to help them. If they are hardworking but they still don't make enough money, I'd want to help them, you know? If it's a single mom who can't work because she has to stay in with her kids, I'd want to help.

I mean, there's things like that. If someone has a situation, which is a legitimate situation, where they're needy and they can't do anything about it, then that's what I would want to attend to. But when you ask a homeless person, say, well, why don't you go to the homeless shelter? Because there are homeless shelters in most towns. You know, why don't you go to the homeless shelter? The answer I've always gotten is, well, they won't let me drink, or they won't let me take my drugs in the homeless shelter. Well, then, some people really want to live under a bridge or somewhere else rather than have to give up the habits that enslave them and that have put them where they are.

And I don't think we're obligated to support their habits. Okay. Thanks for your response. Okay. God bless you, Tim. Thanks for your call.

All right. Peter from London, and I assume that's London, England. Hi, Peter. Welcome. Hi, Steve.

Thanks for taking my call. So my first question is, 1 Kings 2-2, David is saying that, I go the way of all the earth, be strong therefore and prove yourself a man. Is David more or less saying that, man up or prove yourself by being a man, by being strong? And then my second question just relates to evangelism, and I'm of the disposition where I'm a bit timid and shy, and I just wanted to know how you can be a bit more bold and have some backbone when you're preaching the Gospel onto people and not to cower in fear.

So those are my two questions. Well, when David was telling Solomon, his son, to be a man, of course he's anticipating Solomon becoming the king after himself, and he was about to do that. So he's basically saying you're going to have to be a man rather than a boy.

He'd been a prince, and he'd been taken care of by probably attendants and so forth all his life. Now he's going to have to be the man of the house. But he probably means also be manly, not just be the man, but be brave. Be a leader.

Be what a man is supposed to be, and don't be a coward. David was, of course, going to go on and tell him to do some unpleasant things, like to get rid of Joab and Shimei and some people like that, which were going to be unpleasant. In fact, David had not been man enough to do it. David had been a little too soft. He knew these guys deserved to die, but he just didn't want to do it, so he left it to Solomon.

So, I mean, he's leaving Solomon with responsibilities that are not easy ones, and not least, ruling the nation. So he's just telling him to be strong, be manly. You know, Paul tells the Corinthians that way, too. In the King James, near the end of 1 Corinthians 16, it says, Quit yourself like men, which just means be the man, or be manly. And sometimes we just have to be courageous, because the world is not going to appreciate what we are doing or what we have to say. Now, when it comes to witnessing, you say you're a little timid. A lot of people are maybe not cut out for going out and preaching on the streets.

That's not everybody's temperament, and certainly isn't everybody's calling. But Christians should be, as Peter put it in 1 Peter 3 and verse 15, we should be ready to give an answer to anybody who asks us a reason for the hope that lies in us. And we should do it with meekness and with reverence, it says.

In other words, we should be kind. We should give answers for our faith to people who don't understand why we believe what we do. As far as evangelism goes, frankly, evangelism isn't everybody's calling.

Paul said that God gave some evangelists and some pastors and some teachers and some other things, apostles and prophets and so forth. So evangelism, going out and preaching the gospel to groups of people, is not going to be what everyone does. But you should be unashamed of Christ enough that you would speak for Christ, at least among friends, if they are speaking against Him or if they are deceived about something. If they are following something that you know is false, you as a Christian know it to be false, for you to correct them might be the right thing to do.

Although sometimes it might be better to hold your tongue and wait for a better time. You really need to be led by the Spirit. But I don't think you need to feel ashamed if you're not always out there preaching the gospel because some people make you feel guilty if you're not doing that because that's what they're doing.

But that might be their gift and not yours. I would just say that you should be prepared to answer for Jesus whenever you have a chance to answer for Jesus. And you don't have to feel like you have to force situations that are unnatural. Some people do that very well.

I don't. I don't go up to strangers and just start talking to them about God out of nowhere. But I do love to talk to them about God if they want to talk, so I look for opportunities for it to come up. But I don't feel guilty if I don't get that opportunity. So I just say don't let anyone guilt you into doing more evangelism. But if you want to reach your friends, just look for opportunities to have conversations with them and don't be too pushy about it, perhaps. That's all I could say, and I don't have time for any more, I'm sorry to say. I'm glad to hear from you in London, though. Thanks for calling. You've been listening to The Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us. Let's talk again tomorrow. God bless you.