The Narrow Path 7/2

Welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast my name Steve Greg and were live for an hour each week.

The afternoon taking your calls of your questions about the Bible or about the Christian faith or emails of the difference of opinion from the host and wish to call to bring that up. You're welcome to do so. The number to call is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 our first holiday is from Carla calling from Torrance, California Carla, welcome to the narrow path that you're calling. Thank you for taking my call to the college yet again.

You had that truly tragic situation which is gone, and so forth. I and it totally could have been an emotional response to everything as you have pointed out something that was terribly unusual and and and so forth. So when the spiritual response in them somewhat when I wanted to bring out the something if it's a stretch, but it sometimes affect affect people and that is the fact that he was. He had cancer and I he may have been on medications, and he may have been on other medications as well. My husband was hospitalized about 10 years ago or so, and after the surgery I he was sent to the CCU and I he was given or offered. I should say a sleeping pill he said you're fine. I've never taken one I'll take this and was just I guess something is commonly given to people and he had a totally violent reaction to it.

I got up in the hospital supplies people to hold him down inside he was being held prisoner and so forth and ended with a totally violent reaction to couple days to wear off.

Could been interaction between different medications or from the nurses said. Sometimes they when they took that medication. I get up in the middle the night you make phone calls and drive around something not what you write me and it is entirely possible that this could be drug-induced. You never know when you put chemicals into your body and how they may affect your brain and we know that certain the majority of cases where there like school shootings and things that were people just snapped of these were usually the shooters were taking some kind of meds, so if if a cancer patient was taken some, meds it may have also missed his head in which case, of course, would be even less a matter of something that he would be fully aware of her cognizant of or responsible for, appreciate your input there. I really need to go to call the God bless you Alex from Honolulu, Hawaii. Welcome to the narrow path answer: all great. I'm migrating today is I was just wondering. So you have been going to some different churches here in Honolulu and I hear a lot of pastors they get in my opinion, overly political and usually got up I agree with but some about it where it feeling out of place for the pulpit done. Just wondering what your take is on, all what about well it's there's a fine line between politics and moral concerns. The church has every every reason to be concerned about moral issues and to teach the congregation. Since we live in a time, especially where the congregation probably are going to be voting and need to have a pretty good grasp moral moral issues are that have been so prickly politicized and I I personally think that a lot of Christians have not made application of their Christian beliefs to the issues of the day. For some reason a lot of people just think of being a Christian means you go to heaven when you die, you just have to make sure you believe that that's not will be a Christian means being a Christian means that you're advancing Christ's cause in Christ because is not unconcerned about justice for example is very concerned about justice so a lot of political issues are related. Just now, I think, however, that you can talk about justice and and in doing so you can brush with political points that are relevant to especially if the Congress is not keen enough to make the application themselves may be difficult – be were to be voting and could possibly do some serious damage if they don't understand what Christianity teaches about the issues that they're voting about then I think the church would be remiss in not clarifying those things. On the other hand, I don't think the pulpit should become a place for a lot of political speech any more than necessary course. What does that mean well I can't decide that I think that the preacher has to really focus on edifying the church building them up in Christ because some political politics is never to be our Savior. I'm sure that with things the way they are. A lot of people are looking at one or another political candidate as seen on the Savior of the of the chaos from the chaos. If a person if people think that the left is got it right than they think Trump is a big danger, and they're excited about getting rid of them if if someone thinks that the left is the problem in their very concerned about you know, Biden, and other things that are going on and I think there's cause for concern. Honestly. But, but concern is as not to be understood in light of we know who's really going to be in charge.

Ultimately, we know the kingdom of God is gonna win. We don't know that we won't go through a very horrible rough patch before that to mean obviously, the Soviet Union, for example through 70 years of communism before communism fell there. That's more than a generation. And so I mean, we are concerned about conditions we leave to our children and grandchildren. On the other hand, the church still survived in the Soviet Union, is persecuted, its pastors and people like me who speak up were hunted down and put in prison and tortured.

But the church survived and so there's realize it, there's no way that a political party either one of them is going to bring salvation to our nation because the problem here is at least one side is very very wrong. I mean Dick there can't be so much anger and division without one party being on the wrong side and if they are very, very wrong. Then then that heats things up in it.

It's not every edifying situation. I think that pastors ought to be saying okay. My people need to be a politically aware of what their vote is perhaps to bring about a state. The one where the other, but on the other hand, they need to be strong in Christ. They need to learn how to live by faith. They need to learn how to love their neighbor and their enemy. They need to be committed to true justice and not just a fake justice is called social justice. They need to actually know what real justices and they need to be able to be made courageous to stand in the day of trial they need to learn how to come in and perform spiritual warfare so that they might withstand in the evil day, and having done all still to stand.

There's all kinds of edifying things that pastors should be teaching and building into their congregations that that if you if if things go south politically and it looks like they have in a but if it gets even worse. Well, they'll know who to trust and it won't be the president will know where to look, will know how to withstand testing hopefully into death. That's what Christians have to be built up for nights. I don't think very many congregations are ushers.

I don't think many people incarnations these days in America are really not prepared for that and what we can say is what we need to mobilize them to vote on the right side to yield, banish the problems of the society you can't banish the problems of our society by voting III believe in voting and I will. I intend to vote, but I am not of the opinion that if we get a good president in that that's good or good Congress.

We had a good Supreme Court that that's gonna make a good nation. Our nation is a problem because people's hearts are bad because for a generation or more young people been raised in a secular mindset which doesn't have God in it because they don't have God in it.

They don't stand for God so the fall for anything that rises up and so it's a spiritual problem that we have the people who work going crazy. That's a spiritual problem. They've got so and politics can solve any spiritual problems you can make laws that forbid abortion that you can't prevent people from heaven back alley abortions. I think we should make laws against abortion by the way, I think abortion is murder and should be outlawed in every country in the world because murder is illegal and immoral, but I don't think it laws against abortion to keep people from killing their baby, so it should keep some of them from doing so, but we can't make a kind perfect country through political or legislative means, that doesn't mean we don't use those means. It is like I trust God to provide for me but if I should find myself without you no visible source of income. I have to trust God for that.

But if I have the ability to work. I need to do my part in that too. And I think the same thing about changing society for more just society voting plays a role in that. But I don't think that the church that continually talks about politics is doing a real favor to the congregation because even if he can get them all to vote the way he thinks would make a better world and if they all do vote that way.

That hasn't changed.

The real basic problem of our country and that is it's a godless country and and so problems will erupt again anytime there's a new election or whatever. What we need to do is make sure that the Christians know how to live as Christians had a how to endure trial how to be faithful unto death, how to understand the of the mind of God and live by the mind of God in their personal lives and marriages. There their lives at work and of course their political activities and many other things they may have involvement in so I am not against political subjects coming up from the pulpit. I think from time to time. They should especially when a political or something that has been politicized wrongfully, is actually moral issue.

See, I don't think that I don't think abortions and politically sure think that's in a moral issue but it's been made wrongfully into a politically I don't think that you know same-sex marriage is a political issue.

It's a moral issue as somebody has politicized so we might've been happy to not talk about politics at all, but now it's been politicized.

That's for coming to our backyard there. Addressing things that are actually our concerns that his morality, which is a very much of Christian concern so we can't help talk about some things that have some kind of political ramifications when in fact those they shouldn't of ever been politicized the first place.

But it's it's deftly our domain to talk about morality and justice and in so that these days can involve some statements and some politically charged, but we can't hide or run away from that. But we better make sure that were not simply making our congregations politically alarmed or politically wise that's that's a good thing to be, but we better make sure that their spiritually fortified and I don't think it's about politics all the time does much to fortify people spiritually. If anything it causes anxiety and anger and sometimes hatred, none of which are spiritually edifying and therefore you know we can get people riled up about bad things are going on but if they're not in the spirit of the just and the flesh of their no more prepared than before to face the trials and tests that are coming upon us so pastors happy, wise, and the you have to know where to introduce and how long to talk about things that may be political in nature, but that can't be the main focus. It must never be the main focus of the church like a lamb looking at it on yeah and hope to God that anxiety and also one quick call?

When you think you're coming back on. Well, I taught school in Honolulu a few months ago by by zoom. I don't know when. When the schools in Honolulu that invite me to be having their classes in person and flying over again that I used all the time. Of course I don't. I don't mind if I don't come right away but I will. I'm sure come again sometime soon.

I can't tell you but I'm I will announced on the when I know. Candidate okay Alex, God bless you think all right as Sherry from Vacaville, California hi Sherry from Cowtown hi how are you good in your hometown nonsense. Cowtown yes it is, and I've been there. I went there to visit Charles Manson is in prison, he invited he invited me that I didn't get in. I didn't get in because I showed up in blue jeans which the only chemicals I owned and they would let you in blue jeans. I got drove from Santa Cruz to Vacaville was a couple hours and had then gets a letter that I got a letter from my that will give a talk about that because I would be really interested in hearing all about that.

It's not that edifying.

Okay, well, kind of tight intellect. The previous caller was talking about and politics and religion. Right now you know in California are the masks have been mandated by our governor and I know that's not a law. If the mandate and so I have found myself through the Past few weeks becoming angry and anxious about all of the things that I think going on in our country and so I am and one of the things that does make me angry is having to wear the mask and so I am the only one in my family that refuses to wear the mask and I and the reason I do it because I feel like it's a measure of control, rather than that there's any hard scientific evidence based on mask. Being able to prevent the spread of COBIT because I have done a little bit of research and I can't find any hard evidence because they don't have it yet on the mask so I feel it's a measure of control. And I feel stubbornness in the rising up against it because sure what would your question be?

Should a Christian where the masks or should I obey the mandate. Well, I don't believe we have to obey everything the government says but I do think we should choose our battles of the if the government tells you you can't go to church that I don't think that I don't think that's something the Christians have to obey when Peter and John were told not to preach anymore implicitly will have to obey God rather than man on the other hand, since church can be done by zoom and so forth.

Or might be people who choose to do it that way instead and comply with the government and not cause any extra trouble. There are there are things that I do that I don't think the government has the right to tell you but I do them anyway because they it doesn't hurt me to do it and because I need to choose my battles. I mean if I go to jail for something after not doing something that I don't really think they have the authority to tell me to do so. I didn't do it well. They still him in jail and that's an inconvenience.

I mean I am not afraid to go jail for my faith. But if I went to jail for. That's to say, refusing to wear a mask.

I don't know that that would be an issue big enough to justify that kind of inconvenience to ministry so you have to pick your battles. I I don't believe that wearing masks has very much to do with the spread of the disease and supposedly not an expert know I'm certainly not by certainly listen to them and most experts I've heard.

Think of the mainstream experts are, you know, politically motivated, and don't have their facts straight. So would you believe I do wear a mask when I'm asked to do so I don't when I'm not and present. I don't wear a mask outside if it becomes time where you can't wear gloves or develop mask I'll probably wear one justice. It is a matter of government control, but so is the speed limit and a lot of times a lot of times the traffic is based on a on a road is safe. You could go much faster than the speed limit, but the government still has the right to regulate those kinds of things since they take care of the roads and clean up the wrecks and things like that. That's kind of their concern.

So I think that the government does controlling symptoms or controls more than it is really loud to but I think we need to live at peace as much as we can with the law. There are there are times when the law will simply go against our conscience to keep it and it'll be acting like the beast instead of like you know God's servant for righteousness and for justice so I think that we should probably avoid getting in trouble with the law about things that aren't really moral issues to me wearing a mask is not a moral issue.

I certainly am. I'm certainly I do object to wearing a mask, but I don't have objection on moral basis and as I don't feel like God told me not to wear masks on market where we if I could say that and it certainly take my chances with mask everywhere because I don't really think I haven't the slightest fear of COBIT 19 I got public all the time I shop I go to the post office and so forth. I I went to church.

I was in a church last Sunday that probably had three, 400 people and none of them have masks so you know I don't know if any of them got cold. I didn't. I didn't expect I would but if I did I don't even expect it would bother me much. I mean very very few people die so I mean I understand your concern. I think that I think it's a gratuitous control thing the government's doing, and I don't think they should and I can understand people objecting to it that it's not the kind of thing I would choose to get arrested for there are things I would get arrested for that is not one of them for me, in combination with other factors that are happening such as you know, talk about defending police departments and general lawlessness that we've seen it within within the so-called protest was a riot taken in conjunction with all of what's going on. Do you think that the mask issue commitment like when a small piece that isn't necessarily the hill to die on that, taken with all the other thing I feel like if we don't make a stand against that control, then little by little, you know those liberties are taken away where where do we know when to you now think I think I would save my powder for for a real crisis we meet, we may get only one chance to stand up as Christians against something significant and all get shot down for it or or put in jail for it and I wouldn't want to be the mask issue because frankly think worse, things are coming and so I would.

I would think we must keep our powder dry and and and and wait for the time where there really needs to be a confrontation if there needs to be one. I don't think this is her case where it has to happen.

I can understand a person's sympathies if they want to do it so I'm not telling you what to do because the Bible actually doesn't give the government power to make these kinds decisions and and yet it does tell us to live peaceably with all men as much is this in our power so you have to counterbalance those things in and do what your conscience tells you to do.

I certainly won't criticize you if you don't wear a mask like that's not the hill to die on that. I want to die okay thank you okay Sherry, thanks for your call Oscar from Pittsburgh California. Welcome to the now Turn the radio down or off Oscar place going.

My question know how calm on you know he brave enough to have the wisdom to direct know you know the quantity of Israel with her now is how do we know you know the government know but usually out following you know that that that that that that the things of God, not the commandment know how do we know that it is not more course you know that if people do not you know they they still believe is still waiting for them. It's a use you know good people you know to send some of the of the unfitness of you know that the soap that Microsoft will the government, you know how you know we we know we help you not use reality that was quite okay yeah okay I understand I mean in the Old Testament times the kings of Israel looked to God for guidance if they were good kinks. The bad things didn't unfortunately but the good ones did they pray and ask God for guidance and protection and they were governing under the direction of the prophets that God sent them so forth. The modern state of Israel has no connection to that Old Testament country visceral it's it's not the same kind of country it's it's it's just not it's it's it's not a continuation of that letter. Christians don't think very clearly about this that you say well it's called Israel with the same place the old Israel also must be Israel, year of the old Israel in the Bible was a country's founded on a covenant with God made at Mount Sinai where they had laws that God gave them God was their King and the even when they had kings like David the kings were expected to obey God. And it was a theocracy that is a country governed by God. Now modern Israel course that that nation of Israel in the Old Testament. It disappeared in about 70 A.D. but and then for a couple thousand years. There was none there in 1948. We now have the establishment of another country. By the same name in the same place but is not the same country. It's not made up of godly people.

It's not it's not based on a covenant that God made with them. It's a secular country just like America is it's got a it's a pluralistic country could be any religion you want, you can worship idols if you want their legally you couldn't initially Old Testament be stoned to death. But here you could read in modern you can worship idols should be a Buddhist you can be a Muslim. You can be an atheist.

You could be a Christian.

Although you probably be treated worse as a Christian there in anything other options, but this is not a country of its godly and is not founded on God's founded on the United Nations and the United Nations arts God's prophets so what we have in Israel right now is a country in the same location with the same name as the country that was there thousands of years ago, but it's not established on the same basis. Certainly none of people there now or ever in that country before and it's just a modern nation like America or like an immigrant democratic nation. It's a modern clerk pluralistic secular, democratic nation, and it's not God speak God's nation. What would make God's nation, the people say, well, it will yield Bible said they come back together.

Well, maybe just maybe it doesn't. We have to look at those verses say if it see if this is a fulfillment process. But even if it were what has happened there yet is not anything like what the Bible said because if it were taken. Ezekiel stuff it says that people would come back to the nation with a heart for God. That hasn't happened.

So we need to look at Israel as basically a regular nation, a regular secular nation, and I can't think of any reason why we should necessarily equate it or connected with it is really the Old Testament acceptance in the same real estate as they were. That's my position course. Most Christians who listen probably disagree but I think most patients don't think about it quite as deeply as they should. And maybe I'll start because we can't trust Israel today is going to be a righteous nation. It may be more than some other nations but we can't trust it always will be, and that we should always supported take a break for 30 seconds and will be right back. The narrow path is a listener supported ministry. You can find out how supported by going to our website. The narrow path.com and the tablets is building that's the narrow path.com.

I'll be back in 30 seconds. Tell your family. Tell your friends tell everyone you know about the Bible radio show that has nothing to send everything to give you the narrow path with Grant when today's radio show in Denver go to your social media and send a link to the narrow path.com, one can find free time on your teaching blog article verse by verse teachings and archives of the narrow path radio shows and tell them to listen live right here on the radio. Thank you for sharing.

Listener supported the narrow path.

Greg actually narrow path radio broadcast.

My mistake.

Regular live for another half hour taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or you have a different viewpoint for the hosting you'd like to balance, feel free to give me a call and we'll talk to about it. The number is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 Internet scholar is Ron from Worcester mass Worcester Massachusetts first time in which you will strike and pronounce it look like it was the worst sister course. I never could pronounce Leicestershire sauce that dispelled funny but now I know it's Worcester and been there many times. I want welcome good things I will genealogy of Jesus, that the Scriptures are goes from jail staff has been back to Adam and I'm just wondering how Tom is not biologically connected habitats that "merely what would that she spent connected misnamed you well. Good question. First of all there's two genealogies of Jesus in the Gospels ones in Matthew chapter 1 verses one through 17 and the other is in Luke chapter 3 beginning verse 23 and going to the end of chapter both of these. At first blush look as if they are Joseph's genealogy. It's obvious that Matthew is clearly given Joseph's because he says your so-and-so begat so-and-so begat so-and-so begat so-and-so begat so-and-so begat Joseph so we know that that's Joseph's family line. There and it says Joseph, who is the husband of Mary in a tomb. Jesus was born, so we know we have Joseph's genealogy and therefore not the bloodline of Jesus. Since Joseph was not Jesus. Father Jesus bloodline was not Joseph's but in chapter 3 of Luke.

We have another genealogy and on the face of it, it looks like it's Joseph's also it says in verse 23 now Jesus himself began his ministry about 30 years of age being as was supposed to sign Joseph now as was supposed of course implies a course he wasn't really the son of Joseph, but people generally regarded him to be the son of Joseph. He was adopted by Joseph. He appeared to be Joseph's part, Joseph's family, so he was supposed to be the son of Joseph, but then it gives the son of he, like the son of myth that the son of Levi.

Already we haven't had one connection with the genealogy of Joseph in Matthew none of those names are connected to Joseph in Matthew so it raises questions. Is this really Joseph's genealogy government.

Several suggestions made in the early church, Eusebius, the early church father, who wrote in the early fourth century said that the family of Jesus and the family of Joseph were the source of his information and that Joseph had two genealogies based on what was the law of Levi marriage and I don't have this a very complicated thing that Eusebius goes into it and says this is why they're both Joseph's genealogy, but one is the genealogy of his literal father he lie and the other is the is legal genealogy through another man named Jacob and there was a connection through the law that required a brother to marry his brother's widow. If in raising children in the name of his brother and so forth. III can't go to this in details.

If it's hard to understanding when you read it it be impossible to understand given over the radio, but I take a different view. Even though Eusebius is very early in seem to have good sources. I still feel there is grounds for a different view, and that this is Mary's genealogy and that what Luke is saying is, although Jesus was supposed generally to be the son Joseph. He was really of he lives line and that because he's really Mary's son and had no earthly father is Mary's father could be his nearest male ancestor. Now if you read the passage in Luke three and for example the new King James R. Or some of the good translations will find it. They use the words of the son are put in italics because they're really not in the Greek the way it reads is you, Joseph, the son of he lie the son of fat, etc., but the words of the sun are not in the Greek text actually says he was son of Joseph of he lie of myth that of Levi, and so on down through the whole genealogy going back to Adam now to say that he was of he lie would I mean if Jesus really was of he lie that. Then he lie would have P Mary's dad because Jesus was not of Joseph. He was of Mary and her family, so this would have an interest. The fact that he mentions the connection with Joseph was merely as was supposed he says as was supposed he was Joseph we have to. I think read this to say generally he was regarded be the son of Joseph, that in fact he was of another family line.

Mary's Mary's not mentioned because women are not usually mentioned genealogies that her father could be his family line. The Jesus literally came from Mary so that he lie, then we have to assume is Mary's father.

And its Mary's genealogy there, which is really Jesus actual bloodline now notice that in verse 31 of Luke three, David is in Mary's bloodline just as he is, and Joseph's in Matthew chapter 1, we have Joseph is descended from David, and so is Mary, but not through the same lines of David. Joseph came through the kingly line, David's son Solomon, who is King Ackerman, then a Rehoboam whose king after him. And so for all the way down all the kings of Judah were in Joseph's background. But Mary came through a different son of David Nathan who never became king and through his children, who never became king so Mary, if this is her genealogy came through a more obscure bloodline of David, but still that make state Jesus is the son of David and that's with the prophets of the Messiah had to be the son of David now if this is not Mary's genealogy. Then we don't have her genealogy anywhere and that means we have no documentation that Jesus was the son of David in any sense, except that he was adopted by Joseph, but who was of David, but if this is Mary's genealogy than we have documentation that Jesus actually qualifies to be the Messiah. And if it's not Mary's genealogy. We don't have any such documentation anywhere in the Bible and I think that's an important thing to establish sorry. I think we have Mary's genealogy here more than that, I would point out that Luke and Matthew are the only two Gospels at least two books in the Bible to give us anything about Jesus family life before he was 30 years old and they each have birth narratives and genealogies of his and so forth and Matthew always gives the birth narratives from Joseph's side. It's Joseph's genealogy very clearly it's the angel appears to Joseph after Joseph is heard Mary's pregnancy tells him to marry her and the angel after Jesus born Tecumseh Joseph tells and taken to Egypt and then comes to Joseph again tells me go back from Egypt and tells him to go to Galilee and settle in Nazareth, the whole story of Jesus childhood or birth. As far as it is related at all and Matthew is from Joseph's side.

Now we come to Luke everything is from Mary's side, we've got Mary's relatives, Elizabeth and Zechariah's and the birth of John the Baptist. From Mary's side of the family.

Then the angel comes to Mary and tells her she's going to have a baby and then you know it's Mary's side all the way through, and then we have a genealogy which kinda looks like Joseph Smith. We know it isn't his, because it's different than his and and there's a good reason to believe that it's Mary's and that would be consistent with Luke's general pattern of telling the whole story from Mary's side was Matthew told from Joseph so I believe we have Mary's genealogy here even though her name does not appear that it's not unusual for a woman's name to be left out of a chinos is usually less than the men who give the heritage and pass it along to the offspring so very unusual have women's neighboring Matthew has a few woman's names but that's unusual. It's it would not be unusual for Luke to leave out women's names so that we my answer to question that is appreciate that all right run complete understanding of that you have a great day. Excellent. Thank you. All right, let's talk to John from Michigan John, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling and ability. I'm well thinking great.

Thank you for the patients. By the way Charles meant anything to me for a little ballast left my train of thought question for you two people up recently at me for an easy to read Bible.

I'm also interested for myself on a quick story. I just went to a Catholic bookstore looking very easy to read Bible the guy to study American Standard Bible, but he also told me that the Bible came from the Catholic Church and I didn't know that and I know than the Bible.

The Old Testament came from the prophets of Israel. The Catholic Church wellhead around and the New Testament came from the apostles and the Catholic Church was anywhere around that time either. Now of the REIT. The reason I say that is this the early church fathers referred to the Catholic Church.

In contrast to heretical groups like Gnosticism and Manichaeism so forth. Wheat we think of the church fathers were mainstream and not heretical as Catholic. The word Catholic means universal.

And so there is the universal teaching of all the true churches than that was Catholic teaching that is universal teaching. It was not Roman Catholic. Most churches they don't call themselves Catholic except the Roman Catholic does Eastern Orthodox my call themselves the Eastern Reading thing to do very much but the thing is the real Roman Catholic Church evolved centuries later. They didn't give us the Bible, the church had the Bible and the church even even the councils that determine the canon of the New Testament occurred before there was what we call Roman Catholic Church. For example, it Augustine is considered to be the father of Roman Catholicism and he you know he lived at the end of the fourth century and early part of the fifth century kind of hope he passed over the year 400 in his lifetime and and it was before that that virtually all the books of the New Testament were already accepted.

It's true, it wasn't until almost 3 or 400 when the Council of I think the Council of Carthage was the counselor finally kinda put their seal on on the 27 books of the New Testament we have, but even then the in or around your 400 during the lifetime of Augustine that there wasn't a Roman Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church is based on the assumption that the Bishop of Rome is the head over all the churches worldwide. That's was called Roman Catholic.

It's under the authority of the Roman bishop that idea that grew slowly as a tradition. It was never said so in the Bible.

None of the apostles believed it, and the earliest church father didn't believe it, but it was an idea that grew especially after Constantine, the Roman Emperor became a Christian.

The Roman church became the most important powerful church because the Emperor was in Roman was a Christian and part of the church so obviously you couldn't help but the center of the empire where that the Emperor himself was a Christian and his partner church of Rome. You can help but have the church of Rome is in the bishops of Rome who were the bishops over the Emperor. You know would be we get more and more prestige and and over the centuries most most historians I read believe that there wasn't really what we call a pulp, or that the idea of the Roman bishop is really the authority over all the churches until about Pope Gregory which is about 600 A.D. and the church is canon church is canon of Scripture have been well established for centuries before that, so Roman Catholics don't make a distinction between their group, which is the Roman Catholic Church and simply the word Catholic, which did not refer to the Roman Catholics just referred to the universal Christian church worldwide, of which the Bishop of Rome had no particular authority.

Okay, so that's what I kind of threw me for a loop that I thought I knew a little bit of not what you just explain, but that it didn't make sense.

Are you looking specifically for Catholic by Mark, are you Catholic, you shall know now I don't want to know it's for my two people my family and then myself but then interested just to get that at least interested. I listen to you and you break things down, which I love.

I don't know where they'll be with that make sense so I if they can find you read you would just get them involved, at least, and I would say back in the 70s back in the 70s I had a very easy to read Catholic Bible as I've never Catholic but is it was a new translation called the new Jerusalem Bible and it was, it had the Catholic Apocrypha and it had it had Catholic footnotes and frankly very liberal footnotes to them and they didn't believe that Moses wrote the Pentateuch and things like that they were is liberal scholarship, but is it was published by the Catholic Church but is a real delightful readers like reading the NIV or the Phillips translation or something like that which is not the most accurate but reads very nicely that was called the new Jerusalem Bible. I'm in the wrong path, if they're reading something he could, easy to read and I'm not doing their homework and that is a kind of wrong. That is a problem is that the new Jerusalem Bible is a lovely read, but it's notes can be poisoned in no and it has notes that study Bibles footnotes, but I just say you know there's a lot of Bibles that are not particularly Catholic Bibles that are reasonably easy read and not looking for The Bible pertaining a lot of their know that there beliefs or whatever you call it.

Well I would say some Bibles are reasonably easy to read our weekly like the Christian Christian standard Bible. I think it's the Christian standard Bible, and the ESP is pretty easy to read. Of course the NIV is very easy to read.

It's in RI don't I have my issues with NIV but it's it's a Bible and its is easy to read. I would not recommend the new living translation, which is very easy to read but not very close to the original sign because it does are some suggestions you can look into the front left and he said with something Christian standard, the Holman Christian standard and it came out it was called the Holman Christian sent home and as a publisher and they now publish, just as the Christian standard Bible is the same Bible. They just dropped the world Holman and just called the Christian standard road. See S.

The stone okay so much what you do okay, John, God bless you that you to buy Rebecca from Washington DC and shaking things up back there. Rebecca looking out for us a question about what she can't think what it can't compatible with Christianity on I was looking to anything Gilbert and think that IQ on Frank Brown Bible Michael Petty solid thinking on he started barking at you recently came on wondering what you know about and think that actually what answer we will agree to use the term inner healing started out meaning one thing that the term has just diversified and it doesn't all mean the same thing anymore. The idea that we need healing inside. Metaphorically speaking, is not a problematic idea. I mean, we obviously need more than our physical healing. We our souls sealed to, but unfortunately the term inner healing which is not found in the Bible arose in the charismatic churches from a woman named Agnes Sandford and she got her ideas. Many of them from her.

Her son Jack and from her.

Her pastor Morton Kelsey, both of whom had studied union psychology at Carl J. Hume University in Switzerland and they they are union analytics analysts are very they believe in and union sought in therapy and and they influenced her and she began to try to put Christian scriptures and so forth that together with some of the ideas and so she formulated what we these days call in or what McAndrew called inner healing in the 80s maybe the late 70s and she brought that right. In the charismatic movement especially and so a lot of charismatic churches have bought into the idea being, you know, getting SATA means of the spirit walk with Jesus. It's not really quite enough to really get Charlie sanctified, you might have some deep traumas that you need some special kind of Christian therapy for me and they call that inner healing. As I said, the idea has diversified a great deal in the last several decades, and whenever I whenever I represent Agnes Sandford's views about it on the radio. Someone write me say well I'm involved in early May.

We don't we don't believe any of that stuff. Good on good if you don't butts enforcing the books on your healing that came out in this 80s, especially to teach these things and the things are that we all are affected by the collective unconscious note, Sigmund Freud invented the idea of the subconscious mind and his protégé Carl Ewing bought into that now. Freud was an atheist, Carl Young was an occultist, he contacted spirits and he had a spirit guide that he called for Lehman Young did and he said that he got insights from the spirit God and he parted company with Freud because Ford was an atheist and I think that Ewing was a Presbyterian or something that he was. He grew up in a poltergeist house and communicate with demons and things like that and thought that was a good thing and Ewing after parted from Freud took the idea of the unconscious mind and an expanded value of the collective unconscious of the whole human race which means the whole human race shares certain unconscious memories.

He said, for example, the reason people often have dreams, panicky dreams about falling in their sleep and they wake up in a panic is because of that that's from our evolutionary ancestors of our race who had to sleep in the trees so they would fall to the ground be eaten by lions in the idea of falling would be a terrible disaster.

So this fear inspires in all humans at some time or another. This kind of fear of falling in their sleep and he felt its is a whole human race shares a collective unconscious, and he also believed because of that we could through certain meditative states connect with people in the realm of the collective unconscious people who died people who no longer around and we can contact them and they could mentor us and that it be possible for example if you are a scientist that you could go through certain union process of visualization where Thomas Edison if you chose would come in the room with you in this mental rent realm and would talk to to be really him because he's part of the total humanity of total collective unconscious to and this thing was carried over into Agnes Sandford's teaching that you know if you've got deep issues and you debts therapy. You really could visualize Jesus and he will actually come into the room of your mental picture, and he will communicate with you and he'll he can even change your past because he's timeless and therefore in and so they come up with all these goofy things and this not a line of Scripture supported it came out of the cult and and I don't really see any reason why Christians should depend on something that came out of the cold as something that will make us better Christians. It seems to me if this kind of therapy was useful or necessary or even safe. That perhaps Jesus would have recommended or practiced, or maybe the apostles or somebody else in the early church. I don't think that a valid spiritual therapeutic Christian should be seeking would have to originate from edema name for Lehman, who communicated call you whose teaching is filtered down to Greg Sanford so that's that's my thinking about it now.

People sometimes contact was they will we do inner healing.

We don't do this visualization stuff. Well, okay, fine then you know if you're doing something instead which is what the Bible teaches, then fine.

If it's not.

The Bible teaches. Maybe we should try using what the Bible teaches because I word of God is powerful, and sharper two-edged sword, and by the word of God. Paul said the man of God could be made perfect, perfectly developed for every good work and equipped so maybe we should try the tools that God gave us and see how that works. I know someone asked me once where you go when you need counseling been through some traumatic experience about never been traumatized and I don't I don't going works up to the word of God.

God's word is my counselor I mention I would never let someone count me, but I'm not to let them counseling through psychological union or cultic means. If they were counselors in Scripture that's fine but I don't usually have to go to people for that because I know the Bible and I didn't have to tell me what the Bible says usually so I can adjust myself from the Scripture.

That's what was done. I think every Christian should be and to do that if you believe the Scripture. If you apply the Scripture you obey the Scripture. I personally think that big problems in your past will eventually be solved.

I don't think there's a shortcut. I think inner healing sometimes may be look to buy some sufferers as to a possible shortcut. I don't think there's that many shortcuts to sanctification okay.

Oh, I'm sorry I hung up to take out. I only have a few minutes I'd I didn't mean to cut you off I just thought you were done. You call tomorrow. We can talk about again.

Natalie from Rockland, California. Welcome to the neuropathic sculling should Christian tertiary unit called earlier regarding my lunch make right now I'm not registered, click, click, hot patient Scripture lying one term wearing that went politically in Q3 where we hired an act out and I'm not quite that there is not a lot and restart it out. I wearing that link directly to that that branding are trying to get like that. I will think that there are a couple anything online that are good research article from the UK. At that point that I found that healthcare only where even prior to coping with any great strand.

I believe my own personal belief and what kind of hearing having been in healthcare and that when people are wearing fake Drinking that were prohibiting racing and drop what little arrow right now because I work with that Barry Connor might not be making any bad that they did not let the new blank and I do not agree with the shutdown for the port at that native and I thought however when there now all our to be clear here about 30 seconds so I got to catch up and I appreciate you sharing an alternate side. God bless you. Okay, great hearing from you. Listening to the narrow path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Greg. We are listener supported and we pay for the time on the radio hoarsely go off of the station willing to pay for you like to help us stay on the station you're listening to. You can write to the narrow path at the address you find a website or you can donate online. The website is the narrow path.com under the donations to the narrow path.com thank you joining us let's talk again tomorrow