The Narrow Path 7/28

Radio broadcast. My name is Steve Greg and were live for an hour each week afternoon to take your calls. If you have questions you like to bring up for conversation about the Bible of the Christian faith or if you want to talk about something some point on which you disagree with the host. Feel free to do so.

Right now, however, regardless right now we have we wanting to talk the lid on hiring another line had no preference regarding hello studio good morning Mike, not allowing immigrants into your country.

Hello, I'm not sure if that's if things are working hours okay yes I was hearing another program in my head okay were to go to the phone lines, but I wanted to say our lives are full at the moment, but if you call a little later you will probably find a line has opened up the number is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 first caller today is Dylan coming from Portland, Oregon hi Dylan how you doing right use of deadly force. All right, thanks you call I will discuss this at some length in an article that's posted in my website. So if you want to read a longer answer than I or more thorough answer with more scriptural references and so forth and I can give you in this timeslot. Feel free to go to the narrow path.com and go to the topical articles and there's an article called the Christians use of forcible resistance and so I do discuss at their short answer is, I believe that we are's supposed to defend the helpless.

If you have children and a wife and or even neighbors, or people you see at random, who are under attack and you have the power to stop the attack that I think that that is something that would be consistent with loving your neighbor as you love yourself. In fact, I can't imagine that any other course of action would be consistent with loving your neighbor as you love yourself. If you love your neighbor and they are in a sentiment attacked by some violent criminal then I would think that there'd be nothing that love to dictate except to help to rescue the innocent. Now some people say.

But Jesus said to turn to the other cheek and don't resist evil men. Well, you've got to take the fact that Jesus in the sermon about uses a lot of hyperbole. That is, he makes a general point without qualifying it, he talks about the need to go in your closet lock the door when you pray are when you give. Don't let your left hand know what your right hand is give is doing Robison a figure of speech.

Jesus said give to everyone who asks you. Obviously, there are limitations to that given in many other scriptures.

So when we say Jesus didn't resist evil man, we have to understand what he is referring to goes on and tells us what he means. He says if a man strikes on one cheek on the right cheek, turned from the other also. That's not resisting the evil man. Now that evil man. In that case is not attacking with deadly force.

He struck on the cheek. That's a very different thing than somebody coming to kill you or your family and to to to be hot, humble, and to be generous and to not strike back is a very Christlike thing to do and I think Christian should tend toward pacifism, tend toward nonresistance whenever that is so impossible to do without fulfilling some other Christian obligation in our greatest Christian obligation is not to be pacifists or grace obligations to love our neighbors.

We love ourselves so.

And that would include our lives our children so I think that it's a Christian duty to defend that you asked about using deadly force. I personally would would be very low to use deadly force. In any situation I would never want to kill another human being. Now I could imagine very few situations where where I could not help an innocent party without killing the attacker, it seems to me that there's usually something short of lethal violence that could be used to stop an attacker in many cases Christians have suggested you could put yourself in the way of the attacker to protect the others. Of course this is this is not going to work in every situation.

It would make sense them situation because of the person coming at you because this is a get ready you. They plan to go for your wife and kids. In other words, you're just a speed bump for them and freeze a bond. I'm not good defend myself and for my son to let myself get hurt here if the if that's just another way of saying and then my wife mature get raped and murdered, then we have to be a little more nuanced in our our heroic willingness to just lay down our lives.

Sometimes it's not ours to lay down because in order to lay down my life for my friend, or even for an enemy. I have to make sure they're not laying down my life, to the detriment of somebody who would been spared if I didn't do that. So the ethics of the sermon on the Mount are very much the rule of my life but I recognize nuance I recognize the hyperbole in them. In many places and so we have to really think through the biblical ethic as Jesus taught it in terms of, for example, his own behavior and the behavior of the apostles and the teachings of the apostles and for that matter even the true morals of the Old Testament because the Old Testament morals don't change morals do not ever change. So we have to recognize that whatever Jesus said, using as he does various figures of speech. At times is not going to be in conflict with the whole moral teaching of Scripture about the mind of God. Now getting back to your question. Should a Christian use deadly force.

I think we should do everything in our power not to do so. I think that we could either cripple or or or deflect or do something to an attacker or a retain that person you know or detain them while others escape. I think those kinds of things are are much more, according to what I would see as my Christian response, but in such rare cases as the only way to save C innocent people from the deadly monstrous criminal attack where where that would require deadly force. I do not say that I would condemn the use of deadly force. It should only be done to prevent the death of somebody else. It's like I don't agree with abortion under any circumstances except perhaps if it's a tubal pregnancy in a tubal pregnancy, neither the woman nor the baby will survive without intervention. If you remove them zygote from the tubes. Then the woman will probably survive, and the cycle will die by and which is a bad thing. It's it's it's terrible thing to have to sacrifice human life. In that case, an innocent one, but that's a choice between sacrificing one life and sacrificing to and that's a hard call, so I meet Christians often like other religionists tend to be legalistic and are looking for rules that they said okay. In this situation I'm supposed to do this, but if there's this other little element.

I do this other thing, and if there is a slightly different arrived, and I think this is the living by rulebooks.

What Jesus teaches us is to live.

I believe in love and let let love lead agape love dictate our ethics. I think when you read the sermon on the Mount, Jesus is intending to demonstrate in an actual real-life examples.

What agape love would look like as opposed to perhaps are simply following our own selfish impulses, but again we have to recognize that what what is loving and one situation is certainly not always could be exactly the same as what is loving and in the other.

I believe we should be as loving as possible to all parties.

If you know if you can only stop a criminal from committing a crime without killing him excellent, excellent. That's that's ideal if you if there's only one choice and that is that you get your children criminal to kill her. He's going to kill the people you nearby that or he's going for that I would think that I'd rather be.

I'd rather stand before God, having been responsible for the ending of a life of someone who's doing something worthy of death, then for being responsible for some dying whose innocent because I did nothing when I was in a position to do something so rather than make rules and laws. I'd rather say doing the loving thing is always what were required to do be led by the Holy Spirit to celebrate nature always going to be doing the loving thing and if you would like more to look at. Many scriptures bring up and discuss relevant to the topic online. My article at the website. The narrow path.com under the tab that says topical articles you find my article called the Christian enforceable resistance which I wrote many many years ago in response to a pastor who wrote me a question about that and that's what I wrote back to him that it was published in a magazine later on.

Okay, let's talk next to see Richard from seal Beach, California looking to the narrow path.

Richard yet another legalistic question I would like to sermon this weekend on the 70 years of Babylonian captivity and the preacher said it was a result of 490 years of the Jews that resting the land and then I was thinking about that after the Civil War George Washington Carver shape is felt by rotating the crop saving resting the land in the 1930s here in the United States. We had the gospel so I was wondering do you think we should still rest rest the land and to show that some of the old law is still in effect and now listen to the radio. Thanks, Steve, I think if you call is for some of the old laws been in effect, I believe that many of the old laws embody permanent truths to be sure it does mean all of them do. And that's why many of them passed away like we don't circumcise anymore. We don't offer animal sacrifices and remove your old laws that are of no use anymore, but but certainly some laws embody eternal truth and eternal principles. Now the ideas resting the land. Every seventh year, the law, I'm not sure if in God's mind that was more ceremonial or practical.

That is to say, keeping a Sabbath day keeping the Sabbath year keeping the year of Jubilee is after seven Sabbath years of the seventh and so forth are quite consistent with a consistent number that appears in many different contexts and I wonder sometimes if a Sabbath year is as ceremonial as a Sabbath day.

For example, keeping the year of Jubilee is as ceremonial asI assume that this is so in other words, I don't know that there is a requirement for farmers to let the ground rest every seventh year without crops. However, to say there's a good requirement is a different thing than to say that that it wouldn't be wise thing to do. We may know enough about land now and in fact God's law may have dovetailed with this fact that giving land rest or for its nutrients to replenish and so forth is a healthy thing to do and if you just can use land all the time without giving interest you're getting depleted, producing good crops, so arming God apparently knew that. I'm not sure that farmers and other countries didn't know that by this time in the days of Moses are not sure but whether this means the law continues to be true. I don't I wouldn't go that far. I would say that if I was a farmer I would want to use the best of agricultural knowledge to manage my farm in my crops and I believe that I think good agricultural knowledge suggest that you need to give fields arrest once in a while, so I probably would do it just the way of the Bible described, though I wouldn't do so in a legalistic way, as if that's something that you know it's as if my righteousness somehow is hinged upon.

All right, let's talk to John in Oregon city, Oregon hello John, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling chapter 12 first goal so will shut up one book to the time of the so if the book is sealed until the time of the question is, how could be fulfilled by Antarctica and 168 BC went to great great question. First of all let me let me say something that you might agree with. I don't if you're not, but I consider the time of the end it's referred to their as the time of the end of the 70 weeks and therefore the time of the end of Israel's career as God's people, which was of course the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and I don't think it's looking toward what we think of is like the end of the world. It doesn't say the end of the world's is the time of the end and the period of time that has been under discussion.

70 weeks now. He says the prophecy is sealed up until then that's one way of saying it won't be all fulfilled children. It doesn't mean nothing and it will be fulfilled, necessarily, but that the domain concerning the main burden of the prophet concerns things that are far off that something sweet for example, I mean not only does it profit Antiochus epiphanies, Daniel also prophesies of the kingdom of Babylon will fall to the kings of the Medes and the Persians that happened in Daniel's lifetime infected had happened when the when the angel told him to seal up the book that that part that was predicted in the early chapters of Daniel had already happened that the Greeks would next, the Romans, and of course Antiochus epiphanies in between would also you know not disqualify the general statement that the book has largely to do with things that have to do with Israel per se, and ultimately how many years remain before Israel will be basically removed, which is what I think. Chapter 12 describes so you know there are things that happened not at the time of the which were fulfilled before the time of the end. And so to say the book was sealed up I don't think it means that literally nobody read it.

Or nobody could understand any part of it as it was being fulfilled. But I think of it means is the prophecy. The prophecy in general is a prophecy about the, the, the length of time from Daniel's day till the Messiah and destruction of Jerusalem that that history would go and by mentioning certain things would happen in the midst of that time.

I don't think it's necessarily going to guess what is implied by its sealed up until the time of the end so good, so bold, criminal and cool when you they had the better written the best book on the subject of this amount, the pre-millennial of the book of Daniel are well-liked in our intent, prophecy year. Well, I'm not sure you would recommend because I don't read many books on entire process. I don't know who's written. I know that there have been guys like George Eldon Ladd, who is premillennial and who shared views much closer to my own on most things even about prophecy. I think say he was a premillennial slide.

I don't think is premillennialism also affected his view of various details that I would disagree on so I can't really make up recommendation without reservation of any premillennial author who writes on prophecy because that is basically what premillennialism or melisma post millennialism are the things that really determine how sums can interpret certain prophecies, so I you are on IE I George Eldon Ladd was recently good okay to say one last comment is very deep but Schofield in his introduction to Revelation said that he didn't understand it perfectly when he said that the people who lived in the end time would understand and prophecy better. Well, that's been here I've heard lots of times that you know people living centuries before the fulfillment of the prophecy. It doesn't matter whether they understand properly or not, but that people living at the time of its fulfillment you'd expect God to give them insight into at least those who are insightful people and that may be true that the main thing is that I don't see very many prophecies in the Bible that have to do with the end times, in the sense that we usually use that term. That is our times. I think there's a little bit here and there, but not much. There certainly no detail and therefore whatever I understand about Bible prophecy. Most of it was fulfilled long ago and so I'm not living in the time of its fulfillment after the comments fulfillment, but obviously futurist on Revelation or Daniel would disagree with that okay thanks Dave okay good talk to John, she eyed Jerry from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Welcome to the neuropathic for calling high are your what you need. Turn your radio down yeah I'm hearing it and delay okay.

Circle had a question I'm not dumb a dummy dummy. I just can't seem to get there. I've got a few questions thrown at you and then listen on the radio. It tells me to examine myself and see whether Christ is inmate are not that Scripture is Christ is in many and is my life.

He dwells in my heart and I stand and says is Christ a minister of sin. So I can so you know Christ command me and how I got Christ in me well for generally I don't sin in the second question about heaven and I want to go to heaven, so it talks about heaven. And then it says the heavens and then it talks about the car having and then it talks about the heaven of heavens and then it talks about the heaven of heavens and then it talks about how it talks about the lowest L and that's my questions and I walking in confusion and I will complete something I need to ask you for more clarification. Since you don't mind staying with us for the conversation. I'm doing to find out more about what you are. You say you want to be Christian, but you don't seem to really get there, what is well that's not missing. The Bible teaches. The Bible teaches that the Christian is determined not to send a Christian hates sin a Christian repentance when they sent but the Bible does say in first John 19 which is written to Christians. He says if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Town Christians that and it well. If we've got first John chapter 2 verse one says I'm writing these things so you don't sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

And as far as the presence sin is concerned.

First John 17 says if we walk in the light which is present time, not past tense. Then we have fellowship one with another, and the got in the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us present tense from all sin cited as a well of course you can't cover up since future because they don't exist, but but some of my best option we are we are told to stop exactly Christian Arnon that I will not in much the confessional at time commitment to justice.

Why would you think that being a Christian is more related to your sins, then related to Christ. You said you want to go to heaven when you go to heaven.

That's where where everybody not everybody well where God becomes my my daddy in the my daddy know the Bible says that we become his children now therefore born again, God is our father already. He is our dad.

We have the superior voice and you don't sin well your your view about senior kind of hung up on you got a few verses that I believe you totally misunderstanding, and certainly first John does say whoever is born of God does not sin, but it's means he does not continue to live in sin, it is me. They never committed a sin. James was an apostle and he said in many things we all stumble now stumbling for Christian men sending and he says we all do that from time to time but it's not the way we live. It's a stumbling stumbling is an interruption in the way we live.

It's an exception to the way we live. But when we if we confess our sins he is faithful and just forgive us our sins so the Bible does not teach that Christians never sin it does to your father in heaven is okay let me just say this I'm not either but I'm a Christian and neither was the apostles. They were Christians too, but they were perfect.

Peter was far from perfect. Paul had to rebuke him publicly wants and that was well into the book of acts when Peter was the leading Christian in Jerusalem and so I think that I think that you're going by a few misunderstood anecdotes from Scripture, rather than a holistic understanding. Being a Christian means that you have repented of your sins and you are now following Christ as your determination you want to live obediently to Christ because you love them, not because you want to go wherever loves each other in heaven, but because you love him and that's what makes heaven attractive only reason I would ever want to go to heaven is because Jesus is there any other an interest in heaven except for God and Jesus. I want to be with them because I love them if if I don't love him and you hate heaven because him to be dominated by God and by Jesus, and people who don't love them harsher to hate it there but being a Christian is you love God you love Christ you Jesus, if you love me you keep my commandments. So you keep his commandments, that your way of life. It does not mean that you've stepped over the threshold. The moment you got saved and now you're suddenly perfect. You're right, we are called to be perfect. That is the goal. If God said in a lower goal than that then we might be satisfied reaching that lower goal. Our life as Christians is pressing on toward the mark for forgetting the things behind and looking to the things that are before we press onto the mark of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

Paul said it is being changed from glory to glory into the likeness of Christ is not sudden it's not instantaneous so I'm I'm really sorry that you feel because I don't correct, but I think you should recommend some lectures to that.

I gave her free everything in the website is free if you go to the narrow path.com that's the narrow path.com go to topical lectures and choose the series is called. How can I know that I'm really saved. I'd suggest you listen to those I'm out of time for this segments. I'm sorry to have to move along the listening to the narrow path, we are listener supported. You go to our website. The narrow path.com and I'll be back in 30 seconds for another half hour. 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 with them for your social and send a link to that narrow path.com, one can find free time on your teaching blog article teachings and archive the narrow path radio show and tell them to listen live right here on the radio. Thank you for sharing.

Listener supported the narrow path. Greg asked the narrow pathway of broadcast. My name is Steve Greg and we are live for another half hour taking your calls if you have questions about the Bible of the Christian faith or a different view from the host. Feel free to give me a call.

The number is 844-484-5737 and I have an announcement to make out this Saturday every month or two we try to have a gathering into macula in a little church building is not really church building insert building its leased by a church of the leather shoes.

It was while it's how the love of Christ Fellowship into macula now when we get together we just have a time of fellowship and Q&A. It's a question-and-answer time just like show and if you like to get together with some like-minded believers this Saturday night at 630 we gather and the Q&A starts at seven.

We gather 630 so people get some fellowship before the meeting begins.

So if you want to know where that is.

Want to go to that you go to our website. The narrow path.com and go to announcements and scroll down to this Saturday nights date and you'll see the location and the time and all of that, this Saturday into macula. Check the website under the announcements page@thenarrowpath.com all right. My next colors Lucan Portland, Oregon. Luke welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling technical I'm struggling reconciling your review or your explanation of Calvinism versus many of the reformed teachers I listen to it doesn't seem like the reformed view of Calvinism. Your explanation agree so I can't tell if the reformed view of Calvinism is actually classic Calvinism, or if you have in common inches. I'm not sure what the answer is open to maybe you can expound on this.

Two views. Sure, I will tell me where the difference you think it's because I'm I'm very conversant in Calvinism I've read, the best Calvinist authors for decades and I'm I agree with them but I know putting much what they say now I will say this I I'm often told by Calvinists that I am misrepresenting what Calvinists believe I let I want to say this, the Army and I'll be glad to hear from you. Where you think I'm missing it, but I just say what these people you really should be saying is I misrepresenting what they believe and they think they are, writes a lot of people do not know what Calvinism teaches, they go to Calvinist church or church that calls itself Calvinist, and in many cases the some of the uglier aspects of the Calvinist document were taught by Calvin and Luther, and and and some of the leading Calvinists throughout the ages are are never made clear to them. Now if you listen to my lecture series I quote them to make sure that I'm not getting them wrong because I quote both ancient and modern Calvinists and the Westminster confession of faith. Most Calvinists accepted me.

There there are varieties of Calvinists. No doubt, but I can't address every person has got their own personal disagreement with classical Calvinism, but all. Another thing I point out is although I am saying with the Calvinist say I'm not saying the way they like to say it. In other words, they will they will say you know God for Danes.

Everything that happens. Okay and heap here of course has elected some to be saved and they will inevitably be saved by his sovereign election and in others he did not like me said he liked to be reprobate and they will inevitably be lost in this election was made before the beginning of the world.

Okay, so let's just be reasonable.

Here, if you really believe that God before you begin the world shows some sleep. People be saved and they got no other help but be safe and happy saved is Lynette it's an emerald will be saved and other people he chose to be inevitably lost. Which is exactly Calvin and the Westminster confession of faith, say then what you're saying is that no human being has any real say in whether they will be saved or not, that everybody living was born either under a death warrant that can never be removed and go to hell because it through nothing.

They particular chose or else they will or at least they could've chosen different. Let's put that way right or else there to go ahead and so now we would use when you line it out like that that's exactly what they say but is not the way they want to say it because they they like to say things in a way that makes it sound like it's just glorifying to God. You know that.

They say that Calvinism glorifies God because it gives him all the credit for salvation and that people were not Calvinist like myself while they they want to take glory away from God and want to give glory to human beings into human free will and they worship free will. Now there's there's someone misrepresenting a view because note, I've never met an Armenian who worship free will. I've never worship in our many who had any interest in taking any glory away from God or even thinks that our many beliefs have any negative impact on the glory got it also mean they're just each side when it tries to paraphrase the views of the other tries to do it in such a way as to exhibit what's objectionable about the other side okay now if if you can, if I Calvinist can really make the point that a person like me is trying to take away from the glory of God in salvation, or that I worship human free will and they've got a real uphill battle because there's nothing true in the statements at all. But if I say well Calvinist teach that you don't have any choice in order to be Christian. Well, that's exactly what they say. That's not is not a twisting that simply abbreviating what they they say in many many words heard little hyper, and a few others say is that late.

They totally agree that we have free choice free will, but we didn't Be the deciding factor in our conversion, which I think biblical but that doesn't agree with what Calvinism actually teaches. Historically well know you are compatible list of free will is what what these guys are arguing for and basically what like for example I've heard RC's pro se number of times that it's not that God chooses who goes to hell he just passes over certain people and doesn't elect them for salvation. So there on the path to hell by nature and he just passes over them doesn't elect them. That's not mean he just let them go the way they want to go and that with the elect. He interferes Moran and make sure that they get saved but this is coming Calvin. He hated that explanation in in his doctor with his book the pretest eternal predestination God. He said that is a lame attempt at justifying God by saying that he allows this to happen when Calvin says when he in fact he ordained and decreed that this will happen.

So mean hyper and and Spruill and some these guys aren't really that much on the same page with Calvin. Many Calvinists are now compatible list of free will is the is simply what Calvin determined Calvin issues to suggest that there is a possibility that people can have free will, but still be that that but that belief is still compatible with the idea that God chooses who will be saved. So what they're saying is that people can make any choice they want to accept the choice to be saved because only God allows some people to make that choice and and forbids others to make that which is a strange thing to suggest if God is really not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. Why would he forbid most people to repent. Now course Calvinist say what he doesn't want all people who said he only wants the elect to be saved and I've heard a few Calvinist rose what he kinda does at one level. Once all people say, but he only really ordains that the elect was it lets nonsense, of course, if God wants people to be saved.

There's nothing that can stop the right as a sovereign, according to Calvinism, God just unilaterally saves whoever is elected, he could've elected everyone in the world. If that was that pleased him. If he really wanted and when saved he could've elected said there's nothing to stop it. No one stands above God telling him who he can elect who can't write so so if Calvinism is true, then we have to do some that the majority of people that God brought into the world.

He didn't want them to be saved and not only did not want to be saved, but he didn't choose to save them in the context of a situation where there naturally can be tormented forever and ever, and eternal fire. According to Calvinistic view so I mean if it was a matter of you know people who aren't saved well. They just get snuffed. And that's the answer like you put put down your dog when he's old is not suffering. After that you just can't live anymore.

So you take that sleep, if that's what they believe it wouldn't be as cruel. It's doubly strange for God say he wants and what to repent and when we say, but still he didn't elected what we could have, but if if he said well I will I have elected to save some in the sense that the live with me forever and the others. I'm just let them go off to sleep in and they won't suffer. But then I can enjoy heaven okay well that's that's God's business. He certainly has every right and he has a right to do the other thing to. But what kind of a God, is it if he says okay those who don't become saved. They're not just going to go to sleep and miss out on going to heaven. They're going to go into a place where will be tormented forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and never stop being tormented and I could've saved them if I just wanted to but I just didn't want to so I didn't. That's God in the Assistant. Anyone who says it isn't and it comes know your misrepresenting call me and tell me how that's misrepresenting that's that's what you are saying you just not saying it is plainly as I did because people would never want that doctrine, if they heard it plainly right don't agree with what you just said actually probably actually not Calvin title into a different view right. I was raised I was raised Baptist.

Now there are there are Calvinist Baptist is reformed Baptist, but we were not reformed as ridges. Baptist end and so we were not Calvinist, but I thought we were growing up, I thought we were at least partially are mostly Calvinist because I didn't know what the Calvinist doctrine is really sad until I read the real Calvinist. The Presbyterians reform people you know as a Baptist, I thought we are pretty much been Calvinist, but but holding to all the doctrines of the Calvinist church of the Baptist Church are raised in when I later right final count visitors and I never believed any of those points. I don't leave any of the points of Calvinism, because what they say is simply is not taught in Scripture and its and it makes God a monster which he isn't God wants me monster.

He's got the right do they want to see what he sovereign. He can do what he wants to. I'm 100% agreement. God made us he can do what he wants.

He wants to torture. Is this like a kid, let's pull the wings off flies are like little cats out of the wind on the freeway God could do that if you want to, but he's not the kind God I read about in the Bible if that's what he wants to do what I do hundred percent degree of Calvinism were true, along with eternal very cool painting died for everyone to make it very difficult to know why anyone in the Bible say that God is love, when in fact only a minority of people receive that love and the rest are tormented forever and ever. When he could've love them all.

I don't know the we could say he's loving to the elect. In that case, we can say he is love and which is what of their statement symbolic. God is spirit. God is light, God is love is not saying that your lights and spirit are kind of one aspect, or once one smaller percentage of he's out that's what he is and he is love.

How can a God who is love hate. So many people, the majority of people, even people that you and I don't hate and that's the answer we would we would save we would save everyone that we meet. If we are is in our power but God won't then were more loving than his, and I'm not love but he it's about theology and people… I don't think their thinking well right thank you very much in your family okay. Look for your call. God bless you.

All right Nelson from Fort Worth, Texas. Welcome to the neuropathic's are calling thank you for taking my call. It sure Lawrence sure glad that free will Baptist came about after hearing about calendars and Westminster thing by the way, is that in England yes yes is it is English. I have a little research on didn't know who it ties in with the Wesley hand in church. No not Wesley at all. It's not even Wesley on the opposite side and the Anglican Episcopal Church to talk to. I don't know about. I don't know if Anglicans have an official position. I think a lot of the Anglicans I've read people at JI Packer suffer strong Calvinist, but Wesley had was in Anglicans of the day he died.

He was very anti-, so I don't really know. I don't know if the majority of agriculture Calvinist who did you say Armenians are pro-Calvin know Armenians are usually considered to be the polar opposites, Calvinist or not, whether or not know the actual polar opposite of Congress are pulley genes are many and you Armenians are the balance between Calvinism and our plagiarism who well. Pelagius was a an English monk who lived at the time the Augustine and talked strong views of free will in August and August the course of the originator of Calvinism. Augustine was 1 August, the Augustine Pelagius had a ongoing debate and so Calvinists who are Augustinian often refer to their opponents either as Palladian or semi Pelagius.

But in fact Arminius, who, after whom Arminianism is made was in no sense a Pelagius. He was he was asked much closer Calvin that he was to Pelagius anyway. Is that the questions you had a good over there in Jerusalem_quarter of religions are Jewish, Armenian, Orthodox Jew, you know, if that's not your questions. I need to ask you to move on to your question, no I will get you anything about Kirk. The dictate the land by yeah those three young early 70s. He's a strong dispensations author Lucier you know much about you to read up on him. My dad had books, but he had never shared those things with me right I I have never really met or talked to Salem coven or as far as you know anyone who did. Though I remember he was. He wrote some popular books seems to me like they may been self published books of the time. I'm not sure they they always seem to be kind of a poorly put together books in my opinion, but that he had. It was it had a real emphasis on Bible prophecy from a from a dispensational point of view already sent to Chris in Michigan. Chris, welcome to the neuropathic for going Chris are you there yes I am okay sure call. I threw it. God found great pleasure in every living well I would say it seems like he did.

He said it was very good. I guess that could we could be setting.

He took great pleasure in it. Okay really my the heart of the question. My question is so new animals go to heaven to be with. Well, it's one thing to say that God takes pleasure in animals to be another thing to say they go to heaven. I think God took pleasure in the rocks from the trees and the mountains and the seas to but I don't think they're going to have a good Bible specifically see them and I don't know the trees have eternal life. I think God will be delivered long animals were not told anything about you know whether whether they have any kind of relation with God. That would be redeeming but we seem to get the impression from what we know of animals in the Bible doesn't tell us any otherwise that animals don't really have volition they don't really have free will to choose one where another which makes them amoral now amoral means they're not in moral and they're not moral they're just they don't have any connection with morality because they don't make any choices they have no conception of right and wrong, and if there amoral.

That means they're not particularly good or particular back I'm a week we have had dogs. I'm sure that we thought it was very good. Dogs that that was what they were by nature that's the nature of the dog.

It's not necessary.

Good.

I just like for sheep to follow is not Nestlé good because that's the nature of the sheep doesn't get a particular credit for that, though, if we follow Christ as his sheep. That's it. That's a good thing. That's a good choice. Sheep don't make a choice dogs to make a choice to be good and so there's nothing about an animal that necessarily would connect with the idea of you know, earning heaven or hell.

God may have animals in the newer I, I, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if he did, because animals are so pleasing to us to enter man army and to God.

And so I think that I think there may well be animals and the new earth. I have no nothing in the Bible tell me whether they will be some of the same animals that were here or whether he make new ones, and I don't even know if you make new ones, authors could be anybody that some people would say because about half of the line and the landline done together and Isaiah 11 Isaiah 65 that that means there's gonna be animals there, but I don't think those are describing heaven. Those particular verses so like we have to be. I guess my position we would have to wait and see. And we don't really have any guidance from Scripture on that in my opinion that seeing Marty in national city, California. Welcome to the neuropathic for calling. 1135 but every thing in the book of Daniel, well I think probably I don't know of anything in the book of Daniel.

It hasn't been but but of course there's some things and then another little obscure and hard to know maybe they do refer to two things in a few case I might my my own interpretation of these things is no that they've all been fulfilled.

1130 5M of understanding shall follow to try them into purging to make light to the time of the end because that for a time appointed to say like every generation before us pleasing like catastrophes know whether was World War II or something. It was the end you'll and then got really more about the time to the time of the end complementing as many shall be purified and made why did try to quickly understand what the wife understand off-line thank you sir.

I mean if you're wondering what those passages are talking about our times. I would say not directly or think or talk about the times that are being described in the case of Daniel 1135. I believe it's the time of act of Antiochus epiphanies when the Hasidim, the holy ones among the Jews were standing against the persecution and they were standing for godliness and eventually broke out in the Maccabean revolt of some events and guidance and would be made sure and made white and be tried through that time is very fitting for that period of time that is talking about and likewise in indented chapter 12 where it says that many be made white and so forth. I believe that's talking about the time of the leading up to the fall of Rome of Jerusalem to the Romans and and of course Peter lived at that time and he spoke about the trials of our faith, being as the trying of gold that perishes, but it redounds unto you, honor and glory to God and so forth that's in first Peter 17 so Peter lived at that time that I think Daniel is talking about. In Daniel 12 and he use the same ideas of the Christians are being tried. They are being purified like gold in the furnace and so if it's true of the of the faithful Jews in the days of Antiochus epiphanies, which was 168 years before Christ, or hundred 67 years before Christ, and that is also true in the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. For that period of time, then I would say it be every there be a reason to suggest it could be true that other types may be any time that there is great tribulation for God's people that Debbie my take on it. Robin in Sacramento, California. Welcome to the neuropathic for calling me and wanted to commend you discovered you on the radio little email late.

I would buy your explanation are your commentary on black lives matter. It was on 23 July left 14 that that around my plan because the red approach to taking a stand and yet understanding that no common understanding the spiritual aspect of socialism economy, communism, as they relate to their manifesto that would absolutely wonderful and I appreciate an account that dynamic. To find a balance between the spiritual and the practical lien. My question is coming up here. I wanted to discuss the issue because I come in conflict with my all church about the camp on the left. Popular can where I like you know that he took By Political Issue, Which Is More of a Libertarian Issue and That Spiritual Issue Is by the Religious Constitutional and to Me If the Matter of How God, I've Got People All around Me Getting Call That One, Which I Believe Died before They Had Proper Diagnostic Covered but I Got Free People Nurture Call That One Is Donna Ventilator and I Cannot Figure You Can Name Signature Okay I Will Time Were to Be Done in Seconds with Him of Everything That a New I Agree with Everything Donald Trump but I Disagree with Both of Them on the a Taken a Great Amount, but I Wanted You to Comment on the Ideology in a Practical Element with 19 Well I Think That If Are Going to Say That People Should Wear Masks to Avoid Coded Then Maybe We Should Wear Masks, 365 Days a Year Every Year Because We Want to Avoid the Flu and Other Diseases Culvert Is Much Less Dangerous Than Lots of Things That Are out There, Including, for Example, Abortion Kills More People Than Any Other Cause in the Whole Country Every Year, but We Don't Outlaw That If You're Afraid of Disease. We Can Wear Matching along the Father Is the Covert Thing Is to See A Lot Of Things Right.

Masks Usually Ration and Is Interesting That They Do so, but I Can See Now More People Doing so, Although I Can't See Any Reason for Christians to Be Afraid of Culvert, Especially If You Do the Research and Find out How Not Deadly It Is for Most People I'm Out Of Time. Appreciate Your Call You Listen to the Narrow Path. My Name Is Steve Gray. We Are Listener Supported You like to Help Us out, Go to Our Website.

The Narrow Path.com and Check out How to Support the Narrow.com Thanks for Joining Us