The Narrow Path 9/10

The thing being good afternoon and welcome to the narrowcast radio broadcast Steve Greg were alive for an hour each week. The afternoon taking your calls. If you have questions you'd like to call in with and ask about the Bible with the Christian faith or if you have a different viewpoint smells you'd like to discuss alternative way of seeing things from the way the whole system.

You're welcome to do so you can join us here right now we have some lines open. That may not be true in a few minutes, but it is true. Now if you like to call the number is 844-484-5737 that's 844-484-5737 and Deborah talk to Eli first of all, from Riverside, California, just down the road. Ferocity Eli, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling height for great thank you talking about the devil was created by… Perfect angel, a separate column 14, and I believe what the will of 28.

I want to hear your comments on it and helping to anchor all plants okay well thank you for your call. You like to talk to Joyce. Well, the idea that Satan was a perfect angel and he fell. It's a very very common Christian view and it goes way, way back to early church fathers who taught the same thing. It doesn't go so far back. However, as the Scriptures themselves. The Scriptures don't ever mention the devil being an angel factors no specific reference to the angel to Satan ever having been anything other than what he is now now the Scriptures that are usually used by those who teach this are as you said Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 was a man once nodded a few few lines in the New Testament they use as, for example, when Jesus said in Luke chapter 10 I think it's verse 18 is that I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven, and some people think that means that he was an angel who fell although Jesus doesn't make any reference to Satan ever have been an angel in Revelation chapter 12 it talks about a Dragon which is the devil and his angels making war against Michael and his angels, and the Dragon is cast out of heaven. Some people would make reference to that is the origins of Satan.

But again, that passage doesn't mention St. Evergreen and Angelina from the his first appearance in the book Revelation to the last is a serpent or Dragon.

That's not an angel let evil thing so there is a statement Paul made to Timothy was giving the qualifications for elders in first Timothy chapter 3 I don't remember what verse visits in the first 45 verses of prescriptions in first Timothy three, Paul says that says that he should not be an office meeting a new believer, lest he be puffed up and and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Now the condemnation of the devil. To my mind means the devils condemning him but some people think it means the same condemnation as the devil fell into that is to say if an elder is too immature. He may be proud and puffed up, and fall like the devil did. Now, that's not what it says but that's how some interpret. In fact, the new King James, to their great discredit added the word same, and instead of of the devil to put as the devil.

So in other words, that the new King James decided Chipman to add some words in the text and frankly I think a lot of modern transitions do, so that instead of saying that the man may fall into the condemnation of the devil. They make a Satan that he will fall into the same condemnation as the devil, which is making the assumption that the devil fell through pride and that would be a danger that in an office as an elder might have also all it's interesting that he only thinks an office would probably be danger that if the devil was a holy angel you think you'd be in a better position not to fall, then an immature Christian, but who notes we these are New Testament passages that don't actually ever mentioned the devil being an angel solute. The main passage is the longest passages of people make reference during Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 now, neither of these passages mention the devil, that's interesting is that in Isaiah 1412. In the King James version and the new King James and maybe maybe a few other more traditional translations you do find the word Lucifer there but Lucifer is not a name it's more like nickname and it means the light bearer shining one MorningStar something along those lines and it's that's that's a Latin word. Interestingly enough, the Old Testament that we read was translated from Hebrew into English. However, when you have a King James or new King James in that one verse you have a Latin word. Lucifer, which means light bearer essentially bright one now I'm not really sure how that can be justified. Why would they take a Latin word. Lucifer and stick it in an English translation of the Hebrew Bible, and it's obviously borrowed from the Vulgate, but in most modern translations. We don't have the name Lucifer because it's not a name and because it should've been translated into English like the rest of the Old Testament Hebrew, the Isaiah was written in Hebrew and in that particular verse translation should say shining one or MorningStar or something like that and that's what modern translations do say they don't use that Latin word. Lucifer, unfortunately, because the King James had so much influence on Christianity in the English-speaking world for summary centuries many people assume that Lucifer must be a proper name, and it must be the name of the devil.

Now I want to tell you the word Lucifer is not found anywhere in the whole Bible except there and of course only in the older translations not in the modern are more faithful to the people. Solute really. The Bible doesn't ever have a name Lucifer in it and in the in the translations that do use were Lucifer. They only do so and that one verse so in others.

If Lucifer supposedly the devil then you're going to have to find in that passage because it's not in any other passengers know other passage that mentions Lucifer by that name.

Now does the passage mention the devil anywhere. No. And in fact if you look at the opening verses of that chapter. Isaiah for 14 you'll find that it's a continuation of chapter 13.

No surprise there.

Isaiah 13 and 14 follow each other and they are both prophecies against Babel and against the king of Babylon, in particular in Isaiah chapter 14 verse four, five, and not looking at right now it says take up this lamentation against the king of Babylon. Such addressing the king of Babylon, and it doesn't seining at the devil now of course.

Isaiah like most prophets writes in poetry and he says some poetic things which if you took them literally you have say what he must be writing someone who is not a mere human, King, because you know he wanted to make his throne above the stars of God.

However you have to remember this is a reference to the beginning of Babylon the beginning.

Babylon was the tower Babel and their ambition was to make a tower that reaches into heavens among the stars and so he's basically using symbolic language or poetic language and its talk about Babel and if you aren't sure that I'm right about that. You can be quite positive. If you just read a little further in the same passage so were in Isaiah chapter 14 and I'm turning there now in verse 16 verse 15 it says you should go to be brought down to shale, which is where dead people go to the lowest steps of the pit that says those who see you again is that you this, verse 16. Isaiah 1413 and consider using. Is this the man who made the earth tremble well, it says it's talking to a man. Why would people look at an angel is a are you a man, are you the man who did this know he's talking it says in verse four of the same chapter you take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, the king of Allen was a man and he had great ambitions is very proud and that God brought them down to lowest pit and he symbolically says every procedure down there and shale is a are you the guy who is so such a big shot who shook the kingdoms who gave him so much trouble.

Look your you have become like one of us is exactly what they say.

So that's not really talking with an angel or let me just say this something, say well it really is true it does talk with King about a bit at this point it's talking about the power behind the throne, which is the devil.

Well I could say that about any passage in the Bible.

I suppose if I wanted to if I don't need any proof that I don't need any evidence. But there's nothing in the Bible that says its talk about anything other than the king of Babylon. It's just a tradition is a very old one that says that start with the devil you will not find a reference to the devil in that passage.

The other passage is Ezekiel 28, and beginning around 12 or so it begins to talk to the king of Tyre in a certain way and most people want to say that this is also not talking to the king of Tyre about says it is not really talking to the power behind the throne, which is Satan.

However, I would point out that beginning in chapter 26 of Ezekiel and inclusive of chapter 27 and 28. The whole passage is about Tyre about the fall of Tyre and even about the king of Tyre and some of the earlier passages and it says to the king of Tyre as it was says in verse 12, Ezekiel 28 Son of Man take up a lamentation about for the king of Tyre, and say to him you were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty, you were in Eden, the garden of God. Every precious stone was your covering gives a list of gemstones. It says the workmanship of your temples and pipes was prepared in you from the on the day are created, you were the anointed cherub who covers I established you. You are the holy mountain. You are in the holy mountain of God, etc., etc. so you were perfect in all your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you by the abundance of your trading you became filled with violence within, and you sent out Tyre was a trading city is a merchant city. It was a port city the most prosperous port city at that end of the Mediterranean Sea. Now he says they became corrupted by the abundance of their commerce trading.

Now whoever is talking to was involved in commercial ventures was corrupted by the I don't think anyone has ever speculated that the devil was involved as an angel in heaven. In commercial ventures became corrupted by trading so I'd I don't see how this would fit that now of course there are things in the poetry of the passage that can't be taken literally. If you're going to if you make it a human being.

But the king of Tyre was a human being to say you were perfect in beauty perfect in wisdom. Actually if you read the chapters before better target Tyre.

It says that the king of Tyre said these very things that himself. He's older Prince of Tyre.

He says you've said I am perfect in beauty and perfect in wisdom and so he simply repeating back what the king of Tyre says about himself. He says yeah but you iniquity has been found in you to going down the same.

Now the part about being in Eden and also being a cherub is I think more than anything the features of the passage that people have taken to mean all this must be the devil because he was in Eden and he was a cherub, a person is a cherub erotic a person is not a cherub, a cherub is a an inhabitant of heaven as a supernatural being, not an angel by any means.

If you want to relet cherubs. They are described in Ezekiel earlier on in both chapter 1 and chapter 10 cherubs are described as having each of them has four faces the face of an eagle, the face of a man the face of a lion in the face of an ox and they have a four wings and so there there a strange creature. Softly angels look when they're saying in fact their distinguished in the book of Revelation, we see the four living creatures which apparently her cherubs and then you see a multitude of angels which are something else.

So if we want to say this is literally the person's heart is literally a cherub will he was an angel that he was a cherub something else than an angel. Now more than that if he was literally in the Garden of Eden and is literally a cherub, then he wasn't the devil because the devil and the Guardian was not a cherub. He was a snake. But there was a cherub in the garden.

You might recall when Adam fell, God put a cherub with a flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life.

So, of all the characters that ever lived in the garden of Eden that we know of. There was God there is Adam and Eve. There was the serpent and there is the cherub. Now we know who God is.

Adam and Eve are.

We know the serpent is and by the way, the serpent, Satan. But who's the cherub or whoever it was wasn't Satan because he's one of the different characters in the story so if the king of Tyre was literally a cherub in the garden of Eden. Then he wasn't the devil because the devil is a serpent in the garden and the cherub was something else I would point this out. Three chapters later in Ezekiel 31 Ezekiel is talking about the king of Assyria and he says is as you read the description of him that the Assyrian was a treat. First of all, in verse three it says he was a cedar in Lebanon, which is not literally the case for so he wasn't in Lebanon and he is not a cedar but this is the language of the language of poetry in verse eight of Ezekiel 31 it says that the Assyrian was in the garden of God.

That's the garden of Eden. He says that all the cedars in the garden of God could not hide it.

He says no tree in the garden of God was like in beauty. And then he says I made it beautiful with its multitude of branches so that all the trees of Eden envied it that were in the garden of God.

Now this is describing the Assyrian nation, or perhaps the Assyrian king is not clear whether start of the nation king, but the Assyria said to have been a tree envied by the trees in the garden of Eden, so it must be true. It was around at the time of the garden of Eden was around for the trees in the garden into and maybe even in the garden of Eden. Now of course it's not literally true. Assyria didn't exist in the garden of Eden. Assyria arose from the nations. After the flood of Noah, which was thousands of years later so Ezekiel is not speaking literally here. He said that if the Assyrian is a tree in the garden of Eden and the king of Tyre is us cherub in the garden of Eden. We have every reason take both of them equally literally or equally, not literally.

And I think would have to say, not literally, is is the only sensible way to go on that because it's not the case that to either the Assyrian nor the king of Tyre were literally in the garden of Eden.

So what we have we have Isaiah 14 which is about the king of Babylon. Then we have the king of Syria or the Assyrian nation. Perhaps in that and and and that's it.

Ezekiel 28 and we don't have any passage in either book or any other book that mentioned the devil. So's army course, the devil is mentioned in a few places in the Old Testament but not in these places.

There's no mention of Satan in these places so I'm going to have to say those who say the devil is a fallen angel, I would just have to ask where does it say that maybe he was see whenever I give this expiration, there's a good rumor goes around that I don't believe that II say the devil wasn't a fallen angel. I don't say the devil wasn't voltage. I don't know if he was not. Nothing is said about it in Scripture. Maybe he was. But I how would we know in a week.

We can't just to know this intuitively. The Bible doesn't tell us. So let's just say if the devil is a fallen angel God didn't mention it. And Jesus said about the devil and John 844. He said the devil was a murderer from the beginning. Doesn't sound like he thought he had earlier career something good and it says at first John 38 also the devil sin from the beginning at six so there's no mention of the devil ever doing anything but sending or being anything but a murderer.

He was nosing from the beginning were told and there's nothing in the bottle that tells us of any alternative view about his origin so I guess I run a long time on this, but there's a lot of material to cover, especially when you are attempting to deal with something almost everybody's heard you on biblical ideas about at least that the Bible is silent about was present when extra biblical expectantly. Okay where To Chris from Venice, Florida Chris, welcome to the narrow path extra calling a good evening Dean, click here.

Florida get to talk to you again a little while and I really appreciate your ministry at I got 15 years. The first one is really called me to open my eyes to partial plagiarism and my question for today is the difference between full and partial plagiarism. I've been looking into. Both are good looking into a major debate. I think with Don yeah I would lift the mother debate with all wrapped in a white gold round yeah yeah looking at your debate Michael Brown sharing the message with friends and people in church and be a little off, ostracized, but what you think like a question I would take a golf line you if you were to give the really good punch of Jeff the nuts and bolts differences between full and partial credit rhythm and what is left for the be fulfilled. Whether it the millennial and how that the millennial workout room of the neck, you know, in the millennial. I know you I okay I got your question now. Okay okay welcome.

I think the particular sector, but okay well predator is him. The word means.

It comes from the Latin word for past Prater's pastor Latin and Prater is him is one of the options for interpreting prophecy when you look at a prophecy that predicted something let's say back in the days of in the days of Jeremiah or in the days of Zechariah were the days of Amos days of Ezekiel and Daniel. When you look at proxies like category or the book of Revelation you you have some options you can either say will these prophecies have been fulfilled in the in the centuries that followed them as the proxies were given at a certain time and then the predictions came true at a certain time and we now look back on them as fulfilled prophecies. That's that's that that's looking at them in a patristic way or we can say no. These have not yet come true. These are proxies that have yet to come true. That's looking at them in a futuristic way so Prater means past future means future, and so in most prophecies in the Bible it predicts something everyone has to decide I has this been fulfilled already or is this going to fulfilled in the future.

Now, if you say in the future.

That's a futurist view. If you send the past. That's a predators view now. Actually, all Christians are partially predators because there's hundreds of Old Testament prophecies that everybody knows have been fulfilled in the past there's prophecies about the fall of Edom and Moab and you know Babylon and in Syria and we know those profits for fulfilled and ancient history.

Before long before the time of Christ.

We know there are prophecies about the fall of Jerusalem that Jesus gave which you know he did it.

For example, in Luke 19 when he wept over Jerusalem said you know that your enemies get it, build siege mounds around you and your delay you to the ground and not one still be left on another etc. that's a prophecy everyone recognizes was fulfilled in A.D. 70. That's not even debatable. So there's lots of proxies like that most Christians think there's hundreds of prophecies about the Messiah that were fulfilled by Jesus and that's one reason we know he was the Messiah because he fulfilled so many proxies so when you look at the proxies the Bible. Every Christian believes that hundreds of them have been fulfilled in the past, but also most Christians believe that there are some proxies that have not been fulfilled yet and there to be fulfilled in the future and those have to do with the future second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the church. The new heavens and new earth being created these things now. Almost all Christians believe that some of those prophecies are future, but there are some who don't. There's some who believe that all prophecies were fulfilled the past. Those are the full progress date they might, they come selves consistent predators, but what they're saying is if you believe that some of these proxies were from the past. It's only reasonable to assume they all are. Which of course is rather not intelligent thing to say since when Jesus walked the earth. They could say a lot of proxies and fulfilled the past, but not all of them. Even the full predators believes they weren't all fulfilled with Jesus. I believe your all fulfilled in 70 A.D., after Jesus had gone so the fact that prophecies are not all fulfilled at the same time is a given. We know that prophecies about the fall of Edom didn't happen at the same time dispositive of the fall of the Syria and the fall the Siri didn't happen at centers and follow Babel and so forth. So prophecies you all have different times of fulfillment. Now the full predators believes everything that's ever been predicted in the Bible, old or New Testament has been fulfilled and therefore there is no future predicted events. There's no future second coming is no future resurrection of the dead was no future direction of future new heavens and new earth. They say that all of those happened either literally or sent figuratively in A.D. 70.

Around about that time when Jerusalem fell.

That's the full predators. Now that's a very new view. It really arose pretty much in the 1970s, I was pretty much only there were there were very few people who took a view similar to that in the late 1800s, but basically it that modern full predators movement began in the 1970s or so. Such a very new idea.

Until then, Christians all new that Jesus is going to come back in the future and that that hasn't happened yet the resurrection has met, but the full predators to doubt that now I'm a partial predators like everybody else. I believe some prophecies have been fulfilled in the past. So part of the Bible is predators strictly and contribute but some still remain to be fulfilled a futuristic, partial predators, service, and in a sense, all Christians are partial predators. I believe that the book of Revelation is largely fulfilled in the past and that all of the discourse of this writer disagree with some people who are futurist about the things what do I think is yet to be fulfilled in the future, while the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture of the church and then you have zero. Those are things I think are yet to come. Everything else appears to be filled and so that's that's my position on the question asked. I hope that clarifies things for your listening to the narrow path were not done.

It sounds like were number not wait another half hour. We just take this break at the bottom of the hour to let you know that we are listener supported.

If you like help us pay the radio bills stay on the air.

You can write to the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 -4 website. The narrow path.com copyright is negated nearly in the path that leads to life.

Continued nearing Pat everything in today's media show is over and enjoying my visit in the narrow path.com find free topical audio teaching blog articles neither teachings in times of narrow Panamanian shadows rethinking for supporting the listener supported narrow path that Steve Greg remembered the narrow path.com radio broadcast Steve Greg in our lives for another half hour taking your calls you have questions about the Bible, the Christian faith Christian life Christian apologetics Christian history.

We can talk about those things. If you have a different viewpoint for the host audit balance.

Comment we could talk about that too will be glad to have you number to call is 844-484-5737 and our lines are not entirely full so if you call now there's a possibility you get through number is 844-484-5737 our next color today is Michael from the Dallas-Fort Worth area hi Michael looking to the narrow path. Thanks for calling yes or listen, I've got a question I've been reading parts of the Benedict option and I haven't read it, I I've heard of again.

So there's an issue and there is that he touches on in the relationship that Christians have with the modern corporation, and particularly large corporations and I'm becoming increasingly uncomfortable with this relationship.

Myself and no benefits the consumer and at the employee and I'm just wondering if maybe you could get some sense insight into biblical principles that might apply to that the Benedict option. I need you to help me out here what what is the relation between the church and and big corporations. Christians interact with these big corporations and increasingly I see them acting in antagonistic leak towards Christian principles icing and in the Benedict option author talks about kind of separation that we need to begin sending note, Benedict. Referring to the monastic men and how they separated themselves from the larger world systems and so I just wondering if you have any any insights into that.

I mean, I like corporations in that they provide no modern conveniences are really like cars and computers and air conditioning modern healthcare… I see something better than where you know that corporations are our their their aligning with certain leftist principles that I think are antithetical to Christianity and also in the employee employer and find a high-speed letter, intimidation and coercion going on thereto that I'm uncomfortable with that is happening more and more and I'm awfully glad that I'm not an employee. These big corporations because they are moving so much more toward the other deceptions of critical race theory, and social justice issues that are certainly anti-Christian in tone, but I will say this I don't know that we have an obligation to do business only with other Christians there is. I mean, it is an option. I mean, from time to time here that a infective and even now there someplace. I will not shop in certain restaurants. I won't eat at because I've heard of some position. They took on something and it relied on, put money into their pockets. On the other other and on the other hand it's very difficult to to get some kinds of services from Amazon.

For example, so convenient, but it's it's very anti-Christian very prone to same thing with YouTube and things like that and we got a lot of our videos on YouTube. It's you I would if if I had the choice I would use only Christian sources for some of the things that I and I'm not aware of the Christian alternative to YouTube. For example, so innocent, like I think that it would depend on the conscience of the personnel because of China's using prisoner labor and stuff like that. Some of prisoners of conscience. Christian pastors that were imprisoned were being used as slave labor to do to build your own to make products that we buy at Walmart and almost almost anything at Walmart was made in China and me lots of Christians will boycott Walmart and I'm not against and I think it's I think the principal thing to do.

Although I don't know in the Bible if if that's something that were commanded to do, but I but I I believe in boycotting groups that you know that you absolutely do not want to put any money in their pockets. On the other hand, you know what corporations do on a large scale against Chris and sometimes small shops and their owners will do who are not Christians you know that they'll take the money and they'll use it for their sinful lifestyles. For whatever and and Dell support charities that that you promote whatever abortion or whatever so I don't know if there's a thing you can do to keep all of your money from trickling down into evil uses. I think that I think is simply a matter of conscience and I certainly respect people who who have not yet another thing when I buy gas for my car when I buy groceries at at the supermarket. You know when I go to Lowe's to get something I I have to admit I don't do a lot of research to find out where there you where they're donating money. I'm sure most of her given some to Planned Parenthood or something.

And patients are using that no ignorance to exploit you know there is power in addition actually is an American identity do you mean on the other hand he could well understand that we could reduce our consumption as it no primary principle to begin with what I think all Christians probably need to reduce their consumption will not all Christians, the all American Christians probably are more consumer stick than than Christians in poor countries are earned and a lot of the car consumption leads to the wasting of money that we didn't need to spend on things we didn't need to get in which some people who really do have needs like to feed their children. They could use that money and that's why I really believe Christian should give an increasing percentage is much as they can to those missions that help the poor and that spread the gospel rather than rather than increasing our standards of living, but on the other hand, I don't like to be jilted by the fact that I live in America and my income and my expenses are greater than those of someone in Argentina makes $12 a day. You know something you can't live very well on $12 daily sheet government help here so it's his word, a dilemma, and I think that people just have to really I think Christians cannot judge each other but they really need to judge themselves as to what they are supporting and so forth and and any H when she father consciously God will convict people if they're doing something that he's displeased by them doing if there if they're looking to be convicted if they're looking to be sensitive to what the Holy Spirit so like I like I said I know people who won't buy at Walmart because everything there is made in China. Well I don't go to Walmart very often. I don't like going to Walmart much but I am not boycotting them completely and some of the products I buy. There are food products and things of that which are not made in China. But it's it's really hard to know how to avoid everything in a secular pagan world which we live in that the exit to buy from only from people who will use the money for the kingdom of God. I'd love to do that. I don't know if that's an option open to us. Now there are some things probably that you can't get from Christians and we might be able to just not get them at all warm and perhaps you don't need to have television service reps you don't need to have a cell phone but I think most people feel like they do. Although there are some new options for some options on so providers now. I think better that are not leftist, and so forth. So I think it I think you bring something up that we can't be, we can't impose legalism on other people because the Bible doesn't anywhere say that Christians can only buy things from other Christians that would certainly be the ideal because we, the Bible says in Galatians 610 as you have opportunity to do good to all people, but especially those of the household of faith and certainly if their businesses that yield the owners need to feed their families and pay their bills and some of those orders are Christians and others are not. Well, we shouldn't be callused or non-Christian in what we do have a priority to help those who are Christian, so if we can get services or goods from Christians that I think we should choose to do so. If there are goods and services that we just can't buy from a Christian company because they are not manufactured by Christians you might buy from a store that's owned by Christian but he's getting the stuff from some sort made in China or something you know you got to get a summer to so I just think it's you go crazy. I would think if you had a real legalistic site thanks and I'm not spend any money anywhere were any my money will get in the hands of Planned Parenthood or the Chinese or anyone else that who's policies I object to. I think God knows that we can't trace all that money every week, we'd have spent her whole life researching everything I ever felt I had a friend that was in the oil business before he became a pastor and I was talking to him about this issue several years ago. Every time you thought it take to get us a portion of that money goes to some where Helena will do some company and you can't escape it really. But I think that it said the danger to to have an all or nothing type of mentality dies like oh well, it's impossible to forget it or this kind of attitude that oh well, you can impose that on the legalism mean that that happens all the time and libertine freefall malware. I will do whatever I want to because you know I am under grace, and you can't tell me what to do so is going to move on.

I need to see. I just want say I think that this is a matter of personal stewardship and and you're right's personal stewardship is always black and white. I mean, it's always possible that you could miss one more meal and get five more dollars to Haiti in mean you can always cut back a little more and give a little more and and yet I don't know that I stewardship is a personal responsibility, and we will answer to God for where you stand before God is going to get really give account for every nickel that he ever put in our hands and say 100 would you do that. Did you did you support the kingdom of God, or did you just know feather your own nest and make yourself comfortable. That's me working offensively, we don't answer to each other for it so it's it's kind of it's kind of nuance because like one guy gives 20% of his income to the poor. Another person gives 30%. They might have the same income and it might be possible for the person gives 20% to adjust his standard of living, so that he could give 30% like the guy the other guy does but it's it's none of my business.

I mean, unless he's sitting with his money. I don't and I don't think buying something from a non-Christian is sinning unless you think some sinful to buy.

I so it's it's something I think legalism is something very much to be avoided here on the other hand, I think Christians need to have probably more than they do gently attend her conscience about where their money is going and how much they're spending on themselves and whether they could get by with less by by only buying such things as they can buy with a clear conscience, knowing you know where the money is going and so forth that something for him and to make your own mind. Some people are very religious and some people are very libertine, as you say yes, and I think that I think stewardship is is not not legalistic or libertine. We have obligation and will answer to God for our stewardship, but we don't and I think you know in my mind and my mind.

One these days I think about our brothers and sisters in developing countries have have clean water to drink and I'm going out here blowing my money on stuff that's going to fill up my garage with garbage. No and not just meaningless to your parents are very helpful. Like my procedure. It's a difficult question and that's just the kind of thing needs to be discussed and people may be thinking more about thanks for calling.

Okay thank you God bless you. Okay our next caller is Seth Ferrell from Long Beach, California Pharaoh, welcome to the neuropathic for calling. Thanks for taking my call.

Either moment, I have two questions might be Amos 811. I think my question to you each.

When do you think that God brought the famine of his word Stout's and my second question would be, you talked before about in the garden. Adam, I don't know the work of Adam's hands was cursed or something.

And of course the snake was cursed, but you would not. Yes, you questions and IQ them up there. Thank you for okay thanks for your call. Good targeted.

Let me take the second question first on some online the curse, as we call it that was uttered against Adam and Eve and the serpent in Genesis 3. After after the sin is not so much that man was cursed, but the ground was cursed for a second. It made it became sort of a trickle down to be a curse on him because his good have to deal with thorns and thistles in the sweat of his face again eat his food, but it doesn't naturally make it a curse on the man. It just made his life more difficult because the ground was cursed of the woman was not cursed, but man and woman both had undesirable consequences. I think I think that's what might many people speak of as the curse, the cursor came on men and women of the Bible is referred it specifically as a curse on them but it's very clear that Eve was going to have more difficulty or sorrow, as it says in childbearing and Adam was can have more difficulty in doing what he did. Of course this reflects both of their major roles.

The woman the man was made to attend the ground and produce food in the first place and Eve was made to help them be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth by having children, and together they were to cultivate the world and fill it with people now man's job of cultivating the earth was way more difficult for him in woman's job of having babies in full, being fruitful in filling your discovery more difficult for her that the snake, of course, said he was certainly everything that was said to him was strictly a curse, but I don't.

I don't know that the man is said to be curse so much as the ground so man and woman, both of them.

They were they were subjected to more difficult circumstances but I'm looking for right now here in Genesis 320 says to Adam's curse.

It is the ground for your sake and toil you should eat of it all the life etc. etc. and to the woman he says I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception and in pain you shall bring forth your children so those are not stated to be curses, but the serpent's curse in verse 14, because you've done this, you are cursed more than all the cattle, etc. and all the beasts of the field. So as far as the word curse being used.

The devil got a curse on them but Adam and Eve weren't personally cursed by third, there their sin was going to make their tasks that they already were responsible to do more difficult. Yes my name is chapter 8 verses 1112, especially verse 11. Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, that I will send famine on the land not a fan of bread nor thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. This probably speaks of a time when God would not be sending profits hearing the word of the Lord in those days they didn't have printed Bibles usually meant the Holy Spirit speaking to the prophets.

The word of the Lord to the people and there would be a famine in the sense that it wouldn't be available. God wouldn't be speaking in verse 12 he goes on says they should wander from sea to sea, from northeast, they shall run to and fro, seeking the word of the Lord shall not find so it's essentially saying when people want to get a word from the Lord. They won't be able to agree as is, as it were a famine for that. Remember how Saul wanted to get a word from God when he was facing battle with the Philistines and it says God didn't speak to him by dreams or by Herman's lumen or by ordinary ways like that.

Visions and so he went to which he was so eager to get something from the Lord.

He went to which called up Samuel who had died in the séance and that try to get a word that way but of course this is Amos is considered related in Saul's time.

Generations later, so he looks forward to a time when people in general will not be able to find the word of God and he will be speaking. I personally think this must refer to what we call the inter-testament will. Because there was 400 years after Amos's time and before Jesus came when God in sending profits at all the of the last prophet we know of the God sent to Israel before Jesus came was Malachi and that was 400 years before Christ. So Malachi 400 years before Christ than 400 years later, John the Baptist and Jesus pressing between that was 400 years regarding scented profits.

I think that's probably the famine is target people real Israel want to know what got us a reason is not talking and you know presumably why wasn't he talking. I suspect it may have been because he had already spoken and they weren't listening. He had already given them the law and the prophets for several centuries previous and they just didn't respect them. They didn't follow them and you know why would I keep talking to you if you got your hands over your ears so I think I just kind is it okay you don't, you know like hearing from me song I can talk to you for well. However, he did still have a promise to keep and that was the promise of the Messiah coming so that. If science had to end eventually.

With the coming Messiah. That's that's when I perceive the famine does refer to that.

That season that 400 years before Jesus came.

A lot of people think of it, of course, a futuristic link like there's time coming when we will be able to hear the word of the Lord and I but I would not say that that isn't possible, but I don't think that there's any reason in the passage to look that far ahead when there was a striking period of 400 years when this was fulfilled. I don't think there's any suggestion here that we have to look beyond that to the end times are like that for the fulfillment of it all right working to talk next to Eddie from Macomb, Michigan Eddie, welcome to the neuropathic calling me by saying I've been the biggest jerk. To my way. I had eventually had good at all to shame. Marriage, why no and and now sheet she wants a divorce and and I'm kind going on I Will be done inside and I repent they know how much you want to believe. Yes, she have you cheated on. Note whether is a believer, she probably shouldn't divorce you as she has. She had received a counsel from Christians about this readability-seeking counsel have a marriage counselor as well that will that's good and sounds like you need 1 inch and something she needs one to because the Bible doesn't really give a woman grounds for divorce. Just because her husband is a jerk. You know it's it's it if you were cheating on her, or abandoned her that I'd say she has a biblical case for divorce if you the if you been abusing her. Then she probably is a case not for divorce but for moving out until used. Learn how to stop abusing her. If if you've just been cold toward her, neglected her will.

That's a very bad thing terrible thing but that's not grounds for divorce. It's something where you of course need to be getting some kind of godly counsel and I hope it is Christian counseling you're going to not just secular counsel noted that she wants nothing to do with the Lord. Now she's not thinking about the cheese year operating with her feeling all right, let's see. She's in a position that the Bible describes as somebody who the seed is sown, and it it takes off, but it doesn't have a roots in it because it's on shallow ground with rock underneath and then says when the sun comes up.

It withers the it withers the plant and it dies. Jesus said that's those who when they hear the gospel they believe for a while but when difficulties when tribulation center and persecutions come because word they fall away. Now that's if she doesn't want to do the Lord. Now she's in that position, she was a professing Christian.

Apparently she was going to be Christian up to a certain point she's willing to suffer a certain amount for her faithfulness to God. But she wasn't. She had a limit and apparently she feels that she left see their roots were not very deep and she's been in tribulation intermarriage with a very difficult man and therefore she's bailed on God because if she doesn't care what Jesus thinks she's not a Christian Christian somebody who's a follower of Jesus. If if you're not if you don't care.

Jesus thinks that you're not a follower of Jesus. So anyway, I feel that she does need some counseling alone not so much even marriage counseling as just being a Christian who enduring hardship because a lot of our hardships come in marriages but but hardship is not an excuse for denying God or for betraying God for breaking the house that you made to God. Christians are supposed to be more committed to God than that I can't. I can't change her wife's mind and I can't drink for you if she's leaving on a Maccabean position of doing to change that for you but I think it's very good. I think that you should continue getting counsel and learn to be a better husband, and even if she divorces you keep learning because she may change her mind if she sees change she might not like there's no promise there but if you start treating her well if you start being a different kind of a man is, she may decide that you know whatever it was she loved about you and she started out the marriage that that's still something there that she will that Shula value, but you never really know. There's no promise you please would you please pray for me the please and 11 listening. I really needed. I really needed your name is Eddie. All right yeah right yeah let me procure now Eddie I thought I pray for Eddie and his wife both of them are going through struggles in their Christian walk. Both of them have defects in their Christian walk.

But he's trying to repent and get better may be too little too late.

We don't know, but perhaps father you can soften her heart and his given patients to pursue the right way and even if she doesn't come back for a long time. Wherever I pray that he'll be a better man through it. Hillard learned his lesson with the same.

Their marriage asking Jesus.

All right, Eddie – erotic time listening to the narrow path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Greg and we are alive Monday through Friday at the same time. At the same station. You can also hear us online at our website or on the mobile app you don't have the mobile app will get it free go to where you get your abs search for the narrow path.com you find that you can listen to the program on your phone or iPad anywhere you are at a time and there's other resources on the we are listener supported. If you'd like to help us stay on the air.

You can write to the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 or go to the website. The narrow path.com. Let's talk again tomorrow.

Publishing