The Narrow Path 10/21

Good afternoon and welcome to the narrow path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Greg and were alive for an hour each weekday afternoon, we have an open phone line you call in with the questions we talked about the if you have a different viewpoint from the host. Feel free to call in and we'll talk about that as well. The number to call is 844-484-5737 fax 844-484-5737 our first collagenase general calling from Portland Oregon to Darrell.

Welcome to the narrow path extra calling hello Darrell later yes I don't like I was referencing that there was possibly light lying in the New Testament churches of that time he referenced the Corinthians that there is saying that the couple seeking from the cup of being in the reference to that idea have any information on them like it was spiked with drugs or something yeah Leslie is a terrifying yeah well I don't know what the customs were of the other.

Even I don't think I would get that information from what Paul said in first Corinthians 10. There were he talks about you can't drink of the you can't drink and eat at the table of the devil and at the table of the Lord at the same time I don't think he was talking with the contents of what they're eating and drinking so much that they were at the feasts of my daughters eating food sacrificed to idols that were served up to the public as a usually has in honor of the demonic God and so just as Christians would take their love feast or agape feast in honor of remembering Christ, so that idle temples would have these feasts honoring their gods so it was the fact that some Christians were actually doing both. They were participating in the church and in the Christian love feasts and they were also going to these public health feasts and the idle temples and the problem was not really what was served.

There are been, but I don't know that spiked wine or not they might have. I wouldn't deny it, but I don't think that be the significant point. I don't think you same year lease. This is the devils table because the spike in the one he sent this the devil's Temple because this is that worshiping the devil and so that would be my my treatment of that particular verse. What they may have put in the wind. At least feast. I don't know. I haven't started that out and I don't really I don't think it make a difference to Paul's point was saying that he was. Churches were love potion that he referenced that mean cycling to could be. I mean it is, is this whole discussion intended to point out that the Bible would see it as inappropriate for Christians to use drugs or something like that as of the issue here. The concern that validating that his experiences and that Christianity exported the same, though he sent try to say that that the Bible is teaching that it's okay for Christians to drink a spiked line is at the point where they eat and drink my client are use drugs because Christians used in the first century Christians a lot of things that there were there were some Christians living as a guy in the Christian church who lived in sexual immorality with his stepmother. That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

In fact, the Bible says that had to be brought under church discipline for that. When Paul talks about people are Christians eating at the table games is you can't do that if you're Christian so there's no sense in which that would be approved. Solomon if if there if you could historically find that in fact, some Christians were drinking wine that had some are, your consciousness altering chemicals attitude that would in no sense say and therefore it's okay, Christians, non-Christians do are okay and especially if Irenaeus was speaking of that, I'm sure he is he is expressing his disapproval.

Paul was certain was expressing his disapproval of any of the table demons and prescriptive stamps so you know if I give the whole practice itself is not endorsed. If anything it said it would be condemned like I got again. I don't think it has to do with drugs because talking about but if it's sunny Saturday. I think it is about that.

Well, it's a condemnation of what they're doing is not a it's not an endorsement. It takes a lot to Darrell Fester, John from Jackson, Wyoming, talking to the narrow path extra calling would you explain the position of agreement with the old hose.

People in why rejected. Well I that's a position I actually went through a transition screw on my way out of the dispensationalism for those who don't know premillennialism is the idea that there is a millennial or a thousand years of Christ ringing on earth that will occur after Jesus comes back.

That is, he will return before a thousand year millennium. And so it's a premillennial return of Christ ago premillennialism now among people who are premillennialists premillennialists there are two different major groups. One is the dispensational group and one is the historic premillennial group the historic premillennial group would be those who hold a form of premillennialism that was held actually by some of the church fathers in the first three centuries. Some of the church fathers were in fact premillennial, but they didn't hold to the distinctives of the modern system called dispensationalism both systems with the historic premillennial and the dispensational premillennialists have something in common and that is that they believe that Jesus will set up a thousand year reign on earth. When he comes back, but the differences between them are. You mentioned one of them is that the historic premillennialists do not believe in a pre-tribulation rapture that is the dispensational is the modern system have created an idea that there's a seven year tribulation before Jesus comes back which is preceded by the removal of the church from the earth and got to take them away take us away before the seven year tribulation. Then Jesus will come back at the end of the seven years and set the millennial kingdom. That's the dispensational view there's rapture. And then there's a seven year tribulation and then there's the coming of Christ and the exception of the millennial kingdom listed dispensational program. Now that historical premillennialists did not believe in this pre-tribulation rapture. They believe that the church we rapture it of course and resurrected as the Bible teaches, but lately that wouldn't happen until the end of time that is until Jesus comes back, but they still believe that when Jesus does come back, he will set up a millennial kingdom. So both could both views are premillennial, but they are one of them is pre-tribulation rapture that be the dispensational system and the other be post-tribulation after the big leader.

Rafe happens at the end I was raised as a dispensation so I believe that a pre-tribulation rapture and of future millennium as I was starting on my own out one of the first things that change my views that the preacher rapture. I moved my position for being pre-tribulation supposed tribulation because coming at this early stage of my studying. I was realizing that nothing in the Bible predicts a pre-tribulation rapture infected.

It says the opposite says that Christians will go through tribulation says that Jesus will raise his people on the last day, not seven years before the last day so it became clear the Bible nowhere teaches and in fact denies a preacher relational rapture. So I adopted the post tribulation, premillennial view that is the recalled historic premillennial, but I haven't studied the tribute that the millennium question. In fact I didn't even know there's a question about I knew from the beginning that some people didn't believe in a preacher rapture like I did but I didn't know that any Christians didn't believe in future millennium. My teachers never inform you that and as I studied the millennial question. Later, after I'd already become a historic premillennialists and I'd given up the pre-tribulation rapture.

My further studies led me to see the whole millennial question differently, and by the way I change my mind entirely on my state of the Scripture.

I was not aware when I was making this transition in my view about the millennium that anyone had ever doubted Jesus will set up a millennial kingdom because our that's I think that's what the whole church always believed and yet, as I studied the Scripture. I begin absent problems in certain parts of the doctrine and then as I stood further had problems in other parts of Dr. and then others.

Eventually I had to abandon the premillennial view altogether, but I didn't know that I had embraced.

Now something that anyone else ever held.

I just thought maybe on the only person who just can't see the premillennial view. In this passage or in the Bible at all, and then later some years later, I encountered another person who held the view I had come to and I was informed. This is called millennialism.

That's the view that the church held for at least 1500 years and so I was a little relieved because I thought maybe as a heretic, like I couldn't not believe what I saw. It was the Scriptures fairly plain against premillennialism and for right now know to be told all millennialism cell. I became an millennial's about knowing there was such a thing, and I was relieved to learn that there is not only such a thing. But it was the majority view of the church throughout history so that's that's what I went through and so I did. I fully understand the ethos of the of the historic premillennialism, but for me, historic premillennialism was just a transitional point between my dispensationalism and my all millennialism heard you for all millennial you know what he was not technically a millennial. He was actually dispensation us but he didn't believe in dispensationalism.

He was a he was Plymouth brethren of the dispensational view is created in the Plymouth brethren movement and the Plymouth brethren mode has been officially dispensational in their viewpoint, and he is a lot. He was a lifetime Plymouth brethren, but he did reject a lot of the things in dispensationalism, and when he actually would exegete passages he exegete them. Just like in millennialist, but he but he he he didn't ever call himself a dispensation us because he didn't agree with much in it, but I don't think he ever called himself and all millennialism fact, I think I've read his treatment of Revelation 20. Before they gave me the impression he still thought that it started in the future millennium, but he didn't really talk eschatology very much FF Bruce talk more about theology in general and a lot of the things that millennial statement theology in general he was. He set in his commenters.

He never sounded very much liquor dispensations are premillennialists all already got busted on Effexor, Abraham from Spokane, Washington. Welcome to the narrow path to talk to. Thank you very much to be honored mine.

Thank you so little about technical questions. The applicable question. Sometimes when I hear caller's phone into the broadcast I hear an echo and I don't know if you just as I mean, if I could be something that my friendly reminder to all the callers department to the radio broadcast, please turn your radios down.

I don't know if that's a B at the end that's coming through on the radio sometimes and sometimes sometimes it might be in preventing people from hearing the call with questions or hearing your responses on the second question website do you utilize PayPal for that purpose is that there is a PayPal option and there's a at the website doesn't link this has been tags as donations and it basically gives our mailing address of people to send donations that would also give a few options. PayPal is one of them quick pay I think is another letter from them stating there's I'm not familiar with these. I don't really use these payment options, but the creator of our website was able to include them. So yes, I believe we get a substantial amount of support for the program through PayPal that these topics before new audio lectures on the website that just about me to them and all movement brother: and asked a question regarding the resurrected glorified members of the body of Christ to live and live a calm after the second advent question I had second question in Matthew seven and verse 23 and 25 verse 21. Working. Speaking about those he has to depart from him, the same group with a group of people that knows only the ship on one side and the great final passage in Matthew 25 group known as the last of group norms the group to group norms is just two groups. The same group of people who has to depart that my second question in the resurrected student Revelation 20 serving in your opinion right now. Your first question from Revelation 22 two you are saying is necessary to live in the glorified body or know that I did that mean for the hearing of the nation. Question two live in the resurrected.

Well I don't know the answer because much of this is symbolic. We are certainly described recently described as eating with Christ in the kingdom and the evening at his table in the wedding feast and things like that.

A lot of language of eating is found in these descriptions, but frankly most of these descriptions are very high, highly symbolic passages where it may be that what we know what we the function of eating for us might be a different function in our new state that I don't know why I just take it from there we probably will eat but I guess I'll have to wait and find out it I take you know I recognize the symbolism of Revelation, but when I don't see any reason to necessarily take it symbolically. I like by default. Take many things fairly literally. But with with an open mind that maybe this is not going to be as literal as we might think of it as far as the people at the judgment whether the hypocrite sends the and the goats, and so forth are all the same as just two groups are more. I don't at either the sheep and the goats parable obviously separates the fates of the sheep from that of the goats and we only have those two mentioned but there's there's also mention the parable of his brethren says to the sheep. Inasmuch as you did this to my brethren, you did it to me into the goats as you did not do this to my brethren did not do it now.

I generally assume that the brethren are the same as the shape that is say Christ brothers are those who have God as their father and therefore there part of his flock, but one could argue I wouldn't do it myself.

One could argue that there's actually three categories there. There's the brethren. And then there's the sheep who treated the brethren well and then there's the goats who did not.

So were only told what happened. Sheep and goats, and therefore, I think there's really only two groups, one could argue not initially very persuasively think that there might be 1/3 group that are the brethren and their best is simply not in the picture is not discussed and your your last point was. I like to serve right again will have to see how that is.

But it's a this idea that forever people use on clouds with halos playing harps is certainly not a biblical picture it's a it's more of a parody based on some of symbolic visions of John in Revelation chapter 4 and five but Revelation 2122 the saints of God, serve God, that's also highly symbolic passage, so it's hard to know we were not given a description. The interesting thing. Maybe perplexing to some is that the Bible speaks very little detail about heaven or hell. They're just not very many passages that even talk about it and the ones that do talk about it are very brief, usually on detailed and and and the details that are given are usually couched in a lot of symbolism, so it must be God's intention that we don't know a lot about it yet it's not his intention that he he bribes us with descriptions of of glory, and so forth were told that there is a destiny like that, but most of God's communication to us has to do with how he wants us to live and because of that he doesn't really describe what serving him look like and one in some of the parables Jesus describes it as his servants who are have been good stewards will reign with him over cities your 1/5 cities were over 10 cities in the parable of the aminos in Luke chapter 19, but that too is a parable and it may not really connect in a literal, one-to-one sense, with what were to be doing so I honestly don't. I don't know that I can give you description because I don't think the Bible does not. There will be a creation to rule over and there be other living creatures. Animals are what I don't know I mean I don't know what's could be there but something is be rolled over God's original intention in making Adam and Eve, was to rule over the animals and perhaps in some sense over nature in general, whether that's going to be how we serve him in the new earth or whether whether it's can be greatly expanded to ruling over other people I don't know. We just aren't given enough information as a safety information we do have is usually not in passages of the most literal sort so even if we would collect the information is there. It's not always possible to know if the information stated in terms of inventor literal and it might simply present something very unlike what were familiar with your answers and your patience with all the callers thank you so much again. I think Abram contacted you to bless you all and I think you talk next to John from San Diego John, welcome to the narrow path. Thanks for calling the question you not prepared to say okay that's fine just just call back when you're more prepared.

I appreciate it's good to be aware that your some people some people when they call their not all prepared but they don't seem to realize that they just kind of rambled on, by the way, I'm trying to hang up that call gone to another, my equipment is not responding as you if you're listening yesterday my quick cut out altogether.

And it was really a bad thing, but I'm I'm on the road I'm I'm traveling and therefore not really using my home equipment using remote equipment and depends very much on the Internet and I'm using them portable Wi-Fi device from Verizon and sometimes really hard to get steady service on it which is bad thing for radio program.

They were working now a little bit slow on Michael from Sacramento, California is next and once again my my computer is not responsible studio would you put on Michael Forney, Michael yes you think you second Peter 310, 313 treatment of that I read this passage to be clearly referencing the end of the physical universe.

The little literal destruction of all things the world in such there's so many examples in the Old Testament of apocalyptic language very very similar to that Isaiah, Mike and I we can go to a lot of those guys come in judgment and in the mountains melt like waxing and the collapsing universe language. The destruction it looks like the stars are falling from the heavens, and so on. But what happened God is judging the nations, any reason why the second Peter passage to be taking taken differently than the well. I think I take it more literally and I am a partial pragmatist which means I recognize that a lot of passages which we might think about the second coming, actually, because of the apocalyptic imagery they use are really contrite destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. now there are plenty of predators who believe that Peter and second Peter three verses 10 through 13 is not describing the end of the universe and the creation of a literal and heavens and earth, but they see it as the old order. The reason I don't is because it's rather complicated, but I realize that new heavens and earth is a term that Isaiah used.

Actually, I think for the new order that new New Testament system as opposed and passing of the Old Testament, so some people think want to be consistent. You should see the same terminology that way and second Peter and in Revelation, things like that. Well tell you TrueType recitals, I think every passage in its own context and in terms of second Peter, I just don't think that the people that Peter is writing to which was Gentile region churches.

I don't think that they were as conversant in apocalyptic language as so we would require them to be in his Peter would require them to be. If he was not speaking literally. He said what were looking forward to. As Christians isn't new heavens and new earth. Now Paul said on the same subject and I think Paul and Peter would've addressed their Gentile audiences with similar theology and probably similar clarity in Romans chapter 8, Paul said that the creation was subjected to futility, but only temporarily and groans and travails are waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God, and he says so for you know it's good to be delivered to the questions were delivered from the bondage of decay when the sons of God are manifest impulses. That's going to be how, when, at the redemption of our body or our adoption as a course predators often will save all of that is language referring to the change from the old covenant to the new that I think that he's talked about the fall of the earth being undone and ending second Peter saying he says the earth was destroyed with water. In the past the heavens and the earth and a new heaven and earth came after the flood says and were looking for the destruction of the present heavens and earth with fire now.

I think the flood actually destroyed the real world the real world of human society. I think that Peter is making comparison the world to be destroyed again and it's currently since the flood, it's been kept by the word of God until its destruction. I just feel like the whole flow of thought from Peter fits better into the traditional way of understanding events of the predators to keep young on hold and come back here I need take a break right now we have a half-hour coming up. Don't go away. I'll be back in 30 seconds negated nearly half that leads to life continue naming Pat everything in today's media show is over and enjoyed my visit in the narrow path.com find free topical audio teaching blog articles diverse teachings and archives of narrow Panamanian shadows rethinking for supporting the narrow path that Steve Greg remembered the narrow path.com radio broadcast by Steve Greg more live for another half hour taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible of the Christian faith, you will ask or if you have a different view from the house you'd like to bring up.

Feel free to do so. I'll give you a phone number but our lives are full at the moment and so you won't be able to immediately get through, but if you call in a few minutes. Perhaps will find line opened up the number is 844-484-5737 just before he took our break. I was talking Michael from Sacramento and that his question was in Michael your back with me. I guess in him. Second Peter chapter 3 when Peter says that were when the day of the Lord, that the heavens be dissolved, and the earth will be burned up and the elements will melt with fervent heat and then in verse 13 says, and we according to spouse look for new heavens and earth, in which 12 righteousness what what what Michael is asked. Here is why do I not see that as a symbolic rather apocalyptic description of the fall of Jerusalem the end of the old order depicted as the old creation of the old heavens and earth and the you know that the coming of the new creation the new heavens and new earth, which is the new covenant. Now this is the way many predators to understand first second Peter three and I understand some of that language the same way in other passages notably in Isaiah chapter 65 and 66-I tend to see that as referring to the transition of the old order to the new order when stars of the new heavens and the worth and so forth, and full predators if if nothing else, they are consistent. I mean, that is, they insist upon. In fact, that's the whole strength. They believe that if you find that some passages use certain terms to mean something in one place will then anytime you find same term somewhere else. It's necessarily talk about same thing and and to do otherwise. Like I'm doing I'm doing otherwise like. I recognize the passage of the old order for the new in that in the language of new heaven north in Isaiah, but I don't see it that way and second Peter three or in Revelation 2122 so Michael's asked me why I don't and I was, rushing as a break was upon us both. Both Paul and Romans eight and Peter in second Peter three tell us of the hope of the Christian is to be delivered from the effects of the fall. He said the whole creation was subjected to futility. Paul said in Romans eight, but it's looking forward to the time will be delivered from that bondage to decay.

At the time of the redemption of our bodies, which I take to be the ticket to be the resurrection from the dead. Yeah. And I did. I don't believe that an insert clear that what positive it is the same creation that was unwillingly subjected to futility, which has to refer. I think what happened in Genesis that that same creation is looking for to be delivered from that and that'll happen when Jesus raises her from the dead. So at his second coming, so policies the end of this creation fallen and the removal of the curse taken place when Jesus comes back and raise our bodies.

That's how I understand it.

I think Peter is talking the same way Peter says you know of the earth, heavens and earth that were before the flood wiped out with water, but the world that didn't ever sense is being held in reserve to be destroyed by fire.

Now he talks about being the same world the same world. It was I.

Water was as long as we burned up and so the whole world didn't completely annihilate the entire universe or will destruction it flooded the whole world you're comparing the fly to fire they had the same results. Now I think so, but it's the same world. That's the thing. He says the world before the flood was like that with water in the world since that is been reserved be wiped out by fire. I'm I'm not arguing that the flood part of the total annihilation of the world when the cosmos I didn't yeah I'm right I'm not saying that I'm saying is what I'm saying is I don't think the fire necessarily is the annihilation of whole cosmos. I believe it's I think that as the world was cleansed by water and all sin and evil society was washed away by water. That's the same thing that fire will do. It says in second Thessalonians, 18 that Jesus will come in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who don't know God and who obey the gospel now course predators would say that too is about the destruction of Jerusalem and you know if Paul was talking to Thessalonians who were in Greece about what can happen to the Jews in Jerusalem, then I guess that would that would be a possible way of understanding pulpit seek the full predators doesn't take into account that some of the people Paul is writing to our Gentiles fairly newly converted before he wrote to them and and probably not very schooled in Jewish apocalyptic literature and therefore they would not match, they were not naturally take these words in the way that does this Jewish apocalyptic assessment and knowing that I think that these writers would write in words that there. The reader should understand and and so I think the writing more literally. I could be wrong but that's just why I believe that's why believe it.

Likewise, in the new heavens and new earth. In Revelation 21 it comes at the end of the thousand years, which we call the millennium.

But I take to be the age of the church. Full predators usually say that thousand years just represents the period from the death of Jesus until 70 A.D. and then of course the new heavens north came but this is now the Bible teaches Bible doesn't teach the new creation came in 70 A.D. Paul wrote all of his letters before 70 A.D. he said if any man is in Christ, he is a new creation. So there is a sense in which the new order is a new creation, but it didn't come in 70 A.D. it came in 30 A.D. so mean to me.

The there's an artificiality about full predators and that's a wooden a wooden literalism which is the hobgoblin of small minds I think.

Is Emerson said that, but the point is that you can be to consistent because you're ingesting on the universality of meaning of a certain term when there's no reason the authors who felt themselves bound to such universality 24 to being 8070 faith in the fact that it was to a Jewish audience because clearly that that has very similar I have are starting 3232 there were talks very very apocalyptic that I do.

I do tend to see that as being about A.D. 70, but I'm not 100% sure about that even I mean I I'm I'm open to possibly. I do believe the tribulation of those days begins in the Jewish war, but I'm not sure that the tribulation of the Jews ended in 70 A.D. I think when Jesus of every great tribulation. He didn't say how long it lasts. It could be argued that the tribulation of the Jews is not finished yet, that the tribulation is that which began at seven and 66 A.D. with the Jewish war and has not yet been ended as is. Note note note mentioned how long the tribulation is in the Bible so one reason I say that possibility exists for me because of that in Matthew 24 Jesus immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun of the documents turn to blood stars heavens so forth. That's that could be entirely apocalyptic. It could be entirely about 70 A.D. I know the cross-references in the Old Testament that would justify every line in that section apply to a judgment within history. But I also know that in the parallel in Luke 21. What is talk about this tribulation. It says and Jerusalem to be trampled down by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. I guess we have to decide what are the times of the Gentiles, but and I may be wrong but I take times of the Gentiles to be probably the times where God is largely drawing Gentiles to himself, rather than Israel, which is at times that I think were still living so the summer. Of the trampling of Jerusalem in which could be the tribulation. Jesus talked about Matthew 24 is in Luke 21 said to last until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, which I would say has not been has not been filled yet so you know it could be that that whole tribulation of those days, after which the center starter so forth.

I still think the description is apocalyptic.

I don't think it when Jesus comes back that literally starting to fall to the earth. I think it's apocalyptic thing, but it could be that the coming of the Son of Man and clouds could possibly be his actual second coming as many people believe I but I'm also prepared for an overview I'm I'm undecided on that when I teach on the Olivet discourse when I teach on the allergist as I get both possibilities that I think so much okay Michael, it's a good talking to you.

Color is a Carolyn from Black diamond ring or black diamond state that said welcome Carolyn when they were talking about Sunday is stated great safety. He will want to want to get around things as well.

If he believes he and my thought is well yeah they say it is.

He believes he said if he believes what what is it he believes if he believes it. Jesus existed when you're right. The devil believes that to if he believes Jesus is the son of God, will the devil believes that also, if you believe Jesus died and rose will the devil believes that to what what does this person believe that the devil doesn't trust the right hand and what does it mean for Jesus to be at the right hand of God. He's enthroned is a king, his Lord well and have it not not even just change venues from earth to heaven, he went to heaven in order to sit on the throne at the right hand of his father, and terrain over his kingdom.

From that point, and he's been raining ever since impulsive, he will reign until he put all his enemies under his feet. The point is if you believe Jesus is in heaven at the right hand of God you not believe in the Christian doctrine unless that includes the idea he's enthroned that he's the king is the Lord and Paul said will never forget well know if it's as I believe Jesus is the Lord. Again, the devil believes that to the difference in the devil and a believer is that the believer not only knows it's true, but embraces and and and approves of it. You know I'm in the devil doesn't approve of that he doesn't embrace it, but he knows it's true. Your friend may also know that it's true. But if he's not embracing it, then he's in his faith is no different than the devil's fate. If you believe that Jesus is the Lord will then you you have to see that I am either subject to him as a slave because that's what the Lord is he someone on slaves. I am either his slave and so I got to do what he said. That's my obligation or else I'm a rebel and work in Jesus rebels against God are not saved.

Rebellion is like the sin of witchcraft and three commandment course here. Hopefully well when you become a true believer in Jesus and Jesus Lordship you re-identify yourself as as as a servant of his, which means every waking moment my obligation is to serve and obey him.

Now of course I'm not a perfect servant, and although I know I'm supposed to even want to serve him. Sometimes I fail I sometimes I sent.

Sometimes I stumble. Other times when I trip up, but that doesn't change mice. My understanding of what my duties you know I mean you can fail to do your duty but unless you redefine your duty to fit your failures. You have to recognize that though, I failed the thing I failed to do so I should be doing is not required to do and so anyone who knows Jesus is Lord knows that they must obey him, and it sums it, but you don't do it perfectly. Fair enough. I still know I must obey him. It's my determination to do so should all make mistakes but that's part of being a human being I Jesus said the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. He said about his disciples when he told them to obey staying awake and praying they didn't. They fell asleep they didn't obey him, but they wanted to. The flesh is weak. Jesus knows that he knows whether our spirit is willing or not you personally doesn't really leave early we doesn't. I'm not sure he believes I'm actually believes because I mean he believes something he believes certain historic facts and truths about Jesus but like said that the devil believes all the same facts and truths about Jesus. The differences the devil has not submitted to those troops.

Devil knows that Jesus is Lord and every Christian better know that to but unless you're submitted that truth you're rebelling against it and rebelling against it is what you have to repent up to become a Christian.

So you know I you don't have to do any number of good works.

To be safe somebody writing to me is having a real hard time understanding this dialogue and he seems to think that what I'm saying is yet to do a certain number of good works to prove your Christian if you don't do the number good works in a certain quantity or something then you not a Christian setting like that is something you've asked me how many times can you send still be saved.

While I don't know the numbers there's no higher limit given to a seven Jesus said if your brother sins against you, you will 490×70×7. You should forgive him every time and that's because were supposed forget like God does. God doesn't place as far as I know an upper limit on the ceiling on the number of sins he can forgive were not saved by doing fewer symptoms or lost by doing a certain number of sins we are saved by being identified as Christ's followers and servants, and honestly want to serve God in everything you do have a lot to please all the time and not right that would be the fruit of repentance for true conversion. Okay, okay, I think you can answer your call Linda from Cedar Ridge, California.

Welcome to the neuropathic high. My question is on sanctification and I was having a discussion with someone and this person believes that it's a one time event that happened that salvation. I believe it is a process that and then my question is does God do the sanctifying or are we sanctifying ourselves. By the way we live in any Scriptures that you could give me on sanctification. Being a process would be greatly appreciated okay with the problem with this question is deciding the word sanctified the writer of Hebrews uses the word sanctified to simply mean the objective fact God has set believers aside to be his own people, the word sanctified being set apart. And so the writer of Hebrews speaks as if well, God did that when when we are saved, as is usually almost as synonymous with the justified that those who are sanctified in the book of Hebrews refers to every Christian. And it seems to identify their sanctification take place when they became Christians. But the word sanctified also is sometimes used to refer to behaving in a holy way and Peter said in first Peter chapter 1 verse 15 try things verse 15 or maybe 14. He said as he was called you is holy, be holy in all manner of behavior now being set apart from God is an objective set apart for God is what patient means that's an objective reality that God makes true the moment you are you passed from death into life. The more you're born again when you're when you're his. You are now part of the group that is set apart to be his exit objective thing, but sanctification is often spoken of in its subjective aspect that now that I know that God has set me apart from you. I need to start living that way. I need to start living like somebody who set apart for God, I need to set myself apart from God, for God that is in my choices, my behaviors. That's why Peter says be holy or sanctified in all manner of conduct.

So some people determine sanctification or talk about the process of becoming a better person. There are some Westland for example who have taught that's sanctification actually removes yours sin nature is what Wesley taught and that it's a second work of grace after conversion, and that every Christian should seek to be entirely sanctified, but they seem to serve a crisis experience like conversion but not of the same time as conversion. I personally think the Bible teaches about me becoming more consistently one who lives in a holy way or way that set apart for God. I think it talks about the process of growth in second Corinthians chapter 3 in verse 18 second Corinthians 318. He said you know we all with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord are being changed from glory to glory into that same image, even as by the spirit of the Lord so you target the spirit of God changing us into the image of Christ for one step at a time from glory to glory into that same image that's a process.

Peter said in second Peter 318 that we should grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, will that growth and grace and and in knowledge is going to be also accompanied by a growth in holy conduct and the that is, say, more consistency as we become more mature as we become stronger as we become wiser. We will send less and yelled from the moment that your converted God has re-identified you, he's reassigned you to the group that are his set apart for himself.

So that's an objective reality at conversion that seems to my mind to be the way the writer of Hebrews uses the word sanctified, yes, and you get you as you read the word sanctify in Hebrews that occurs quite a few times.

It only seems like you just Christians are sanctified. Christians are the people he got a set apart for himself and that is true, but when Christians talk on sanctification in terms of practical sanctification, actually not.

Not sitting that I believe the Bible that that phenomenon I believe is what the Bible describes as a process and we can call that being sanctified but should be in a different sense than right of Hebrews that said could be a semantic thing you know if Sims is like a sanctified fully Santa Barbara saved okay, but if her target being holy in all manner of conduct that probably didn't happen years that started to happen.

You started to change his God or are we doing to sanctifying as we go. While the initial certification as God's doing. He's separate, but when it comes to growth.

This is something that God does and we do member Paul said work out your own salvation with fear and trembling as God. God who works in you both to will and do of his good pleasure. So he saying that you have to work out as you to live out the things that God is working in you. God's sanctifying you inwardly and you therefore, in cooperation with that live obediently and yes, let's not Philippians chapter 2, but I would also look at first Thessalonians chapter 5 on this because it says that Simon taken her here in verse 16 and and following it says this is first wrestling 516 rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks, for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies. Test all things hold fast what is good.

Abstain from every form of evil. Now make God the God of peace himself sanctify you completely and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. I said God's goodness sanctify you completely. This is as that's God's part. Your part is kind of lined out. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing. Give thanks in everything.

Don't quench the spirit. Do not despise prophecies. Test all things hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. This is what words and it says and God will sanctify you holy so God is the one who again works in you. God is the one who changes you inside makes the changes you are not capable of making but we have obligations to live according to those changes and there is no suggestion that this will happen without arc cooperation in other words, if you're stubbornly not choosing to avoid sin or to listen to the Holy Spirit. Whatever. I don't think that's gonna make you holy own choices okay. Thank you for your call, Celinda Ian from Tallahassee, Florida looking to the narrow path. Thanks for coming in like your little I living on living very lightly and that way I you have questions about work before and I had company, serving as worship leader at our base but I have to move along ways. I'm just curious what your thought. The big question I have right now with your thoughts about someone who is a Christian serving on Sunday night at a base because I don't know that the chaplain or chaplain are preaching fairly well and military base. In other words, well, I mean if there's a group of Christian soldiers or sailors or Marines or something gathering together for worship, then you know that Christ is there and that that someone could lead in worship this Army. I don't see anything that would make that controversial things from a Christian point of view, it may be that the chaplain is not a good preacher might be a very faithful preacher, but that that's his problem. I think if Christians are gathering to worship and to be taught the preacher might be very unfaithful to the word of God, but the First Lady worship doesn't have to be unfaithful.

Where people are truly worshiping and are qualified to worship God, who are his followers then I don't see anything there be a compromise on your part. If that's what you're considering. Okay well appreciate your call. Thanks Janice will really have a closing music and just like 10 seconds or so and architect of various quicker than I thought. So I'm just going to say the narrow path is the name of this program. If you're not familiar with the were on every weekday at this time 2 to 3 on Pacific time zone. Of course, other time zones is not the same time, but it's same time as it is now. We are listener supported. We pay for time on the radio.

That's how we stay on the air and we don't have advertisements or sponsors.

We don't sell anything at our website or on the air because we just don't sell it. We just trust God to provide for us is down there and he usually doesn't through people who think that that be a good idea if you feel led to do so you can write to us at the narrow path, PO Box 1732 macula CA 92593 or you can do so from the website.

Though the narrow path.com. It's the narrow path.com thanks for joining us. Let's talk again tomorrow –