The Narrow Path

Steve Gregg: Good afternoon and welcome to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we're live for an hour to take your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or the Christian faith or a different opinion than that of the host, you're welcome to give me a call in this hour and we'll discuss those things that you raise along those lines. The number is 844-484-5737. Once again, the number is 844-484-5737. I don't have any announcements to make, I don't think, so I'm going to go ahead and go to the phone lines and talk to Carrie from Fort Worth, Texas. I think Carrie was waiting to go on yesterday and we didn't get to you. Is that correct, Carrie?

Guest (Male): Yeah, ran out of time. Got a couple of questions if you have time. I'm involved with a Bible study where we're studying or starting the study of Job and we decided to listen to your introduction to the book of Job before we start our study. We listened to the first part and you explained about wisdom literature, and it brought up the question in my mind about what is the wisdom that God will give for those who ask that James talks about?

Steve Gregg: I think in all likelihood, when James says if anyone lacks wisdom, let him ask of God and that he'll give you wisdom, but you have to ask in faith. I think that wisdom is presumably for guidance. Like, what do I do in a situation like this? Now, I'm not sure if it has to do with every kind of situation, like how do I fix my broken toaster, or if it's more in terms of spiritual choices, spiritual options.

Generally speaking, wisdom in scripture is not about so much practical technological type things, but has to do with making choices that are wise in terms of spiritual outcomes. That's certainly what... but on the other hand, spiritual outcomes are not totally unconnected to physical outcomes. The book of Proverbs, for example, is all about outcomes. It talks about if you're not lazy, you'll prosper. If you are lazy, you won't. If you let your mouth say everything that comes to your mind, you'll do a lot of damage. If you hold it in and think about it before you speak, you may do less harm. You may be able to be beneficial with your words. These have to do with relationships, they have to do with finances, they have to do with many things in life. But they don't give details about them. They're more general, how does a spiritual man relate with his world in the physical world? And the wisdom of Proverbs is there to answer that question. I suppose that's probably the same thing that James has in mind when he talks about asking for wisdom.

Guest (Male): Okay. The other question would be that in 1 Timothy when it talks about God only possessing immortality. I was in a discussion about that and one of the guys said, "Well, yes, that's true when it comes to God having no beginning and no end. But that does not mean that we're not born with a never-ending spiritual life." I thought that maybe that scripture was kind of refuting that idea.

Steve Gregg: Yeah, I think he's confusing the word immortality with eternality. God has always existed, will always exist. He is eternal, and the life that he gives us is eternal. So we participate in it. That life had no beginning. It's God's life that we receive in Christ. And once we enter into it, of course we have a beginning in our experience of it, but the life that we're experiencing has always existed. It's a little bit like if we take a drink from a river, we have to realize, okay, the river doesn't start at the point that we're experiencing it. That's coming downstream from some fountain up much higher. And so, we're just stepping into it. We're just benefiting from it at this beginning point, but we're participating in something that had a much earlier beginning, namely the water we're drinking actually has come all the way down from the springs that it originated from.

So, when we have eternal life, the life is eternal, but we have a beginning. But the life we have, the life that we participate in is God's life, Christ's life, and that has no beginning. Now, immortal specifically means not capable of dying. It's not... I mean, we could say immortality is eternal life if by eternal life we simply mean from the point onward it goes on forever because you can't die. But immortality specifically refers to the inability to die. And no one has that inability to die except God. I think that's what Paul's saying. So, eternal and immortal obviously are concepts that overlap in some usages, but they're not identical terms.

Guest (Male): So could you use that to refute the idea that we're going to live eternally either in heaven or hell?

Steve Gregg: That passage often is used to point that out. I mean, we will live eternally with Christ if we are in Christ. I mean, that's what 1 John 5:11 and 12 says, that God has given us eternal life. We didn't have it before, but God has given it to us and this life is in his Son. And he that has the Son has the life, and he who does not have the Son does not have life, John says. So the eternal life is in Jesus. Once I am in Jesus, I am in that realm of eternal life. I participate in his life, which is eternal life. If I have him, I have it. If I don't have him, I don't have it. It doesn't exist outside of him.

So to be in Christ is to participate in his eternal life. Now, what about people who are not in him? Do they have immortality? Do they have eternal life? Apparently not. I mean, the Bible indicates that whoever believes in Jesus will not perish, but will have everlasting life. It strongly implies that if you don't believe in him, you won't have eternal life but you'll perish. It seems like those are the two possible things: you either perish or you have eternal life. And you have the eternal life if you believe in him, otherwise you perish. And the word perish in the Greek is simply a normal word for being destroyed. Now, some people think being destroyed doesn't mean you disappear or that you're extinct or don't exist anymore, although some people think it does mean that. It certainly does in many contexts. But it is also a word that is used sometimes to think of things that are ruined, so they haven't passed out of existence, they're just ruined. So some people think that the alternative to having eternal life with Christ is to have an eternal ongoing existence in ruin, and that's perishing. But that seems rather unnatural if perishing is contrasted with living forever. Then it would seem like the person who is perishing doesn't live forever. Whoever believes in him will not perish but will have everlasting life suggests that everlasting life is the opposite of perishing. Therefore, perishing does not include everlasting life.

Guest (Male): Thanks again, Steve.

Steve Gregg: Okay, Carrie. Good talking to you. Thanks for your call. Kyle in Indianapolis, Indiana, welcome.

Guest (Male): Hi, Steve. Happy to talk to you again. I took a picture with you when you came to that small church in the center of Indianapolis last year. My question is, I think it's a pretty simple one, but I just wanted to call in and ask you if a non-believer were to come up to you and ask you why are you a Christian? Or if you were a salesman and you were selling Christianity, how would you sell being a Christian?

Steve Gregg: Well, I wouldn't sell being a Christian. The reason for being a Christian is very different than the reason for buying a product. A person ought to become a Christian... in some cases they ought to acquire other things too, besides Christianity... products. Now, some products can be purchased, but whenever you buy a product or you're selling a product to somebody to buy it, you're suggesting that it'll be good for them. That whatever they're paying, they'll be happy that they made the payment, and that they'll be better off for it.

Now, this is true with Christianity too. Whatever it costs to be a Christian, clearly you'll be better off for being a Christian than you were before. But that's not the whole focus of advertising products. I mean, a person isn't going to really be interested in buying a product unless he's convinced that he won't be so happy without it and it'll enhance his life. Now, Christianity will enhance your life too, but you should follow Christ even if it didn't enhance your life because he deserves it. God is God. He owns the universe. He owns you. Everything you have is his, but he's given it to you out of his gracious generosity. It's just a matter of gratitude and acknowledging rights. God has the right to my loyalty. God has the right for me to respond to him in gratitude. And therefore, so becoming a Christian is simply giving God his rights over my life.

Now, is this good for me? Of course it's good for me. But even if it wasn't, it'd still be the right thing to do. So if someone says, "Well, why are you a Christian?" It would not be a quite true statement to say, "I'm a Christian because I want to go to heaven. I'm a Christian because my life is more happy because I'm a Christian than it would be if I wasn't." How do I know that? I mean, some non-Christians are happy too. Maybe I would be too. But although I think I'm happier as a Christian, certainly knowing what I know, I'd be very unhappy not being a Christian.

But the point is, many people sell Christ by telling people they will be better off, they will be happier, it'll enrich their lives. All things that are true. But unfortunately, that kind of a sales pitch does not challenge them at the very core that Christianity expects to challenge us at. You see, when you say you ought to become a Christian because it's good for you, your life will be so much better and then you'll go to heaven too. While that may be true, all you're doing is telling them, "You should be looking out for yourself. You should do the best thing for you."

Now, that of course is what people are already trying to do before they become Christians. They're trying to do whatever's best for them because they think they are the center of the universe. At least they're the center of their universe, and they think everything should be chosen and done to benefit them. And if you've simply added, "Oh, it'll benefit you to become a Christian," whether that's true or not, it's not the reason for becoming a Christian. Jesus said, "If anyone will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." Well, why would I do that? It doesn't sound like very fun. Taking up a cross? That sounds like the ultimate downer. Why should... that won't make me happier. Denying myself? Happiness comes from affirming myself, from pursuing myself and its goals and so forth.

But Jesus says, "Yeah, but you're not going to follow me unless you deny yourself and take up your cross." Well, then why should I do that? Because it's the right thing to do. That's what God deserves from you. And so, the reason I'm a Christian is because God has every right to have my total loyalty and my obedience. I was created for this. Is it good for me? Of course. God would never ask me to do something that wasn't good for me. He's a loving God. He's like a loving father. Parents never require anything of their children that they don't think will be beneficial to their children. But the benefits may not be in view. And if I'm looking for benefits, I might have my doubts whether Christianity is really going to be better for me or not when I see some very tempting non-Christian options, let's say. I might strongly suspect I won't be as happy following Christ.

Well, okay, then that should be put out of your mind. If I'm going to decide to follow Christ because I think it'll make me happy, I have not... I'm not denying myself or taking up my cross. I'm affirming myself. I'm making the decision to follow Christ for the same reason I make any other decision in my life, because I think it's better for me. In which case I haven't changed. Christianity is supposed to change you fundamentally. Until you follow Christ genuinely, before you repent and follow Christ, you are always doing everything to please yourself. When you come to God genuinely, you decide it doesn't matter if I'm pleased or not. The universe doesn't exist to please me. Who am I that even one other person should care about pleasing me, much less the universe? Who am I that I can even expect God to please me? I'm nothing. That's the beginning point of becoming a Christian.

But the starting point also includes who is God. Now, to the unbeliever, God is either non-existent or exists in the realm of the periphery of their awareness. Or if they know God or know who he is and they're unconverted, they see God as somebody that can be used like so many other things in their life to make their life better and happier, to get fire insurance for the next life maybe. But you see, so many people have been evangelized with only that kind of sales pitch that it's like many people listening right now, their heads spinning thinking, "Well, what else is there? What else is there than to follow God because you'll go to heaven?"

Well, there's such a thing as God. I think a lot of people are thinking only of heaven and they'll include God in the equation if that's what's going to get them into heaven. They don't care about God. They care about heaven. I don't care about heaven. I care about God. That's... because, you know what? I have denied myself and taken up my cross. I'm changed. I'm reoriented. That's what repentance is. It reorients your whole value system and your whole purpose for living, and you're not living anymore to please you. You're not living to avoid pain or loss or poverty. You're living to glorify the universe creator, the one who created the universe and who created you.

So, the true reason I'm a Christian... I could say it's made me happier than I would be without being a Christian, but I have no idea how happy I would or would not be without being a Christian. Many things in my life that I've had to go through, I've wondered, "How could someone who's not a Christian tolerate and survive this? Because it's been very hard, but more easy following God." But let's face it, I don't know that I'd be in all respects happier as a Christian or all respects unhappier as a non-Christian. That's not even... that doesn't even come into the equation. That's not even part of the consideration. The consideration is: is there a God? Do I owe him something? Is he getting from me what he deserves? Those are the questions. And the only way that I can say yes to that is if I've submitted to him, I've died to myself, I'm following Jesus Christ, I care about nothing but his glory. And that's what Christianity is in the Bible. I know it's not that in church, but when I stand before God and he judges me as to whether I'm really a Christian or not, I'm going to care more about what he thinks based on what he said about it, rather than what the preachers in our churches say about it. So I guess that's how I would address that issue. Thank you, thank you for your call. We got Aaron from Grass Valley, California next. Aaron, welcome.

Guest (Male): Hi Steve. Hi. Thank you for your show. Okay, so I can't remember the verse, but there's a verse that says no man has seen God.

Steve Gregg: Several verses say that. Yeah.

Guest (Male): Okay. Okay. So with that being said, my actual question is based on this morning I read Exodus 24 and I stumbled on verse 9 where Moses went and saw the God of Israel.

Steve Gregg: Right.

Guest (Male): So I was like, "Okay, what does it mean?" And I had to go to work, so I didn't really have time to get into it. But I just thought, "Wow, I have to call Steve."

Steve Gregg: Yeah. Well, it depends on what you mean by seeing God. What no one... you know, Moses said to God, "Let me see your glory." And God said, "No one can see my face and live." Okay. So no one can look at God's glory full on, unfiltered. He's just too mighty, too glorious. The Bible says that the heavens and the earth are going to flee away from the glory of his presence when he comes back, and the brightness of his glory is going to destroy the man of sin and so forth. I mean, his glory is pretty intense. And even Moses wasn't allowed to see it.

And yet, we're told that Moses was not like other prophets because God would speak to him face to face. So did he see God or did he not? Well, he obviously didn't see his unveiled glory, but he saw him in some other sense. And what sense can people see God in the Bible? Well, they see him sometimes in visions. Isaiah said, "I saw the Lord. He was high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple." He's talking about a vision of God he had. Now, when you're looking at a vision of God, you're not really looking at God with your eyes. It's like you're in a different state of mental state. It's like dreaming. It's like if I had a dream that I saw President Trump or something like that. Well, I didn't really see him.

Now, if it was an inspired dream and its contents were absolutely true and God was showing me something like sometimes prophets... I'm not a prophet, but sometimes prophets would have dreams or visions about somebody and learn something about them that only God knows from it and that's a revelation to them. Well, okay, but they didn't really see the person. They saw a representative of that person in their dream. Their mind had an image of that person. A vision in the Bible is like a dream only you're awake. So your mind is having presented to it images. And sometimes prophets have had images of God and God speaks to them in that way and so forth. They're not seeing him with their eyes. They're seeing him in a vision. And that's a different kind of a thing. They're not looking directly at the unveiled glory of God.

Other times people in the Bible have seen God in what we call theophanies. A theophany is when God takes on... appears in a physical kind of a form, like as a man who wrestled with Jacob all night. Or probably it was a theophany that appeared to the 70 elders on Mount Sinai that you referred to in Exodus 24. It was God appeared to Abraham in a human form in Genesis 18:1 and ate a meal with him. Now, he saw God. In fact, it begins... let me just see how those words begin in Genesis 18 because I think it says he saw God. I think it specifically says he saw Yahweh. Let me see what it says here. Genesis 18:1, "Then the Lord appeared to him by the terebinth trees of Mamre." He lifted up his eyes and looked and behold three men were standing there. So he obviously saw these three men and two of them were angels appearing in human form and one was God appearing in human form. Now, these are theophanies, appearances of God in a tangible visible form. In that case, God's glory is not seen unveiled. It's actually veiled. He appeared in a pillar of cloud and a pillar of fire to the Israelites. They couldn't see the unveiled glory of God, but they saw this cloud and this fire, which was his appearance, but it was a mediated appearance suited for human consumption, for human viewing.

So I mean, there are times when God appears. Now, the Bible actually says interestingly in John chapter 1, John chapter 1 actually says no man has seen God at any time. And yet, the same chapter says the Word was God and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory, the glory as of an only begotten son of a father, it says. And yet, we saw Jesus and he's the Word and he is obviously seen. So how could that be? But all that is said about him and then in verse 18 of John 1 it says no one has seen God at any time, the only begotten son, actually in the older Greek manuscripts is the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father has declared him. So no one has seen God any time, but we saw him in Jesus. I mean, it's like it sounds contradictory, but it's not unless you fail to see that seeing God means different things in different contexts. You can't see God as he really is with your naked eyes. But God can present himself visually to you in a moderated form, in theophanies or in visions or something or in the incarnation itself. And that's not a contradiction unless the Bible said no one is seen God in any way shape or form. Because lots of people in the Bible see God. And when John says no one has seen God anytime, he's certainly not unaware of the Old Testament. He's certainly not unaware of Genesis because he begins that very chapter with words from Genesis chapter 1. He knows Genesis. But and it's in Genesis numerous times people have seen God, wrestled with God. When Jacob wrestled all night with God, at the end of the day he said, "I've seen God face to face and my life is preserved." But we're told it was a man he wrestled with, that is a human form, God appearing in a theophany in a human form.

So Jesus also is God in human form and human flesh. So we see... we've seen God in him too. At least those who saw him did. So yeah, the Bible you can find a number of places the Bible says no one has seen God, no one can see God and live. And yet the very same authors, sometimes in the very same passages, say and we saw God or they saw God. But they mean in a different sense than the sense in which no one has seen God. And that latter sense is no one has seen God in all of his unveiled glory. No human person can see that and live. But God can mediate an image of himself to our consciousness, either by appearing in a physical form briefly, taking on a physical form that he doesn't naturally have, or in visions and dreams which you're not really there, you're in a dream, something may be being communicated to you visually but it's all in your head, it's not with your eyes. Anyway, that's how I would deal with that situation.

I've got to take a break here, but we're going to have another half hour coming up immediately. We'll take more calls. You're listening to the Narrow Path. Our website is thenarrowpath.com. So feel free to check it out. There's all kinds of resources there. I'll be back in 30 seconds. We have another half hour so don't go away.

Steve Gregg: Welcome back to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. My name is Steve Gregg and we're live for another half hour taking your calls. If you have questions about the Bible or disagreements with the host and want to call about that, you're welcome to do so. At the moment, our lines are full so don't waste the time calling right now. But if you call in a few minutes, lines will open up. So take this number down, it's 844-484-5737. All right, our next caller is Brook from Atlanta, Georgia. Hi Brook, welcome.

Guest (Male): Hi there. Yes, I'm here. Hi, how's it going? Good, good. I have a question about Eucharist, the Holy Communion. I heard a lot about it from our Orthodox brothers. What is your take on Holy Communion and yeah, so I want to get your feedback on that.

Steve Gregg: Okay. Well, you're talking about taking the bread and the wine. What some groups call the Eucharist, what some call it communion, some call it the Lord's Supper. It's kind of the same thing, but not all see it the same way. Your Orthodox brethren who talk about it, they see it a certain way that I do not. They believe that something supernatural is conveyed in the eating of the bread and the drinking of the wine. They believe that the real presence of Christ inheres in the bread and the wine and that we of course participate of Christ himself when we take of the communion.

Now, I believe we participate in Christ himself through faith and through submission and obedience, our trust, our relationship with him. I don't have to go to a church and have somebody say words over a cracker for me to participate in Christ. He lives in me, his spirit continues to give me grace as I walk and trust in him. They would say probably, I know the Catholics would I think the Orthodox would also say that you receive grace in some way when you take communion. I don't know of anything in the Bible that would support that. The only way I know that grace comes is through faith, the Bible says. By faith, we have access into this grace in which we stand, it says in Romans chapter 5 verse 2 I think it is, or thereabouts. And Paul said by grace you're saved through faith. So faith is the conduit through which we receive grace. Christ's life is given to us. It says in 2 Peter chapter 1 verse 4 that through his great and precious promises we are partakers of the divine nature, that is his word conveyed to us and us believing it, we receive his nature in the form of of course the Holy Spirit's indwelling.

Now, these are all true things and Orthodox people I think believe much of this too, but they do believe that something additional is happening when you take the Eucharist. I don't know of anything in scripture that would support that. And that underscores a difference between people who think like me and people who think like them. Catholic and Orthodox people believe that there are traditions passed down from the apostles that are not in scripture. They might even seem contrary to scripture, but they were apostolic traditions and they've been supported and that they are as valuable to us in knowing the will of God and the truth of God as the scriptures themselves are.

Now, I don't believe that. I know too much about people. The church fathers in the generations after the apostles were dead were just as human as the Christian leaders are today. Everybody's fallible. Even the apostles were fallible, but they were appointed by Christ to give the authoritative norms for the church and that's what we have in their writings, what we call the New Testament. And therefore, since we know that Christ appointed them individually to the task and gave them authority to speak on his behalf, I have no problem believing whatever they say about things and following their instructions. But when I begin to see in the second and third and fourth centuries church leaders beginning to say things that aren't what the apostles said, some of them are contrary to what the apostles said, and yet they say, "Oh no, this is a tradition the apostles passed down orally." I have to think, "Oh then when Paul wrote his letters, he said things that he didn't agree with when he spoke orally?" I guess... moving from the Orthodox to the Catholic picture, for example, the Catholic Church teaches that bishops and priests should be unmarried. Paul said in 1 Timothy 3, it's a qualification for a bishop that he's married, the husband of one wife, having children who are obedient and so forth. So Paul says that a bishop must be married, the Catholic Church by its tradition says a bishop must not be married. You know what I mean? It's a direct contradiction.

There's other others too, and I believe the Orthodox faith has enough of those too. Most groups do. And I'm not saying Protestants don't. Protestants too also have traditions that are contrary to scripture. But that's just the point. I don't particularly choose to be identified as a Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. I'm a follower of Jesus. And if Jesus said something and his apostles taught it, to me that's normative Christian faith and behavior. I'll follow it. If some later generation of people who led the organized church say things either contrary to what the Bible says or at least far beyond anything the Bible showed any concern for, I take it with a grain of salt.

Now, Eucharist, to say that the real presence of Christ is in the Eucharist, there's nothing in the Bible that says that. And to say that you receive special grace by eating the bread and the wine, nothing in the Bible says that. And I believe it has very much the sound of Jewish superstitions. Paul said to be afraid of Jewish myths. Now, see the Jews believed that what you eat could have a spiritual impact on you. For example, if you ate unclean food, unclean animals, you'd be unclean for it. Well, Jesus said whatever goes in your mouth doesn't have any impact on that. He said what goes in your mouth doesn't defile you, it's your heart that does. God's not looking at what's going into your mouth. It has no spiritual impact at all. Jesus said whatever goes into your mouth goes right through and comes out the other end, Jesus said. And therefore it has no particular spiritual impact. He did not say, "Except for a consecrated bread and wine. Everything else just goes right through, has no spiritual impact, but this is different." No, he didn't say it was different and it isn't different. When you eat bread and wine, it goes through you just like everybody like everything else does.

Now, I will say this. If we had to eat bread and drink wine in order to have receive grace, then there's going to be people in some parts of the world who are cut off from that access and they can't go to heaven then because they can't get to that bread and that wine. But people can always get to God. People can turn to God in prison, they can turn to God in their dying moment, they can turn to God in a desert, they can turn to God in a country where they're the only Christian they know and there's no one serving communion. You know what I mean? These things are not what God cares about. Now, what he does say is when you eat this bread and drink this blood, you commemorate me. You do it in remembrance of me. Okay. It's like when I send my wife a birthday card, I'm doing that to remember her. And when I eat the bread and the wine, I do it to remember Jesus. My relationship with my wife is not based on the card, and my relationship with Jesus is not based on the rituals. That's something that I think a rather superstitious mindset, largely from paganism, came to impute to the meaning of it because it didn't come from Jesus or the apostles. So that'd be where I stand about it. People are free to disagree. Is that...?

Guest (Male): Yes. How about Matthew 26 to 28? Matthew 26 where it says "this is my body, this is my blood, this is the covenant." So is that the Eucharist or...?

Steve Gregg: Yes. Yes. Yeah, and there's no other. Now, but see when Jesus said "this bread is my body," he didn't mean that suddenly a part of his actual physical body disappeared from its original place and ended up in that bread. No. His body... he said "this is my body that is broken for you." His body hadn't been broken yet, he hadn't died yet. When he gave the cup he said "this cup is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for the remission of sins." Well, his blood wasn't shed yet. All his blood was still in his veins, none of it was in that cup. And yet he said "this is my body, this is my blood." Why? Because he was at a Passover meal. The Passover and he and his disciples had taken Passover every year of their life. There's a standard ritual. He was changing the ritual, but he wasn't changing the dynamics of what was going on. He said from now on when you eat this bread and drink this cup, do it in remembrance of me. Why? Because they had always done it before in remembrance of the Exodus. They had done it to remember when God saved them from Egypt. He says from now on you do it to remember that I have saved you now with a better salvation than that. This is preempting the Exodus in your concerns.

Now, in their ritual, their normal ritual, when they held up the bread they'd say, "This bread is the bread of affliction that our fathers suffered in Egypt." Now, it started the same way as Jesus spoke, "This bread is." But they weren't saying that the bread in their hands literally was the bread of affliction that their fathers ate. It obviously is saying, "This commemorates it, this represents it. We're remembering the suffering of our fathers in Egypt when we eat this bread." They're not saying, "This bread, which was just a moment ago real bread, ordinary bread, has now become bread 1400 years old which miraculously has no mold on it and is not crusty because the bread our fathers ate in Egypt was 1400 years ago." No, that bread was not that bread. It's simply a way of saying, "This in our ritual here, this represents this and this represents that." And that's what Jesus was doing. He's doing the same ritual. He was just changing up what things would represent. He was not bringing any magic in it. You know, in the Passover meal, no magic occurred in the Passover meal. No supernatural events happened during the Passover meal, and Jesus didn't introduce any new ones. He didn't introduce any supernatural things at the Passover meal. If someone says, "Well, that was supernatural," well, that's your faith talking. It's not the Bible talking. That's your traditions. And that's okay if you want to have traditions, I'm not going to deprive you of those. But if someone says, "What do I think about it?" I'm going to think what Jesus said about it. That's kind of what I do as a habit.

All right, let's talk to Tom in San Diego, California. Tom, welcome.

Guest (Male): Hi. I just have a question. I have what I call an ad blocker on YouTube, and I just wonder if it's considered a sin to have that?

Steve Gregg: A what? An ad blocker?

Guest (Male): Yeah.

Steve Gregg: Why would that be a sin? Why would you even think that?

Guest (Male): Well, these commercials that come on to YouTube and if you have the ad blocker it blocks the commercials.

Steve Gregg: I understand. Why do you think that could be a sin to have that ad blocker on there?

Guest (Male): Well, I think it's because I'm hurting the business, I guess, advertisers and YouTube and all of that.

Steve Gregg: Well, no. No, it's not a sin. All right, let's talk to Susan in Kokomo, Indiana. Susan, welcome.

Guest (Female): Hi, Steve. I called a couple months ago back and I asked you about something called the Mystery of Revelation, and I'd heard it on a Bible video but it didn't have a name. Well, I'm calling about today as I've learned more about it and fellowship of the mystery and they're saying that like the Old Testament and then there's the Synoptic Gospels and then there's Paul's Gospel. Okay, and that Paul was given the mystery.

Steve Gregg: Okay. That's called hyper-dispensationalism. And that is the view that Paul had a different gospel than Jesus had, and that Paul taught different things than Jesus did. People who believe that, they say that the gospel Jesus preached seemed to be about works and Paul's gospel was about faith and grace. And they think that's different.

Now, if you read the Gospels what Jesus said, he taught about grace and faith too. He said if you don't believe, you'll die in your sins. Okay, well that's faith, isn't it? When he said that you'll be judged by your... he called people to repent, Paul did too. So Jesus said people will be saved by grace. The thief on the cross hadn't done any works, he was saved by his faith through grace. Jesus said, "You'll be with me in paradise right now." Jesus told the parable about the publican who said, "God be merciful to me a sinner," and he went home justified. He hadn't done any good works. Jesus taught that people are saved by grace. But he also taught that people are called to live good works. That's what God's looking for. God's looking for people to be good, not evil. And so Jesus taught a great deal about works.

Now, what did Paul think? Was Paul different than Jesus on that? Well, we know that Paul also taught that we're saved by grace through faith. But that's not different than what Jesus taught. Paul taught that Jesus died for our sins and rose again. Well, Jesus taught that too. Jesus said he came to give his life a ransom for many and that he'd rise on the third day. So that's not different.

What about works? Did Paul teach that we don't need to have any works? Well, no, he didn't teach that we don't need to have any works. Most of Paul's teaching in his epistles is about how we are to behave. That's works, that's behavior. And in he specifically says in Galatians 5:6, this is Paul saying, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love." Okay, so what avails with God? Faith does. What kind of faith? Well, a faith that works through love. You mean there's got to be works too? Of course. How could there be faith if there's no works? James said faith without works is dead. Paul said the same thing. Paul said this in Ephesians 2:8 through 10, "For by grace you have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it's the gift of God, not of works lest anyone should boast, for we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." So we're not saved by works, but God has created us for good works.

Over in the book of Titus, Paul... we're talking about Paul's gospel, is it the same or different than Jesus'? Well, let's on the subject of works he certainly is on the same page as Jesus as well as faith. But it says in Titus chapter 2 verse 14, "Christ gave himself for us that he might redeem us from every lawless deed." I think that's what we expect Paul to say. "And to purify for himself his own special people who are zealous for good works." Okay, so what Jesus died for is that he would get for himself a people who are zealous for good works. Is that the same thing as having a faith that works through love? Is that the same thing as a faith that is not without a work and therefore is not dead? There's actually nothing that Paul preached that was disagreeable with what Jesus preached, and nothing that Jesus preached was disagreeable with what Paul preached.

Let me just show you one verse about this because Paul talks about the teachings of Jesus, which is of course what Jesus taught, the gospel he preached, the things he taught. It says in verse 3 of 1 Timothy 6, 1 Timothy 6:3, Paul said, "If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the teaching which is according to godliness, that person is proud knowing nothing." Okay, so if someone says we don't have to do what Jesus said, Paul said that man is proud and knows nothing. He said if anyone doesn't... if they teach otherwise and they don't consent to the teachings of Jesus, which are the doctrines of godliness. Well, Paul didn't seem to think that there was any difference between the duties that he was talking about and the duties that Christ talked about. So where did someone get the idea that Paul preached a different gospel than Jesus? They got it from dispensationalism. So although I'm not familiar with the source that you're referring to, I know what it is. It's called hyper-dispensational. They teach that there's a gospel of grace in this dispensation, but a gospel of the kingdom in Jesus' dispensation when he was here. However, Paul said that he preached the kingdom of God, which is what Jesus preached. So I don't know how there could be a difference, unless there's two different kingdoms of God that have the same name, which is a ridiculous thing to suggest. So I would say whatever it is you're reading or getting that from, CDs or whatever, you better not trust them because they're going against what scripture says on that.

Fred from Alameda, California. Welcome to the Narrow Path.

Guest (Male): Yes. In Isaiah 46:4 it says, "And even to your old age, I am he, and even to hoar hairs will I carry you. I have made and I will bear, even I will carry and will deliver you." So my question is, you know, because in Isaiah 46:12 God calls these people stout-hearted, so why was God wasting time helping them? I mean, I'm just trying to figure that out. Isaiah 46, because my main question is why does God's grace cover some people and yet others fall out of that category?

Steve Gregg: God's grace covers everyone who believes and is faithful to him. That's how grace comes, through faith. So those who don't believe, it doesn't cover. When Isaiah wrote and when anyone wrote in the Old Testament times, all the prophets who wrote to Israel called them stout-hearted, called them rebellious, called them idolatrous, called them evil, called them to repent. But all the prophets also promised them things, presumably they repent. There's no promise to anyone who doesn't repent. There's no promise made to anyone who doesn't believe. But in Isaiah, there's a great volume of material, and in some of the other prophets not quite as much as Isaiah but Isaiah mostly, talking about the Messianic blessings when the Messiah would come, he would call the faithful remnant to himself and these promises that he made are to be fulfilled to them because why? Because they're faithful.

What about the ones who aren't faithful? Well, they were wiped out in 70 AD. That was Jesus said that too. So, you know, when you read threats and denunciations in the prophets, those are words that apply to the people that they apply to. But they didn't apply to every person. Isaiah wasn't stout-hearted or stiff-hearted and stiff-necked and so forth, but he was one of the people of Israel. In Israel, there were always some who were faithful to God and some who were not faithful to God. In most times in their history, the majority were not faithful, but even then there were some. The most rebellious time in Israel's history was during the reign of King Ahab when Elijah was around. The nation worshipped Baal officially. There was a temple and an altar to Baal in the capital city of Israel. And Elijah thought he was the only one who wasn't compromised. God said to him, "No, I've reserved myself 7,000 who have not bowed the knee to Baal." The nation was Baal worshipping, but there were 7,000, Elijah didn't know who they were but they were there, God knew who they were, who were not worshipping Baal.

There's always a faithful remnant and there is now among the Jews and there always was. And the ones who are faithful, of course ever since Christ came and since the Messiah's come, the only ones who are really faithful are the ones who follow the Messiah. Because you can't be faithful to God and reject his Messiah at the same time. So, the Jews who follow Christ, they're properly called Christians or disciples, but they're saved. And the promises Isaiah made to the faithful apply to them. And that's what those passages that are promises of God's care for them and things like that, those are for the faithful remnant, especially those in Christ.

Nelson in Fort Worth, Texas, welcome to the Narrow Path. Thanks for calling.

Guest (Male): Yes, thank you for taking my call. I just have a question about that traditional verse that's in Timothy chapter 2 verse 15 where it says the woman will be saved through childbearing. Does it mean the word saved mean remembered or taken care of or remain safe from battle or being occupied with childbearing rather than risking her life being a woman out there in the world?

Steve Gregg: Well, good point. Yeah, the word soteria, saved, salvation, does apply to a lot of things. We usually think of it as being saved to go to heaven when we die, but the word is used of any kind of situation where a person is rescued or preserved or delivered. It's a general term for all those things. Now, what you're suggesting is that the salvation that a woman has by staying in the role of motherhood is that it's a sanctifying thing. It preserves her from having to be out in the world facing the temptations of the world. Taking care of a child like nothing else can train a woman to be unselfish, to be willing to lay down her life for another person, the child. This is what normal motherhood normally does. That's good. That's part of being saved from our sins. Jesus came to save us not just from hell, but from our sinfulness. And so sanctification and living a righteous life is part of what it means to be saved. I'm not saying we get saved because we live a righteous life, we live a righteous life because that's what being saved is. We're saved from our sins.

And so a woman, I don't think she goes to heaven because she's had children particularly, but I do believe that having children is the role that God has to protect women from the temptations outside the home and from the dangers outside the home. The men are the ones who go to battle. The men were the ones who are in law enforcement in the Bible. The men are the ones who go and support the family. The women take care of the home and Paul says that's a good thing for the women. That'll save them and spare them from trials and dangers that they would otherwise have. And so I do agree with that. I think that's what you're saying, isn't it?

Guest (Male): Yeah, thank you.

Steve Gregg: All right, brother. Thanks for your call. You've been listening to the Narrow Path radio broadcast. We're on Monday through Friday. Today's the last day of our broadcast week, but I hope you'll have a good weekend and listen to us again on Monday. We've been doing this Monday through Friday for about 29 years. We pay for scores of radio stations to carry the program. It costs a lot of money. We don't have any sponsors, we don't advertise, we don't sell anything. We are listener supported. If you'd like to help us stay on the air, you're welcome to do so. If you don't want to help us, you can still benefit every day from not only listening to the show, but from all the resources at our website, which are all free at thenarrowpath.com. If you'd like to help support us, you can write to the Narrow Path, P.O. Box 1730, Temecula, California, 92593. Or you can do it from the website thenarrowpath.com. Thanks for joining us. Let's talk again Monday.