Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. If you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276.

That way you get a little bit better for camera stuff. The service is at 10 o'clock. How about that? Quick and slick. Let's get on the air with Rudolph from Raleigh, North Carolina. Rudolph, welcome. You're on the air.

Yes, sir. Do the hopeless witnesses believe in the Trinity? No, they don't. They deny the Trinity. They say the Trinity is three gods. Sometimes they represent it accurately, but no, they deny the doctrine of the Trinity. They deny that Jesus Christ is God in flesh. They deny the truth of the Gospel. They deny Christ's resurrection. It's just a non-Christian cult, non-Christian religion.

I know some things about them, but I was wondering about that. I've heard that the Bible actually says that Jesus is a god. Yes, in John 1, they say they've actually altered the Bible to make it fit what they want. This is not just me saying it.

This is a fact. They've actually altered the Scriptures in order to make the Bible say what they want it to say, and then they have the nerve to claim that their translation is the best, but it's not. There are scholars who've offered to debate the Jehovah's Witness, so to speak, experts. Let's just say that they don't do very well.

They don't want us ever taking them up on it because they get their rears handed to them. Okay. Well, thank you very much. I thank you for the answer. God bless you. Take care. Bye-bye. You too. God bless.

All right. Hey, if you want to give me a call, we have three open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Randall. I guess that's Randall from Kentucky. Randall, welcome. You're on the air.

Yes, sir. I have a question about regeneration. I was listening to that discussion that you and Kelly Powers had, and it was brought up, you know, talking about being born again and everything, and he was placing the ideal of regeneration and born againness tying it to the indwelling, whereas this is the New Testament thing. What was going on with the Old Testament things? Were they regenerated also? There's debate about what was happening, and so some say and some hold to the idea that, yeah, they were regenerated in the Old Testament, and some said, no, they were not, because they didn't have the truth of the Gospel having presented the sacrifice of Christ already presented, so that there was kind of an indwelling but not in a permanent way.

That's just one of the theories. So sometimes some will say, you know, when David said, do not take your Holy Spirit from me, they think that that means that you can lose your salvation, but not necessarily. So some say, well, because the sacrifice hadn't been offered yet, then the Holy Spirit could not indwell a person permanently in the Old Testament, but I don't believe that's true. I believe that the Gospel was instituted by Christ, the pre-incarnate Christ in the garden, and that just as Abraham was justified by faith, you know, Romans 4, 3 quoting Genesis 15, 6, or is it 7, then they would be justified the same way, and there would be a type of regeneration going on. So, you know, it's hard to exactly say, but, yeah, they're saying the same way in the Old Testament, is that we aren't anew, okay? Okay, and like in John 3, like when he was talking about Nicodemus, about being born again, is there anything that you see in that text that would cause that to be like Jesus saying, well, this is going to happen in the future, because when I read it, it looks like he was saying, well, Nicodemus, you should be getting this. So, you know, kind of implying that regeneration was a thing that could happen. Yeah, he should have already understood. That's right. Well, part of the reason is because when you go to John chapter 3, so I have my notes in there, there's a reference to Ezekiel 25, I believe it is, and it talks about the Lord and his work with water on the new birth, and so it's in the Old Testament.

So he's saying, you should know these things. That's what's going on there, and I'm looking for it. I don't have any of my notes in my Bible program. So, yeah, anyway, I got a little distracted by trying to find that. All right. Okay. So what did you think of that discussion we had?

It was good. I think, honestly, whenever he mentioned that part about born again thing, I think where he ties it to the indwelling, it was kind of throwing the logic of the argument, because, like, I think he just wanted to say, well, if he wasn't in the Old Testament, saints were not regenerate, then it shows, you know, they didn't have that irresistible grace and things of that nature. Well, it would be a problem to say they weren't regenerate and they were also justified, because regeneration, and here's the question, what exactly is regeneration? We don't know exactly what it is. It's being born again. It's being indwelt by God.

There's a change in us. We know that there are certain characteristics associated with that. So we know that there were people who loved God. Let's take David, for example.

You know, he did some pretty bad stuff. But he loved the Lord and God blessed him. And even Abraham, it was said, was justified by faith. So if Abraham was justified by faith, that means he's saved. Well, if that's the case, how can you be saved and not be regenerate and not have God living in you and dwelling you?

It would not make any sense. And that's where I'm at with it, too. Also with the circumcision of the heart. That totally sounds like regeneration for me. Yes. It certainly seems like it.

It would certainly make sense. And I found the verse. It's actually in Ezekiel 36, 25, because Jesus says in John 3, 10, to Nicodemus, he says, Are you a teacher of Israel or you don't understand these things? Well, in Ezekiel 36, 25, God says, I will sprinkle clean water on you and you will be clean.

I will cleanse you from all your filthiness, from all your idols. So some say that he probably was referring to that kind of a thing in the Old Testament. But there's some other things as well tied to that. But anyway, there you go. Right. So did you? Yeah.

You're not discussing. Did you understand the issue I was raising about the logical priority of regeneration preceding faith? Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

But I'm totally Calvinist leaning. So I totally get what you're saying. I do.

I really do. And I thought he struggled with that. Yeah, I think for some reason, I think even the simple thing of the born-againness, I think it was tossing the ideals a little bit. I mean, I would love to hear you all discuss it, like the tulip type, focus on the one issue at one time. I think that would help.

I don't know. That was interesting. The discussion was just a bit distracted, I think. Something was lacking in there.

Yeah, I will totally agree. Something was lacking. Yeah. Let's just say he was very antagonistic, very interrupting, aggressive, and I had to call him on that.

He got to stop. So that was part of it. But then we settled down and had a good conversation.

Exactly. Like I've discussed, I mean, I've talked to both of you in the past, and both of you are simple guys with passion. So it's good. I enjoy it. I like your both. Well, good. I appreciate that. Well, thank you for everything you do. I appreciate you, sir. All right, man. Thanks. Bye-bye. Thank you. Okay, we'll see you. Bye.

All right, folks. If you want to give me a call, all you've got to do is dial 877-207-2276. I want to hear from you.

Give me a call. We were talking about this discussion I had with someone, and it was an interesting discussion. My opponent became a little bit obstreperous at one point.

I had to tell him, you know, you've got to stop that. And it was a good discussion. We talked about the issue of regeneration preceding faith was one of the issues. And when I talk about this, regeneration, you know, what is regeneration? Regeneration is the work of God on us and in us where he changes us. It's likened to being born again. To be born again, we have to have a regeneration to see the kingdom of God. Well, one of the questions that we'll ask, or I'll ask, I'll deal with in the issue of the New Testament revelation of Scripture, is can you be regenerate and not justified at the same time? Well, of course you can't be. You have to be regenerate and justified.

Justified means your legal declaration of righteousness. All right, well, if that's the case, which comes first? Is it faith or regeneration? Because to illustrate, there's a logical problem if we say temporal priority. So if we're to say, for example, that faith precedes regeneration, let's say by five seconds. I'm not saying it is five seconds, but let's just use that as a number.

Let's say five seconds. If that's the case, then we have someone who's regenerate who's not a believer for a period of time, and that's a problem. It's a logical problem.

How do you have that? But if you have someone who is regenerate and then five seconds later becomes a believer, then you have a regenerate person who's not a believer at the same time for a period of time, and that's logically problematic. So the solution is in what we call logical priority, not temporal priority. Logical priority deals with what must come first in order for another to exist, but they happen simultaneously. For example, if you turn on a light, when the light hits the light bulb, excuse me, when the electricity hits the light bulb, when electricity hits that light bulb, light is automatically there. They're simultaneous. When electricity is there, light is also there. They both occur at the same time. But electricity is the cause of the light. The light is not the cause of the electricity, though they're simultaneous. And so the electricity is called logically prior, not temporally prior, because they're simultaneous.

It's a logical priority, and the issue is that it must be there, electricity, in order for the other thing to be there simultaneous because it's the cause of the other. So in Reformed theology, we say that regeneration is logically prior to faith in that it must be there in place in order for faith to occur, but they occur at the same time. And so God is the one who regenerates us. He causes us to be born again, 1 Peter 1.3. We're born again not of our own will, John 1.13. That means God's work upon us to make us born again, make us changed, is something that God does to us. Now, the result of that is, of course, that we freely believe, and he grants that we believe, Philippians 1.29. So these are the arguments, and these are the issues that we're talking about here, and so it's a lot of discussion. Now, I'm going to say something that I think is very important because we need to establish unity in the body of Christ because there are unbelievers going to hell, and there are too many people out there who will say, for example, that Calvinists are cultists or don't believe in the true God or the true gospel.

It's like, go away, you know? And they raise to a level of non-essentials. They raise it to the essentials and then judge people. They cause division of the body of Christ. They're going to stop that.

Shouldn't do that. Hey, folks, there's a break, five open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everybody, welcome back to the show. I want you to give me a call because we have nobody waiting right now. 877-207-2276. I want to hear from you.

Give me a call. All right. Now, so what we do here in the radio, of course, is I teach theology and I try and answer questions. I've been doing this for a long time, and it doesn't mean I'm right about everything, but I want you to understand that you need to be checking what I say against Scripture. Now, Acts 17 and 11 says to be a Berean.

That means they even check what Paul said against the word of God, and he said they were noble-minded. So I'm thinking that as Christians who are listening, do you just trust whatever you hear in the radio? You should not do that. You should listen critically. Is this person saying this? And you should be able to say, well, I don't agree or I do agree, or here's the reason I do or don't.

This is important. You can't just believe what everybody's saying. This is a problem because in the world, particularly in secularism, whatever the news media says, you know, these leftist liars, they're just flat out liars, they start saying some people just believe them. They just believe whatever's said, and I have personally encountered people who have believed things about me personally.

They're just not true. They hear things. Gossip gets started, and at any rate, it gets bad, and what I'm saying is, you know what? Do you check what people say against the word of God?

Do you do that? You don't have to be difficult. You don't have to get super deep and do an eight-hour study for one thing, but do you read that word enough to be able to say, wait a minute, I don't know if that's correct or not, and just study, because you've got to do that, you know, and I'm encouraging people to do that, and one of the ways to do that is to open your Bible up and just read it slowly.

I actually teach people when I talk about this sometimes. I say, look, read the Bible two different ways. Take a chapter, for example, and maybe there's a verse you want to look at in that chapter, right? So I say take that chapter and read the chapter as fast as you possibly can, just really, really fast.

You're not focusing on any one thing. You want to get the overall thing of the chapter as fast as you can. Then read it about half as fast the second time. Then go to that single verse and then read that verse or two verses, whatever it is, and say, okay, what's it saying in the overall context? It's a quick trick, and it works, believe it or not. It helps you see the overall context of what's going on, usually, not always, but that's a good thing to do.

I do recommend that. It sounds kind of weird, but you know what? It works.

It really does. All right, let's get on the air with Elijah from Philadelphia. Elijah, welcome.

You are on the air. Hey, man, how are you doing today? Doing all right. Hanging in there, man.

What do you got, buddy? Yeah, I wanted to know what is your interpretation or understanding of Revelation 3, 10, where this is a famous verse where it's preached per verse, like to say that, you know, this is Jesus saying that he's going to keep us from the great tribulation, rapture us out. And I'm looking right here at Bible hub for the Greek word, and one of the meanings that it says on Bible hub is that it says the testing here is experience of evil. So I just wanted to know what are the results on this verse?

Yeah, it's perosmos and to tempt, temptation, trial, things like that, putting the test. So what I say to the pre-tribbers and stuff, and they go to that verse, I say, well, what's the context? Who's it written to? Is it written to the entire church or is it written to the church of Philadelphia? Because that's what it says to the angel, to the church of Philadelphia, right? He who is holy, who is true. I know your deeds. Behold, I will cause those of the setting order of Satan who will say that they are Jews and are not, but lie. I'll make them come and bow down at your feet and make them know that I have loved you because you have kept the perseverance I was supposed to keep you from the hour of testing. Well, wait a minute. If this is pre-trib rapture, then where is it that the people are going to come down and bow down at the feet of the Christians?

Just simple. What people often do is to read one verse out of context and then misapply it. They misapply it.

That's what they're doing there. It's not about the rapture. It's not about the great tribulation. It's specifically written to the church of Philadelphia and in the context it talks about the wicked people bowing down before the people of Philadelphia in the church. But he says he's going to test the whole world.

Okay. So he can test the whole world. Then does that mean then that it's a tribulation period?

If it is, then we have to understand how the other stuff fits in with it. Because when he says he can test the whole world, the whole earth, we know that what came after Revelation was written was the dispersion of the Jews and the Christians who went to Mediterranean area because they were persecuted by the Roman Empire. And so it looks like that was fulfilled at that time because the book of Revelation, a lot of people don't realize, was written in code so that those who studied the Old Testament would understand the idea of what was taught in Revelation. So that those who got the book, like the Romans and a lot of the Jews wouldn't understand because they didn't have the mind of Christ, they wouldn't know what was going on. So a lot of people think that what's going on with the book of Revelation, it was written to the people of that time and the people of that time understood exactly what was going on, the temptation from Philadelphia, the persecution upon the church that was going to come to them, he was going to deliver them through it. And people did.

They fled, they hid themselves, they disappeared to hold that. And so for someone to say, well, this means we're not going to go through the tribulation period, it just doesn't say that. That's not what it says at all. Okay? Yes. Also, I wanted to bring it to your attention. I don't know if you know this, but if you look up, because I know you hold to all millennialism and you hold to the view that in Revelation 20, the angel of the chains is symbolic. And did you know this, that in 2 Peter 2, 4, if you look up the Hebrew, I mean, not the Hebrew, the Greek on the Strong's lexicon on Bible hub for the word chains, and then you look up the Strong's lexicon for chains in Revelation 20, they actually used two different Greek words for chains.

Did you know this? I don't understand. Wait, I don't understand the one word.

For what? What's the word? Chain? They used two different Greek words for chain.

For king? K-I-N-G? Chain. No, chain. I don't understand the word. Spell it. Spell the word. C-H-A-I-N. Oh, chain.

A chain. Okay. Okay.

Yeah, with chains. All right. So I'm not sure I understand. Okay. 2 Peter 2, 4 and Revelation 20, they both used two different Greek words for chains.

Okay. Well, I don't see in the NASB, I don't see the word chain in 2 Peter 2, 4. 2 Peter 2, 4. So unless what you want to say is that it's in the King James, let's see.

2 Peter 2, 4. Yeah, most of the... And deliver them onto chains. Yeah.

Yeah, and chains. And there is 45, 77. Let me look at it during the break, okay? Because there's a break. Okay. We'll be right back.

Okay, folks. Hey, please hold on. We'll be right back after these messages. Three open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Okay, everyone, welcome back to the show. We have three open lines at the bottom of the hour, 877-207-2276. Elijah, you still there?

Yep, still here. All right. Yeah, this is really interesting. So I studied this during the break, and I'm really intrigued because in the King James...

Here, let me do this. And the NASB says pits of darkness for the word chains. And the ESV says chains of gloomy darkness. The King James says chains of darkness. The New King James says chains of darkness. The RSV says gloom, pits of the nether gloom. LEB says chains of darkness.

And then gloomy dungeons in the NIV. And so I'm like, wow, that's really interesting. There's all these different translations.

So I looked at it, and it's the way the NASB translates the word. Let's see, get over here. Let's see, what? Okay, hold on.

I was really getting into this, actually, quite a bit. So 2 Peter 2.4, and the cast them into hell and pits of darkness. So the word pits there in Greek is seris. And it's the word translated as chains.

But when I looked at the lexicon, this is what it says. A cord banned a chain. In 2 Peter 2.4, the chains mentioned are not to be understood as literal material shackles. The expression of darkness indicates that darkness itself somehow serves to restrain these fallen beings. Because the word darkness, sozo, sofu, is there. So pits of darkness, chains of darkness. So that it doesn't make sense to say literal chains of darkness. This is why the NASB says pits, which seems to relate over to Jude 6, which talks about the fallen angels did not keep their first abode, but has been kept under bonds of darkness. Anyway, it's really interesting.

I didn't have enough time to get through more, but it was like, wow, I'm just loving what I'm seeing. So I'm not sure it helps anything, but just more information. So go ahead. What was your question?

Let's get back on track. Yeah, my question was because since the Greek word for chains there is different from chain in Revelation 20, I was thinking that maybe you were onto something when you said that the chain in Revelation 20 was symbolic. That was actually what I was reading in 2 Peter 2.4, because of the context. It would be chains of darkness. How do you have chains of darkness? The implication is that darkness somehow is binding them. But what does that mean?

That's why I'm saying it's really intriguing. I've never seen that before. So figuratively, in Revelation 20, when it says the key to the abyss and the great chain in his hand, chains as in chains for the hands and feet, manacles or shackles, is how that's used. And so it's talking about literal chains, the actual chain word, but obviously it's a literal chain used of a figurative something. So it's a figurative use of the term chain is what it comes down to. So I'm reading some more.

They should have imprisoned, but chaining their right arm to the left arm of the soldier who guarded them. And that's what the word chain there is. So anyway, John is using the term in Revelation 20.

And you're right, it is a different word. I think the word in 2 Peter 2.4, I think it's really interesting why it says that. Pits of darkness versus chains of darkness. Pits of darkness, chains of gloomy darkness.

Chains of darkness. I'm going to give you one more interesting verse before I go. Sure, sure.

This is fun. Yeah, go ahead. So do you remember when I called you a few weeks ago and I told you about the guy who said that a guy gave him visions of hell, you know, being locked up in a prison cell in hell? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. He actually gives several Bible verses for it because I actually went back and watched his video. So I'm going to give you one. Okay.

You can go to Isaiah 24, 21, and 22. Okay. So it will happen in that day that the Lord will punish the host of heaven on high and the kings of the earth on high. They will be gathered together like prisoners in the dungeon and will be confined in prison, okay?

And that for many days they'll be punished, okay? Yeah, okay. Yeah. So... Yeah. Yeah, I could see that, but I'm cautious about interpreting it that way. But anyway, I see what he's saying.

Go ahead. There's others, though, too. It's not just that one, though. Yeah, I'm sure there are.

Here's the thing. We know that the wicked are going to be cast into the lake of fire. If they're in a prison cell, is the prison cell cast into the lake of fire? Or are they removed from a prison cell in the afterlife and then cast in? We know that in Luke 16, 19-31, Lazarus and the rich man, he wasn't in any kind of container.

So we don't see that kind of a thing. So when it says here in Isaiah 24, 22, so it will happen in that day, the Lord will punish the host of heaven on high and the kings of the earth. They will be gathered together like... It says like prisoners. So like prisoners in a dungeon and will be confined in prison, and after many days, they'll be punished. So is a prison a literal prison? Or is it a restriction confinement of freedom?

And he's using an analogy. That's the question I would ask at that point and start to study it and see. Read the ESB version.

The ESB version makes it sound like it is a literal prison. Okay, let me get over to it. Let's see. Let's see where we can do that one. Oh, I know what we'll do. All right, Isaiah. So you think... Come on. 21 and 2.

Okay. ESB, they'll be gathered together as prisoners in a pit. They'll be shut up in a prison. After many days, they'll be punished. That's verse 22 or 21.

Oh, that was 22. Okay. So if you go to the previous verse, the ESB says, On the day the Lord will punish the host of heaven and heaven, the kings of the earth on the earth. Yeah. So anyway, this guy is saying that that means that when you die, the bad people go into a prison cell? Not all of them. Because he pointed the verse out where Jesus said that they will receive greater damnation. So he was just getting at there's different levels of torment.

And that's true. Pointing out that verse and many other verses to point to the prison cells in hell. But what he teaches is that the current place of hell now where there's prison cells, and there's also fire in hell as well. He said he saw people burning down there too.

That place is the current hell which is going to be thrown into the lake of fire, like Revelation, I think it's 2015 that says that or something like that. Yeah. You know what's actually interesting is I've been paying attention a little bit more online on YouTube to NDEs, Near Death Experiences. They just kind of started popping up and I started watching a few. There are some wacko ones, the ethereal presence of oneness with the universe.

They're being deceived obviously. And you don't find too many about bad situations. Usually it's really good. Everything's good. And so I'm going to start finding the ones where they say, It was bad.

It was horrible. Let's see what the commonalities are between them. The only reason I will even entertain that possibility is because of 2 Corinthians 12, 2 through 4 where Paul says, I know a man 14 years ago whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, but such a man was caught up in the third heaven and he saw things, etc. So it looks like it might be Paul who was stoned and he talked about himself. That's one of the commentary's theories.

But nevertheless, in the body or out of the body I do not know, but he was alive and he went someplace. So I think that's sufficient evidence to say there's an NDE. I mean we continue on after death, and I don't see any reason why people can't actually experience certain things and then report them back. So that's why I'm interested in that more and more.

So there are definitely degrees of punishment. People do describe horrendous stuff. In fact, I'm rambling here a little bit quickly, but one of the things I read once in a book on NDEs is that a particular ER doctor had never had any experiences with this before and was in ER and giving CPR, doing chest compressions on a guy. And he was gone, and he was just boom, boom, just working on it, trying to bring him back. And he said that this guy woke up and was screaming and grabbed the doctor by the smock, was yelling, let me die, I'm in hell, yelling and screaming. And he died. Ooh, yeah.

Scary stuff. Hey, you want to hold on? We've got a break. Here, hold on there.

Do you want to go or not? Four open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. Music It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everybody, welcome back to the last segment of the show. Let's see if Elijah is still on. Yep, I guess he is. Hey, you still there?

Yep, I'm still here. All right, man. Interesting conversation, man. I like when one thing leads to another to another.

I enjoy that. But at any rate, I don't know if I answered your original question or what the issue was, but I've been enjoying our conversation. Yeah, if you want, I could resend you the video of his testimony because I think I said it, but I'm not sure if you got the email. I have thousands of emails. Seriously, I've just wiped out so many, but yeah, send it to me. See if you can check it out. I like NDE stories, and I'm checking them out, okay? Yeah, I'll send it to you immediately after this, and before I go, I just found one more verse for Prison Cells in Hell.

This is Proverbs 7, 27, and you can read that. Okay. Yeah, I'll have to check things out. All right, man. All right. Appreciate it. Have a good one, Matt Slick. You too. Thank you so much. All right.

All right. Okay, four open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Armando from Florida. Hey, Armando. Hope the storm's not wiping you out out there. You're welcome.

You're on the air. No, sir. Thank you, sir. I want to know what's the proper context, understanding of Matthew 7-1. Do not judge that you'll not be judged for the way that you judge.

You'll be judged by your standards of measure. So what you understand is that what he's talking about is the Jews, because he's talking here in the Beatitudes. And the Beatitudes are generic principles of behavior and belief that we're to have. The Jews were very judgmental people because they had the law, the oracles of God, and so they were very judgmental, very judgmental. And Paul talks about this in Romans chapter 2. Jesus is saying, don't judge unless you're going to be judged. And the way that you judge, you're going to be judged.

That's what he's saying. That doesn't mean we can't make spiritual judgments, because spiritual judgments out of 1 Corinthians 2.15, for example, if someone's murdering, we could say, hey, you're wrong for doing that. That is a spiritual judgment, and we're judging the person.

You are wrong. You're in sin. We can certainly do that, and the Bible supports that. So what Jesus is talking about is the general idea of the Jews who were awfully condemning of the Gentiles and other people because they were self-righteous. Don't judge. Do not judge. So you'll not be judged, because by the standard that you judge, you're going to be judged yourself. So if you're saying you're keeping the law and you don't, you're in trouble, buddy.

And this is what's basically going on. I can hear some people say also that the only Jesus in God has to ultimately judge who goes to hell and who goes to heaven, right? No preacher can say who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, right?

Right. We don't have the authority to condemn anybody, but we have the authority to pronounce condemnation upon people. You see, if someone is saying Jesus is not God, for example, then I can say, look, if you continue to deny that or to affirm that Jesus is not God, and you deny who he is, you're on your way to hell.

I can't call your brother right now. You're in a state of damnation. I'm not judging them. And as I say to people, I'll say, I'm informing you of the situation. I'm not making a judgment. I'm repeating to you what Jesus has said. Jesus said in John 8, 24, unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.

So what I do is I inform people. You're judging me. Nope. Judgment belongs to God. I'm informing you about this, and I will make spiritual judgments, and I will tell you that as long as you continue to deny him, you are going to go to hell. You need to repent. This is not me being mean. It's me informing you, and that's how I handle it with them. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Anything else? That's it. Thank you. I would like to use the number one verse in most of the unbelievers to justify.

Nobody can judge them at all. Right. And that's the way to say God. Well, a lot of times when unbelievers use the verse, and I'll say, hey, did you hear that? They'll quote, and I'll say, did you hear what?

I say, well, you know, like a verse being ripped out of context, because you guys don't understand the context. Let's talk. So I have a little bit of fun with them. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. All right, man. God bless. Thank you. God bless. Okay. There's Armando from Florida, and we have nobody waiting.

If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. You know, this reminds me. There's a particular verse, John 2023, that is used by people. In this issue of judgment, when, you know, Matthew 7-1, don't judge lest you be judged, verse 7-2, that you'll be judged by the way that you judge others. So this is why you have to be careful how you judge people. And like I said, we can make spiritual judgments. Now, can we then pronounce judgment on someone?

Yes, we can. If what we're doing is informing them about what God has already revealed. We're not condemning. We're telling them they're condemned.

That's what we're doing. So I can connect the dots, but I want to just jump over to this verse, John 2023. The Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox like to use this a lot. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they have been retained. And what they want to say is that the priests have the authority to make the judgment. They can judge people. They can forgive their sins and pronounce forgiveness and not forgiveness. They actually have the authority to actually do that.

That's what they're going to say. And I tell them, I say, look what the verse says, if you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven. Now, have been forgiven is interesting because what it's saying is they've already been forgiven because have been forgiven in the Greek is the perfect tense. Now, this is important because the perfect tense, for example, here's present tense. I eat. The perfect tense is I have eaten. The pluperfect is I had eaten. So when I say I eat in the present tense, it's just an occurrence now. If I say I have eaten, it's an action in the past that continues in the present. You can say I have eaten.

It doesn't mean you stopped. But to say I had eaten or I had walked or I had thought about it means that it was a past action completed in the past. Or perfect tense, a past action continuing in the present. And this is a perfect tense, a past action continuing in the present. If you forgive the sins, their sins have been forgiven.

That means it's already done in the past and going on now. So this is an issue that's really important because the Catholics, when they quote this, they don't quote this. They don't quote it accurately. If their sins are forgiven, then they're forgiven them. It doesn't say that. It says in the Greek they have been forgiven. And they like to skip that part. If you retain their sins, they have been retained.

So what's going on? They are not pronouncing the actual act of forgiveness as if they have authority to do it, but they are pronouncing what has already occurred, informing. That's what's going on in John 20-23. Furthermore, if it's the case, as the Catholics like to say, that the priests have the opportunity or the ability to forgive sins, then I have a question. Is Jesus then obligated to forgive sin if the priest declares it? If the priest declares them to be forgiven, does Jesus have to come through and say, okay, I've got to forgive him now because the priest said so because he's got authority?

What if there's a mistake from the priest where he forgives someone, at least not the will of Christ, to do so? These are questions we have to talk about and ask, et cetera, et cetera. Let's get to Amor. And welcome. You're on the air. Hey, Matt. I'm a regular caller.

I haven't spoken to you for a while, but I think I will be your last caller here. I'd like to talk about Catholics and everything that's related to my question. And I have a family that are still Catholic, Roman Catholics. So the question, the Roman Catholic people, they acknowledge also the Trinity, Jesus is the only way, et cetera, et cetera. On the other hand, they still worship or pray for Mary, the Pope and all those things, saying it's stopping them to go to Heaven. Yes, it stops them. Yes, they believe in the Trinity, and the Catholic Church has a very good understanding and teaching on the Trinity.

It does. But they deny the true Gospel, and they are idolaters. So they deny the true Gospel that we're justified by faith alone in Christ alone.

Paragraph 2068 of the Catholic Catechism says that you obtain salvation by faith, baptism, and the observance of the commandments. So they teach a false Gospel. Yes, because they acknowledge they believe in Christ is the only way, the Trinity.

Yes, they do. But at the same time, they go and pray for Mary and the Pope and the same, so that prevents them to go to Heaven. Well, what they do with Mary, incidentally, is raise her to the functioning level of a goddess. Now, they'll say she's not a goddess, but I'll say, well, look, does Mary hear millions of prayers simultaneously all over the earth in different languages, both thought and spoken, and she knows the intention of the hearts of the people who are praying? And the Catholics will say, well, yes. I say, well, there you go. She's a functioning goddess.

No, she's not a goddess. And they just, you know, it's called cognitive dissonance on their part. They can't see the problem. Yeah, that's what it is.

It's also called lamism. Go ahead. And God bless you.

Continue what you're doing, man. Okay. All right, man. Thanks. God bless. Appreciate it. All right. Since I have stuff up here on my file on Mary, we'll just kind of end with that a little bit.

Check this out. In paragraph 971, it says devotion to Mary expresses, it says the liturgical feasts dedicated to the mother of God and Mary in prayer, such as the rosary, an epitome of the gospel, express this devotion to Mary. In paragraph 2677, they say you entrust our cares to Mary. In 2677, you ask Mary to pray for you, so they pray to Mary. Okay? And they call her the All-Holy One.

Let's see. She is the perfect pray-er, the one who prays, a figure of the church. When we pray to her, we're adhering with her to the plan of the Father, paragraph 2779. In paragraph 971, it says the liturgical feasts dedicated to the mother of God and Mary in prayer, such as the rosary, are an epitome of the whole gospel.

That's ridiculous. Mary is worshipped. This is Vatican Council 2, page 420. When she marries a subject of preaching and a worship, she prompts a faithful to come to her son.

And I love this one. Paragraph 972, I ask Catholics. I say, do you agree with this? After speaking of the church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. I say, do you agree with that? Paragraph 972 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. They say yes. I say, so the best way is to look to Mary, not Jesus?

Right? After speaking of the church, her origin, the mission, and the destiny of the church. The best way to look is to Mary, not Jesus.

Wow. To me, it's just blatant idolatry. How about paragraph 2677? By entrusting ourselves to her prayer, we abandon ourselves to the will of God together with her. I'm entrusting ourselves to her prayer. I don't trust myself to Mary's prayer.

I trust myself to Jesus. How about this? Let's see. How about, let's see. She's magnet of conception.

Mary is the all holy one. I won't read all the locations. Oh, we're out of time. I get this paragraph of stuff about her. You won't believe what they say.

It's idolatry. Anyway, folks, there you go. Call back tomorrow. We can talk about Catholicism. I can tell you stuff you've never heard before. Oh, my goodness. It's bad news. Hey, we're out of time. May the Lord bless you. Have a great evening, everybody. God bless. Another program powered by the Truth Network.