Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick Live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at Carm.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick Live for answers, taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick.

Hey everybody, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick. Here's the match look live. And I hope you're all going to have a good time listening. And let's see, I'll get back on here.

I hit the wrong button when I did something here. All right, all right, all right, all right.

So there you go. And I want to hear from you. Give me a call, okay? The number 877207-2276. If you want, you can give me a call.

I would love to hear from you. Also, if you want, you can send an email to me, info at carm.org. Info at C-A-R-M dot O-R-G. Just info at carm.org, and we can get back in. I mean, we can uh we can get you on the air.

Check out those emails. All right, so. There you go, and we're working it right here. All right. Hey, let's just get on the air with Jim from Iowa.

Jim, welcome. You are on the air. The verse in the Bible, first in the New Testament, says, Whosoever shall put away or divorce his wife And marries another commits adultery, and whoever marries her, which is put away, commits adultery.

So that means. If you divorce your wife for any reason other than fornication and get married again, you're in an adulterous marriage. Is that right? Or if your spouse abandons you out of 1 Corinthians 7.

So abandonment and adultery are grounds for divorce. Abandonment is? Abandonment, yes, out of First Corinthians seven.

Alright.

So so if you do get if you if it's not for those reasons and you get married again, you're in an adulterous marriage, right? Yeah, and then there's questions as to what to do in different situations and it can become a little bit difficult to get through all the details really quickly and easily, but you know, we can do it. Where's that abandonment thing on? 1 Corinthians 7.

Okay, I didn't even know that. I have to read that. Sure, it's in 1 Corinthians 7. There's quite a few ad ad adulterous marriages in Arthur. Yes, but then what would we do with the issue of um Let's say we have a marriage that was not biblical, and then someone becomes a Christian later when they're married to somebody else.

What do you do?

Well, what you do is you tell them to stay married and to walk with the Lord, and that the sins are forgiven.

Well, that's a move for the marriage. As long as it's not an adulterous marriage, right? No, no, no. What do you want to do? Look, let's just say a couple is married, she commits adultery, they're unbelievers, he, she, he, forget it, she doesn't commit adultery, they just don't like each other to get a divorce.

It's not a good biblical grounds, then he gets married later on. And then he becomes a believer. Then what? You just say, Oh, you're adulterous. And well, hold on, hold on, hold on.

Hold on. Hold on. Yeah.

So what do you do? You just say he's adulterous, or do you sit there and say, Okay, this was all under the blood of Christ, and now what you have to do is just stay married and just move forward? I still think it'd be an adulterous marriage. How about if uh Two homosexuals get so called married. That's an account of Pat Mary's.

No, that's not a marriage. It's not a legitimate marriage.

Okay, I got you. Yeah, you're right about that.

Okay. You're right about that.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, you're welcome.

Well, God bless. Mm. All right, want to give me a call. The number is easy 8772072276. You can give me a call.

And I just got a little bit of an announcement in that I do plan to be going out to North Carolina in August, August 15th, 16th, 17th range. That's the weekend I'm supposed to be there, and I do hope to be there. unless something help happens. My wife's health is has improved sufficiently for me to be able to go.

So that's what I want to do. And we're going to hopefully work.

Alright, so there you go. All right, let's get on the air with. Joshua from North Carolina. Joshua, welcome. You're on the air.

All right, so you're headed to North Carolina. Lord dwelling. Yeah, Lord Wellen. All right. I think I called in one time before.

I really enjoyed your input on. You know, our conversation. It's been a couple of shows ago, so I'm sure you don't remember, but uh I was having a conversation with a friend and um, you know, uh I think I was studying Paul's letter to the church in Corinth, and I posted a little scripture. And uh my friend um is a part of the Episcopal Church, not the denomination, you know. Holds any weight in this, but uh, you know, his response to me uh posting this uh scripture was, man, Paul was just trying to make everyone perfect.

And which scripture is that to him was uh Which scripture? 1 Corinthians, don't hold me to it. I can't remember the exact scripture, but it was, you know, striving, aiming for perfection. you know um Well without going Without knowing the verse, it's hard to comment on it. You know, it's it's tough.

Well, Matthew 5:48 is really. Oh yeah. That's be perfect. Your Father in heaven is yeah, that's be Yeah, I know it well. I know the cop Yeah.

Yeah, but it's not about Okay, go ahead. I mean, I want to hear your input on the script, on the scripture. Just, I mean, what is your. Interpretation on that?

Well, what he's saying is, be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect. But what he's talking about is not perfection in the level of God. He's talking about the context in Matthew 5:43. He's talking about love. He says, Love, you know, God loves everyone equally.

Let's arrange shine the good and the bad. And so, therefore, you know, if you only love your brother, what good is that? Therefore, be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect.

So, the context is about loving people equally. That's what the context is about. That's it. I mean, that's what it is. Starting verse 43 is what you do.

You go and you check it out, you read it, and that's what it is. Hello? We lose ya? Hello? Maybe we lost them.

I'll give them a little bit of time here. And uh We'll just see what happens. No? I'll put him on hold. We'll come back to him a little bit.

Let's get to Jermaine from North Carolina. Jermaine, welcome. You are on the air. Oh, hey, Matt. I um Um Just want to ask you about the second commandment in graven images, I I know Some people I've heard have a problem with people who portray Jesus Christ in.

in uh movies and plays and whatnot. I don't find any issue with it, but It seems like some people do. Would that be considered getting towards a violation of the Second Commandment? No, because uh it says don't make an image of the Lord to God, etcetera, things in heaven and earth, that you would bow down to them and use them in worship service. That's what it's trying to say is don't do it.

That's what is forbidding.

Alright.

So, and you go to Leviticus 26, 1, Exodus 20 verses 4 and 5 for that. And so, what we have to understand is just an issue of the context. And that's what's going on there. It's just a contextual issue.

So, no, it's not a problem. I don't really, particularly, in my opinion, I don't really like to have. any images of of Jesus in my home. I I just don't like that. You know, it's so that's me.

Yeah, no, I agree with you, but I actually like we don't have any images. I don't think any of them are accurate, and that the image wouldn't matter anyway, but I I do uh I don't have a problem with people who are acting because I if anything I feel like depe depending on the context, I've seen more people kind of get more curious about the gospel and about God's Word by By just watching the depiction.

So I don't, and you know, you know, going in what this is, this is not. actual price, but I I just was kind of to hear people who I respect like Votie Bockham. If the mother's kind of speak against it, you know, weren't they work too harsh, but I I was just a little that they were against it at all because I didn't see the big deal myself. Right, I agree with you, with you. And here's something.

I haven't gone to this in a long time, but Philippians 1:15. He says, Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some from also goodwill. The latter do it out of love, knowing that I'm appointed for the defense of the gospel. The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives thinking to cause me distress. What then?

Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed. And in this I rejoice. Yes, I will rejoice.

So I look at it that way. I would rather have an actor portray Christ in a crucifixion for people to be able to see it, for have the video be sent out to people in Africa who don't have internet and don't have stuff. And they can see films. Oh my goodness, that's who he is. That's what he did.

And they know it's an actor. And then they want to trust in Christ. I have no problem with that at all. as long as you don't look at that Caucasian guy, blond you know, the blonde haired black Caucasian serpent dude, that guy. You know.

But that's the only concern I'd have. But even then, I think God is quite gracious and we wouldn't have to worry about it. You know?

So Right, and and I I I do have a p a problem with the uh The blonde hair blue eye depiction only because I wouldn't care if that's what he actually looked like. I'm pretty sure he didn't, but. I only had a problem with that because I've seen that push heavenly in uh Mormonism. in other areas where that becomes the epitome of what they believe Christ is and I've seen people even try to alter their appearance to look like that. Yeah, and so that's the only time I would have an issue there.

Yeah, I agree with you. You know, the Mormon depictions are so, I mean, uber Caucasian-ish. Uh You know, I've been to Israel and I've seen them, the Jews, and Jesus was Jewish, and. I'm telling you, they're Caucasian. I don't remember seeing any blondes.

with blue eyes, but um Whatever. I don't know. I don't care what color Jesus was. I just care that he shed his blood for me. That's all I care about.

That's all that's important to me.

So, yeah. Oops. Yeah.

So I guess if I ask a follow-up, we already know that the Mormon version would be a graven image. Yes, it is.

Well, for one, they don't really bow down to it. Mormons may have an image of the. That kind of personal representation of Christ in their home. And from what I've seen and heard, they never bow down to the statue, they never bow down to the paintings. Not like the Catholics do.

They bow down in front of images and East Orthodox before icons. But the LDS Jesus, of course, is not the Jesus of the Bible. He's the brother of the devil begotten through relations between God and his God. His wife came to another planet. That's not the God of Scripture.

That's not the Christ of Scripture.

So they have a false God to begin with and a false Christ.

So. Yeah.

Bad news. All right. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Alright.

Well, sounds good, big man. You got anything else? Uh well, yeah.

Okay, so since we're on the image of Christ, I actually.

So, I saw the Passion of the Christ when it first came out many, many years ago. Yeah, me too. And I. And I understand uh Mel Gibson's in a more But I went to see the movie and uh I actually From what I understood I I had I even had someone, you know, kind of mocking Jesus before they saw the film. When we were in the theater, I observed what looked like almost like a supernatural event where I saw I was in a, I guess you would say, a bad environment.

People are being loud and Obnoxious And I was wondering why they even came to see the movie. But when we got to the actual deflogging and the scourging, And the crucifixion, it was dead silence, and I saw people who I would consider. I guess you would call them like almost like Hey, we got a break. We got a break, man. Hold on, okay.

We'll get back to you after the break, okay? Because I want to hear that comment. Hey, folks, be right back with Jermaine right after these messages. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick Live, taking a call at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, buddy. Welcome back to the show. Let's get back on with. Jermaine from North Carolina.

Okay, go ahead, Jermaine. You said you were in the theater and people would change.

Well, well, by change, I mean the attitude, the atmosphere, because I was in a I guess you consider more of an inner city part of town, so you had Guys coming in who looked a little rough of various nationalities, and it was loud and kind of rambuckious. I think we saw maybe the Matine version at night, so it was uh it it was maybe like some people needed time to occupy themselves and I wanted to see the movie and My wife is with me and my one of my sisters-in-laws and We were just trying to enjoy the movie. And as time went on, I noticed that the move kept getting more serious, and I couldn't help but take a look at folks when I saw. When they got to the scourging, and the really brutal treatment of Christ. I have never seen it depicted on screen like that before.

And apparently, neither had anyone else because I watched the entire theater go dead silent. You could not hear. A sound. And I watched some of these same guys. I couldn't help it.

I turned around to take a look. And every young person in there had their eyes glued on the screen, and I even saw people. cheered up, gasping, and I I I saw some people just in complete and utter shock. To watch that. And I thought, you know what?

I I may not agree with a lot of uh some of the stuff I saw in the movie was was Mel Gibson taking some liberties, which he freely admitted. But that particular depiction seemed more due it did more positive and negative because I I don't think we get a true Understanding of what that was, like what an actual scourging was or what a crucifixion was. in brutal detail. And I was very grateful that I saw the movie and it was Dead Silent Walking Out as well. And I have never.

I never went to a movie where I experienced that.

So I figured, hey, you know what? I'm not going to be too judgmental about things I don't. know in someone's belief but I believe God was using that moment to get people's attention. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, I agree.

He was he was using he was using that, and he can use it. And so praise God for it, whether in pretense or even with some error in it. What they portrayed was pretty accurate about the crucifixion. And the flogging, the beating, and everything, and it's incredibly sobering.

So, uh, and then I think he's doing one with a follow-up with a resurrection.

So can you imagine if those uh films have been Put out across the world. You know, to people who don't know, like in Iran and Muslim countries, and it was able to be seen, oh my goodness. Oh my goodness. And I I understand some countries did ban the movie. I believe just because of uh the content.

Yep. And it would. But people have a way of getting movies. There's ways to get VPNs, and you can get online, you can do stuff, you can spoof servers, you can do stuff, they can get in, they can see stuff. But yeah.

That's right.

Okay. All right. All right. All right. Well, thanks again, Matt.

I always appreciate your time, and I'm more willing I'll be giving you a call to market. All right, man. God bless, brother. Appreciate it. All right, that was Jermaine.

He's always good, good for a good question. And we're talking about it. I'm streaming live into TikTok. And Bill Morgan says I gave my life to Christ watching that movie. That's what he just said on the uh on there.

So wow, you know, praise God.

Okay, I just want to remind you guys, uh, on the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth of August, I plan to be out there in North Carolina, Raleigh area, um, Cannapolis. I'm going to speak at a conference on Islam. I'll be speaking a little on on Muslim Islam and on also on Christianity. on basic doctrines and some stuff. Because you need to know what it is you believe in order to defend it and on Christian on Islam as well.

So I think I'm speaking two or three times and then two or three workshops. I got actually six total. And then what I want to do is spend another day or two out there. I want to go to Winston-Salem, see the radio headquarters. I've never been there.

I want to do that. Got a friend I want to see down in another city, Castonia. And then maybe the idea, I don't know, if someone wants me to speak at a church on a Monday, Tuesday kind of a thing, let me know. Maybe a Wednesday, even. It just depends.

Because I get hotels. I got to stay. It's extra days. It's extra fuel. It's for car rental, extra rental, extra hotels, and all that kind of stuff.

So. And maybe just get a restaurant someplace to meet at where people can just drive in and whatever, and you can meet. It's fun. I've done it before, it's a lot of fun. All right.

If you want to give me a call, the number is 877-207-2276. Let's get to Elijah from Pennsylvania. Elijah, welcome. You're on the air. Hey, Matt.

Um my question today is um What do you think about the apparent contradiction in Second Kings eight twenty six? in 2 Chronicles. 222.

Okay. I saw a Muslim video today where the Muslim guy brought this up to a Christian on a street corner. Yeah.

It's a copyist error. And uh so I've written an article on this. You can go to Carmen and you can see the article. And I show the notation that was used when it was done.

So, this is it. The discrepancy in ages is due to a copyist error. We can see the differences is 20 years. The system of number notation used by the Jews at the time of Ezra consisted of horizontal hooks that represented decades. And I show a picture of it.

Three vertical bars with a horizontal hook. That would equal the number 14, where three four oh it's four horizontal bars. With two hooks would be twenty-four. If one or both of the hooks were smudged or flaked off of papyri, then the dates would be off by 10 years or a factor of 10.

So that that's it.

Now, a Muslim might come back. And the name of the article is, well, just go to Charlie, just go to Uh Bible difficulties to look up uh 2 Kings 8.26. It's how old was Aha. How old was Ahaziah? when he began to rule over Jerusalem.

So, when a Muslim brings up something like this, I say, well, it's a copyist error, it's a textual variant. And I wait. Because they're going to say, Oh, the pilot's been corrupted. And I say, Well, wait a minute, wait a minute, let me ask you a question. It says, If if a car exists, and then let's say that there is a dent in just a little part of the left fender.

Does that mean the whole car is not not trustworthy? Of course not. That's what you're doing. You're saying that a sm a a the documents are super old, that maybe uh just a a flake came off. These these little hooks are really small.

Maybe the copy has just missed it, or maybe just like I said, it just it just flaked off because the document's old. I said, Does that mean the whole document's Well, okay, does it mean the whole document's not trustworthy? And of course, logically, no. But they're going to just stand on on that horse. They're going to say, Oh, it means the whole thing's not trustworthy.

And I'll say, Well, wait a minute. The Bible never says anywhere I'm leading up to something. The Bible never says anywhere that every single detail in it is perfect and needs to stay perfect. Where the Quran says that there's any discrepancy in the Quran, it's not from Allah, Surah 482. And then I say, and I can show you discrepancies.

That means your Quran is false, but it doesn't mean that the Bible is. You're using another thing, they're doing is what's called an external critique. An internal critique is to go inside the scriptures and say this is what the problem is.

Well, okay, got it. But an external critique, what they're doing is saying it can't be trustworthy because their standard is that it can't have any copyist errors, otherwise, it's not true. That's their standard, that's not the biblical standard.

So hold on, buddy, we've got a break coming up. Hey, folks, be right back after these messages with Elijah from Pennsylvania. If you want to give me a call, the number is 877-2072276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick Live, taking a call at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, at the bottom of the hour, it's 8772-07-2276. Let's get back on with Elijah. Welcome.

You're back on the air. Yeah, so so my follow-up question is this.

So, usually, when I compare translations in the Old Testament, sometimes I go to the uh Septuagint 'cause usually the Septuagint uh you know, solves problems for me. But um, when I went to the Septuagint, For uh 2 Kings 8 26, it says 20 and two years, and for 2 Chronicles 22:2, the Septuagint says. twenty years.

So even in the Septuagint, it's still a There's still a problem there.

So, do you think it was a copy of Arabical the Septuagint as well?

Well, probably. You see, the Septuagint wasn't done by one person. It was done by they say 70, hence Septuagint. Over, I think, 100 years or something like this, 70, 100 years. And so, when you have the documents of the Old Testament, It makes sense to say that what probably happened was either Kings or Chronicles, one of them is more logical than the other, figure out which one is they believe was the correct one.

Uh yeah, the one that's incorrect. You know, like a little flake occurred. And then the copiers of the Septuagint got that and just copied it as it was, signifying that the copyist, that the Textual variant, you know, it was before the Septuagint. And you know, a lot of times people will say, Well, that means the Bible is not trustworthy. And I give them the car analogy.

Well, you know, a little dent in the fenders, it means the car is not reliable. Of course not. So they throw the baby out the bath water, they're looking for an excuse. But I'd say, look, um This shows that the Bible is old. It shows that the scripts are thousands of years old.

What do you think is going to happen? Do you think that everything's going to be preserved absolutely perfectly? Because I've asked people this, if it was, every single thing in every manuscript everywhere all the time is all exactly identical.

Well, you'd probably say something like, Well, that's collusion. Nothing could be that perfect from history.

So it doesn't matter what position you hold, critics are going to attack it. And I would just bring up what I did, and with a Muslim in particular, Surah 482, then I'd take him to. Surah 84, 5 through 6, which says that a man's seed comes from his chest.

Now, see, that's a discrepancy, therefore, you're wrong. And uh the Quran's false, blah blah blah.

Okay. By their own standard. Yeah.

And uh I almo I wanted to uh uh ask what you think about that that uh false prophet uh claiming to be the uh Mahdi because because uh Mo most Muslims they they uh reject him uh because uh their their their scriptures say that Say that the person that's going to be the Mahdi isn't going to want to be the Mahdi, and he's not going to. Claim to be the Mahdi at first. It's going to be the people that. that uh pressure him into becoming uh that that person.

So so so that's why most Muslims today just don't even believe uh what what that guy is saying. Yeah, I I I haven't researched it, uh, this particular guy, 'cause I don't believe that he really is all that relevant. That's why. I I just think it's just a it's just a bump in the road. But um I believe that what happens is, or happened, is that um Muhammad heard enough out of the Bible from people that he had to develop some sort of equivalent to the return of Christ, seven-year period, things like that, a true prophet, and all this stuff.

And that's then they're just using that.

So. Plus, I believe that he was either possessed by the devil or he was. influenced by the devil. To write things later on after he really went bad. And he was not good.

He was not a good guy.

So, you know, anyway, okay? Um Do I got time for one more question or is there people waiting? No, there's nobody waiting, actually. Go ahead.

Okay, good. Um, so I know I know in Deuteronomy six four, I th I think the Hebrew word for one is a plural a plurality. Am I correct? There's two words, Yachid and Nekad. Echad is a plural unity.

And Yaqid is a singularity.

So you could have, for example, ichad, a one group, one cluster like that. But Yaqid means one item, a singularity.

Okay. Okay. In uh Mark, I think it's Mark 12:29, when Jesus called Greek. Yeah, that's Greek, not Hebrew.

Okay. Yeah, I know. Um m m um m my question is The Greek word for one that Jesus used in Mark twelve, twenty nine, is that also a plurality? No, I don't believe so. Let me check though.

Oh, the hero is one. It's just ace. Um And it it's epsilon eota sigma.

So it has a range of meanings, and it comes from henos, means one the first, as a cardinal number one.

So uh That that's what it means. Yeah, 'cause most of them I can use this to say that to say that Jesus preached. that God was uh one as in as in not a Trinity.

Well Okay. When people say that kind of thing. What I'll do is It's kinda like fishing. I'll fill the line out. and see what I'm gonna catch.

And I'm going to ask questions. And I'm going to say, well, what do you mean? Just explain that. Because I've got comebacks, but the statement often is so generalized that. I want to find out what a particular individual is holding to.

And usually, it's like handing them their own rope to hang themselves with.

So so I'll say, does the word there one mean that it's numerically one? And if they say yes, they go, okay. Hero is the Lord our God, Yahweh our God. is one Yahweh. Which is we Trinitarians agree with that.

What so what's the problem? Because the Trinity is one God. Yahweh is one, one God.

So, what's the problem? If they say, no, it means strict unity and denies the Trinity, how do you get that out of the text? He doesn't say that. It just says he's one Lord, he's one Yahweh. Yahweh is defined by Trinitarians as the Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

That's who God is.

So, this does not contradict the Trinity at all. And what I'll do is say: so, what do you think of that? And So I give him a slight answer. And then see what they say. And then I go whatever direction they kind of go into.

One of the things to do in apologetics is to ask them to defend their position. If they're going to say that the word ace there means, or hace, means that it has to be Uh Singularity and not Trinity. I'm going to say, well, then show me the documentation for that. Show it to me. It doesn't.

And then we go into other areas and other scriptures. I could show them stuff. All right. Yeah, I I think I think they might They might respond in the same way that a oneness Christian would respond. Don't call oneness Christians.

Okay. No, I'm serious. They believe in a false God. They don't believe in the Trinitarian God because they openly know the Trinity and reject it. And they require baptism, quote unquote, in Jesus' name.

In order to be saved, so they're now violating the gospel and they don't have a true God, so you can't call them Christian.

Okay. It's not to say there aren't some true Christians in oneness, in their ignorance, but no, official oneness theology is not Christian.

Okay. Okay. Yeah, so uh I was saying that I th I think Muslims might respond in the same way that a oneness would in that they would uh go back to the uh Greek word uh uh which uh means a a singular one and um the uh oneness Apologists, Bishop Jerry Hayes also likes to point that out as well to prove that he thinks that God is one and not a Trinity. Yeah, I met Jerry Hayes uh In fact, Jerry no, wait, I'm getting my names micked up. No, that cake.

Yeah, Jerry Hayes and I have had many discussions. He's a nice guy. We've had many discussions. And He's faulty.

Now, the word heist occurs 345 times in the New Testament. Three hundred forty-five. And it has different meanings. And what we could do is I mean, theoretically, I'm not going to do it. We could go through and I could look and make a chart of every single instance and see what kind of categorization that it has.

But it's already been basically done in most lexicons. And they go through and they talk about different usages of it. Each one, everyone. This expression, here, another thing: everyone of you. Everyone, single, only one, one and the same.

So it has slightly different variations.

So when Jerry Hayes, I don't call him Bishop because he's not a true believer, but Jerry Hayes, you know, he doesn't let's put it the way, he must interpret Scripture in light of oneness theology, not in light of biblical theology, Trinitarianism.

So, okay. All right. Yeah.

I found this one sentence that I'm reading in his book. If you could respond real fast to it, he says. He says that Oh, there's a break. Hold on. There's the music for the hard break.

So hold on, okay, buddy. We'll get right back to you after the break. Hey folks, be right back with Elijah from Pennsylvania. It'll be an interesting question. I want to see what the quote is, and then we'll get to Steve from Utah on the Septuagint.

We'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick Live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All Roberti, welcome back to the show.

If you want to give me a call. The number is 877-207-2276. Let's get back with Elijah.

Okay, go ahead. Yeah, um, so In his book on page 277 about what is this called modalism, he says. If the word Mia was used, it would mean that God was feminine. The word hen could not have been used because. it is the neuter gender.

If hence would have been used Abraham means that God was a compound one. Trinitarians really need this word to be in Mark 12:29. It is not a choice of the masculine heist. The descriptive of just how God is one, and on the very next page, he provides. S uh several uh great scholars Who talk about this word heist in this verse, and they all say that.

The word height in this verse means that That means that God is one person. And one scholar actually said that this word heist means that God is one person. His name is Joseph Henry Thayer. Yeah, it doesn't matter. You can you know, I have a saying, my scholar can beat up your scholar.

And you can find quotes from people all over the place. The issue is, what does the scripture say? You can find, like I said, you can find different quotes from different people.

So, words mean what they mean in context.

So, if I ask somebody what's the word green mean?

Well, they might get it. Wrong because there's like over 20 different meanings. It can mean like envy, money, color, naivete, sickness, a lot of things.

So it has many different meanings and It means what it means in context. You don't want to do what's called illegitimate totality transfer. It means one thing in one place, another place, so you transfer one of the meanings over some other place. If he wants to say that the word one, hey, here means that it's a singularity, then he needs to demonstrate that from how it's used in the scriptures. And since it's used 200 or 345 times, well, then I would say do an analysis of every single occurrence.

If I were debating him and this was an issue, you know, the big topic was Mark 12, 29. Does the word one necessitate composite unity or necessitate singularity of person? Then I would go in and do a study on every use of the word haze. And I would present it in the documentation and say, over here it means this, over there it means that. And so you can't say that it always means one thing, which is the case.

And I'd say, what we need to look at is that God is one, if He's one Lord, because He's one Yahweh. Yahweh is the name of God. He is one. There's just one of them. We Trinitarians agree with it.

So that argument doesn't get you anything. Because if I were to debate Hayes, and I have before, I would just say, well, no, we agree. There's only one Yahweh. He's one. It doesn't mean that he's not one, that he's only one person, because that's not what the word means.

It doesn't say singularity of unity inside something. It doesn't say that.

So, you know, he's just stretching, he's stretching information in order to make it. Say fit is theology. Could you could you um uh maybe write an article on this on on on on this sentence that he says here, like l like do a little study to like uh try to prove him wrong? 'Cause like i and it's just page Send me the debate. I mean, send me the quote in what book it is.

Because that's the only way what I would do then, if I felt like it, because I got 8,000 things to do, I got a lot of work. is I would then take that, I'd get by the book, if I could, look at the quote, look at the context of the quote, examine everything, then I would start an article on it and say, here are the logical problems with this conclusion. Bang bang bang. And just tackle it that way.

So, that's what you have to do: send me the quote and the book name and page if you can. In the exact quote, and that way I can find it. Because I generally don't like to write an article on something if I can't document what the person's asking. Otherwise I just don't do it.

Okay?

Okay. All right. Sound good? Yeah, yeah, yeah, it sounds good because he's making a a bold claim here saying that saying that uh heist is used 93 times in the uh New Testament. And he said it he says it is never once used of used for more than one person.

It's used 345 times. Oh. How many times is he saying? 90? It's just not.

I mean, I could produce a list. Yeah, he's wrong. Yeah, he might be saying in the English. Of course, I in my Bible program, I can take a the word, like in Mark 12, 29, the word one, I click on it, it goes down to uh it opens up an interlinear, I can put my mouse over it, adjective, nominative, singular, masculine. and I can look at it, g uh fifteen twenty.

I then put my put it into uh my uh Greek thing, John fif fifteen twenty, and uh three hundred forty five occurrences. Just that fast. I did it just as fast as I said it.

Okay?

And that's how many occurrences it has. And then I could export it and I could put it in an Excel spreadsheet. And I used to teach Excel, so I know how to do tricks in Excel and arrange things and do all this stuff. And then I can analyze. And it would take a week.

I'm not going to do it all at once, but it would take me a week to go through everything and then write an article and say, no, he's wrong about this. This is why, and they show a verse or two, you know. But yeah, he's wrong. Yeah, he's wrong. Bishop Hayes is wrong.

Okay. Alright.

Okay. Alright.

All right, buddy. God bless. All right, I have a good one. All right, we'll see you. All right, now let's get to Steve from Utah.

Steve, welcome. You are on the air. Okay, I had a Great question. There's the set to agenda The Pentateuch and the Torah, isn't the Pentateuch and the Sentua just both creek?

Okay, originally the The Old Testament was written in Hebrew with a little bit of Aramaic in Daniel. And the pentateuch, pent, means five, refers to the first five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. The Septuagint is simply the Greek translation of the Old Testament. done in the second and third centuries BC. By 70 or 72 Greek, I mean, Hebrew scholars who knew Greek and they could translate it into Koine Greek.

That's what it is.

Okay. Okay, so the Pentateuch and the Septuagint are both Greek, correct? The Pentateuch is written in Hebrew, the original Pentateuch, but the Septuagint includes the Pentateuch in Greek.

Okay. Okay, I got it. I got those a little confused, so that's all right.

Okay, so yeah, well, and I just wanted to have another little quickie here. You got a minute or two, it looks like. Um Yeah.

So Um Comparable with the wheat and the tares, I did a little bit of just looking at it and. All right. Just on what it actually meant, like Cares I always thought were just weeds. You get a lot of background noise. You get a lot of background noise, just so you know what's going on there.

Yeah.

I always thought the tears were just like um Weeds. Yeah.

From what I looked up on what tears actually mean, it's a it's a I thought they might be foxtails, but they're uh something called Darnell or Parnell or something like that. and look just like wheat. Is that A factor is it just a wee I don't know. I'm not a biologist or botanist. I haven't studied that.

But Okay. Because I thought that they were something that looked like each other and I thought boxtails, but It said, No, there's a plant that looks just like weed. that grows up in weed. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know.

It's the Greek word is zizania.

So a plant in appearance not unlike corn or wheat, having at first the same sort of stalk and the same greenness, but not bringing forth any worth while fruit.

So it just looks similar, okay?

Okay. Yeah, yeah. And I don't know, just interesting, just look it up sometime. It's called Parnell or Darnell or Something like that, and it looks exactly like wheat.

Well, you know, that's what I understand, or something that looks very much like wheat until it matures. And then you can tell the difference, otherwise you can't tell. All right. Yeah, I just thought it was interesting.

So All right, buddy.

Well, hey, I appreciate the help. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you. Thank you.

Have a nice evening and God bless. You too. Bye-bye. You too. Thanks.

All right. All right, we have nobody waiting right now.

So, what I will do for the next four-ish minutes-ish. is get us some emails. I got some emails right here. Got some questions and um Let's see. Let's see.

Are Christians allowed to be jealous? Or is it a sin to be jealous? No, it's not a sin to be jealous. God is jealous. I think it's.

Exodus 34:14. Let me see if I'm right. Uh Exodus. Oh man. Exodus thirty four.

Fourteen. Uh Whose name is Jealous is a jealous God.

So, yeah, he jealousy is, it has to be, there's, okay. There can be good jealousy and bad jealousy. proper biblical jealousy and ungodly jealousy.

So jealousy for someone's wife, uh you want someone else's wife better looking than your wife or husband better looking than yours or whatever, or better car, and you're jealous and envious. That's not that's not good. God is jealous in the sense that He wants people to serve Him. and to love him. And that he expresses that in the term jealous, that he wants you to be for himself.

And that's a good godly jealousy.

So, like my wife, I'm jealous of her in the sense that I don't want anybody else. Around her, messing with her, you know, things like that, protect her and keep her and stuff. And so it's not automatically a sin just to be jealous.

Alright, there's that one. Let's get to... Hey, where'd it go? Come on, get over there. There we go, got that one.

Now how about this question? Come on, next one. As the women's ministry leader at my church, may I serve our latest communion at our retreat, or may only an elder administer it? I don't know of any verse in the Bible that says only elders can administer communion. I just don't see it.

And though initially my gut reaction is to knee-jerk reaction is because only ministers, but nothing in the Bible says that.

So, I just take that reaction and just file it someplace else. I believe that any Christian. Who is truly a believer can administer communion. And I do.

Now generally speaking, communion is an authoritative thing in a church context. I think only the males should do it. At a ladies' communion retreat, I would have no problem with a woman doing that. At all. Let's say I was there as a guest speaker to a woman's retreat for some reason and they had communion.

If a woman was given communion, I would silently just sit back and wait and I'd participate in it. I don't have a problem with that because I just don't see any prohibition.

Now, in Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, only ordained clergy can give communion because they had to have the power to change the elements into the actual body and blood of Jesus.

So only men could do that who were ordained. But that's not a biblical position that they hold anyway. And so. I just don't see it. It just says they break bread and they have communion.

It doesn't say who has to do it or who doesn't have to do it. And for that reason, that's why I hold my position that I do. The scriptures do not seem. To dictate what the issue is on that. Let's see if we've got any more time.

And we don't. We are out. There's the music starting any second. May the Lord bless you. And by his grace, we'll be back on here tomorrow.

We'll talk to you. And I think. Let me just get this right. I think Friday is uh I think we're rough Friday. There's no That's right.

Yeah, no radio Friday, which is Friday, July 4th, 4th of July.

So there you go. Hey, by God's grace, back on here tomorrow. Talk to you then. Have a great evening, everyone. Another program powered by the Truth Network.