Matt Slick Live

A previously recorded Matt Slick show. Good day. I am hanging in there. Hey, if you want to give me a call, I've got a bit of a reputation, so I like to talk to people and minister to them. And so, maybe I'll do that a little bit. Anyways, if you want to give me a call, we have five open lines. All you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. And, all right, so, by the way, just let you know that we stay on the air by your support. If you want to help us out, all you have to do is dial.

C-A-R-M dot O-R-G forward slash donate. And, what we ask is five, maybe ten dollars a month. Not very much. And, it does help us create budgets and things like that and support the missionaries. And, you know, and others. Because, well, this is an outreach that is designed to minister to as many people as possible.

It's one of the things, it's kind of an interesting story. When I, let's just say was younger, I felt as though, at one particular point, I'll give the background for that, but that the Lord was speaking in my heart and I wanted to serve him. And, let's just say that I really felt that need, that obligation to serve him and to bring as many people into the kingdom as possible. That's what I want to do.

That's what I'm hoping that, you know, will happen by the grace of God that will bring as many people into the kingdom as possible. So, anyway, there you go. And, if you want to give me a call, like I said, 877-207-2276. And, we talk about all kinds of stuff here on the radio show. So, last night I was in a discussion with a guy on Discord. It's something that I go into every now and then. Because of my reputation, I'll go into places and they will create rooms for me just to be there to have discussions within their, let's just say within their atheistic places and things like that. And, so last night, I was in and having a discussion with a guy and something interesting happened. This guy, I could tell that he was being trained by somebody else I know of.

This somebody else is a real piece of, you know what, he's a real work. And, what he does, he's an anti-Christ. And, what this guy does is he asks questions about everything. So, if you say, well, the Bible says, how do you know the Bible's true? Well, because, you know, how do you know that happened?

How do you know that? Well, we believe. How do you, your belief is justified. Well, what do you mean by justification? He does that.

It doesn't matter what you say. You just ask more questions. And, his goal is to get someone to the point where they can't answer or defend anything and that he claims victory. So, I've had encounters with this guy and let's just say that he doesn't answer any questions.

He doesn't know how to answer any questions. Huh? I can tell. And, I said, you've got to understand something here. I said, you've got to understand that I can ask you questions and I do ask questions. In fact, I had asked him questions. Now, here's a point worth discussing and worth looking at.

I brought up to this guy and I bring up to others. I'll say, you use logic. And, I say, can you justify your use of logic? This is a question that's fair for me to ask them. If they're going to ask me to justify that God exists or my belief is valid or whatever it is, I can also ask them questions like, well, justify your question's validity. Show me why the question that you're asking is a valid question and that I need to answer it.

I can play the same game. But, you see, ultimately, what happens is they don't want to answer those kinds of questions because those kinds of questions are too difficult for them. They only want to ask questions that are anti-Christ in their motive, that are against the scriptures. And, for those people who aren't intellectually trained, they will fall prey to that. Well, I didn't. So, with this guy, this newbie who's learning from this other guy, you know, I said, look, you presuppose the validity of logic and I'm asking you to use logic to demonstrate why you can use logic. I said, of course it's circular. Any presupposition of logic presupposes logic.

You can't use logic to prove logic because if you do that, you're begging the question. But, everybody has to start someplace. So, justify your starting point. Justify in your worldview why that starting point is the right one. He can't answer the question and none of them can answer that question.

They can try, but they can't. Well, what happened is this guy, you know, I basically had to shut him down and I did and found out that he's then talking to this other guy. Now, this is the kind of thing I have to deal with sometimes on the web. Now, I enjoy it.

It doesn't bother me any. But, these are some of the things that we have to deal with. And, I'm bringing this up for, you know, a reason.

One, a little bit of entertainment. But, the other thing is this. There are an increasing number of people who are hostile to the truth of Christianity who seek to destroy it and to use any means as possible in order to bring as much people out of the faith to destroy their faith or whatever it is. They're out there. I encounter them on a regular basis.

But, when you ask the same things of them that they ask of Christians, the same principles, they don't want to answer. And, in that, they show their hypocrisy. So, what we're dealing with in the world is a lot of hypocrisy out there and there's a great deal of it.

And, you know, it's just one of the things we're going to deal with. But, nevertheless, that's just a little kind of an opening, whatever, and we've got people calling or coming in now. So, if you'd like to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. Let's get to Kevin from Tennessee.

Kevin, welcome. You're on the air. Hey, how's it going? It's going, man. It's going.

What do you got, buddy? Yeah, I wanted to ask, because I read a book about, well, it doesn't matter what it's about, but it said that they don't believe that we could hear from God. Like, I know, like, we can't be having conversations with God, but could God give us, like, a prompting of the Holy Spirit or could God, you know, through our thoughts or conscience, speak to us or guide us in a certain way other than just strictly word for word from the Bible?

Now, here's the thing. I'm going to say yes, and to my reformed brothers and sisters, they may spit their coffee in the air at that. There's a doctrine that states, and rightfully so, that the Bible is a final authority and everything.

And I have no problem with that, and that's what I defend, and that's what I believe. But I see nothing in scripture that says that God can't communicate to us. Now, when I say that, I don't mean that he necessarily would tell us a voice. Maybe he could.

You know, I believe he could, but does he? Well, I don't know. I don't see anything in scripture that negates it. Now, people can go to 1 Corinthians 13, 8 through 12, and we can talk about that if you want, and I'd be glad to.

So, I know that people are hearing, having visions and dreams of Jesus, and they're coming to faith that it's happening in the Middle East, and thousands and thousands of people a week are doing this. So, not that we want to make doctrine out of experience, but I alluded to something just a few minutes ago, and because you asked, I'm going to go into detail with it. See, years and years ago, years ago, when I didn't have any calling from God, any direction to go, and it was okay. It was a new believer reading the Bible four hours a day, six hours a day. And I was praying constantly, hours a day, walking, talking, driving, at work.

It was just incredible. My mind was on the things of the Lord all the time. And I was begging him over and over and over again to use me. I don't care where, I don't care how, I don't care what, just use me.

I don't care what it is, I just want to be used. And I would pray it over and over with intensity, day after day, week after week. I did this for a long time. This intensity just didn't go away, and I kept praying. I had to be used of God, needed to be used, and this went on for weeks and weeks.

And I don't mean I pray it once or twice a day, I mean on my mind always. I could take you to the place where I was standing when I swear I heard the voice of God in my heart. I could take you to where I was standing because I remember where it was, I remember what I was looking at, and I remember this voice. It wasn't audible, but it was just there.

What do you want? And I said to help as many people come into the faith as is possible to trust in you. And then I heard the second voice, that impression kind of a voice, and it was when? Early in life or late in life.

And I said late in life. And after that, that urge to pray for that went away. It was answered.

Now, as you can tell, I'm on radio, I've got a website with 100 million visitors, I've written books, I do debates, and I'm not bragging. I'm just saying, you know, it works from what the answer was. It's consistent. Now, is that doctrinally sound? I see nothing in scripture to prevent that from being true. Can God communicate to us?

Sure he can. He communicates to the pastor in the pulpit who will be reading through scripture and all of a sudden his mind will be filled with knowledge about something. An unction and a desire to speak about something in such a way that it has to be said. It happens. We know that we get impressions from God. We just know when it happens.

It doesn't happen very often, but we know. God speaks to us and into our hearts. Not that we're hearing voices. I've never heard the voice of God like that.

Never. But sure, he can communicate to us, and he does. But all of it must be judged by the word of God.

For the word of God is the final authority in everything. And that's what I believe. Okay? I really appreciate it. Well, I hope that helps, man. Hope it helps.

It definitely does. I really appreciate it. Alright. Well, God bless, buddy.

God bless you too. Bye-bye. And just so you know, folks, it happened again a few years later. And if someone asks you about that, I'll tell them about that.

It's only happened twice. And there you go. If you want to give me a call, three open lines, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276.

Let's get to Chuck from Burlington, North Carolina. Welcome. You're on the air. Thank you.

Yes, Matt, I was curious about Roman 518. Good to speak up, because I already hear you. Oh, there's a break, too. Okay, Matt, I was- Hold on, there's a break. Can you call? Hold on.

Timing. Sorry about that, buddy. Sure. We'll be right back, okay, after the break. Alright, buddy?

Alright. Hey, folks, we have three open lines. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. Alright, buddy, welcome back to the show.

We have two open lines. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. Let's get back to Chuck.

You're welcome. Yes, sir, Matt. Hi.

I've heard you execute Romans 518, and I think you mentioned there's a big difference between the King James and the New American Standard. Yes. Could you go over that, if you could, real quick?

Sure. In order to do it, I'll have to go to the Greek first, alright, so that you can understand what the Greek literally says. Because this is a very interesting verse, very important verse, and a lot of people just don't get it. But it says, literally, I'm looking at the Greek, okay, so it says, so then, as through one transgression, into condemnation to all men. So also, through one act of righteousness, one righteous deed, into justification of life to all men. That's the literal Greek, okay? So, what we have is, through one transgression, into condemnation to all men. So also, through one act of righteousness, justification of life to all men.

There's no verb in the Greek. This is interesting because it's a single verse, but it has two sentences joined by a compound. So, so then, or so as, is where the conjunction is.

I'm going to try and make this make sense here. Think of it as two verses, but they're saying very similar things. Through one person's event, there was a direct result. Through one transgression, that's Adam's sin, condemnation to all men. So also, through one act of righteousness, justification of life to all men. That's what the literal Greek says. Now, there's a problem because justification means you're declared righteous, but it says justification of life to all men, but there's no verb here.

So what do we do? Well, the thing is that sentence A governs sentence B. Remember, it's really one long sentence or two sentences joined by a conjunction, sentence A and sentence B. Sentence A says through one transgression, condemnation to all men. So also, or in like manner, through one act of righteousness, justification of life to all men.

So A governs B because B says in like A. It's saying and even so, or in like manner to what it was referring to. So this means that when we look at the second part of the verse, that we have to interpret it in light of the first.

That's what's going on. So as through one transgression, condemnation to all men. Now, we've got to put a verb in there because that's what we do in English.

So what verb? Well, NASB says they're resulted, and that's theologically correct because they're resulted in condemnation to everybody. When Adam sinned, federal headship, original sin, sin entered the world, Romans 5-12, and that was it.

They're resulted in condemnation to everybody. Romans 3-23, Ephesians 2-1, Ephesians 2-3. These verses talk about everybody sinned, everybody's fallen, and it's because of Adam's sin.

So the right verb is to put there as result. But the problem is you've got to take it down and put it into the second verse, which would mean this. So through one act of righteousness, they're resulted justification of life to all men.

But wait a minute. All men means that everybody would be saved. As we know from Mark 3-29, Matthew 25-46, Revelation 4-11, 20-10, we know that people go to hell. So what people have done in their translations is they've taken section B and they've governed section A. They altered section A or the first verse, sentence A, because of what they see in sentence B.

They recognize a theological problem, but there isn't one, and I'll explain why. So what they do is they reverse how it's supposed to be. The King James does it. The New King James does it. The RSV does it. The NIV does it.

The NASB doesn't. A friend of mine actually talked to, I think, the son or one of the people who was on the translating committee for this, and they actually worked on this verse. And I told him my understanding of it, and he gave it to this guy, and the guy goes, yeah, that's what we see. It makes perfect sense, and I'll continue on with my explanation. So not just my opinion, and besides, this is what the Bible says.

This is what the NASB says, but let me get back to it. So when I was reading this verse about 30 years ago, and I was puzzled by it. I was at a restaurant reading my Bible, and I went through this, and it didn't make any sense. The resulted justification of life to all men, that means everybody's saved, but that can't be the case. But that is what it says. I was fresh out of seminary, and I went and looked at the Greek. Well, that's what it says.

So it forced me to do some studying, and I'll just cut to the chase. What I discovered was that whenever God refers to the all and relationship to Christ, it's not everybody. People may think, well, that's ridiculous.

No, it's not ridiculous. In 1 Corinthians 15, 22, in Adam all die in Christ. All shall be made alive. Well, in Christ means that there are believers in Christ.

There are in Christ's representation. We died with Christ, Romans 6. We were crucified with Christ, Romans 6.

So we died with them. And so it says, in Adam all die, in Christ all shall be made alive. That all can only be the Christians.

It can only be the Christians. I also discovered that whenever it says in the Bible that God knows somebody, it only means that you're saved. And we also know from the Scriptures that we never find any place where it says unbelievers died with Christ and died to sin, died to the world. It's always in reference to the believers. It's just a pattern of Scripture.

You can check it out for yourself. And so when you go to 2 Corinthians 5, 14, it says, the love of God controls us, controls us, have concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died. All died can only be the Christians.

The unbelievers haven't died, because it's not a physical death that they're talking about. It's about dying with Christ. So as I was looking through this, trying to see what God's pattern is dealing with the all in relationship to salvation, furthermore, you can go to John 6, 37. And this is what Jesus says in John 6, 37. He says, all that the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me certainly will not cast out. He says, all that he's given me, I lose nothing but raise them up. They're the ones who are believers. And he says, all the Father gives me will come to me. All group given by the Father to the Son.

And they will come to him. So when I looked at this, I realized what the NASB was doing was simply being faithful to the Greek. The other versions were not. So the King James says, therefore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one. The free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Well, the free gift is not there in the Greek. And what they obviously did was let sentence B govern sentence A because of this issue. And so the RSB says leads, because what they're doing, it can't mean it resulted. It has to be, it led to it still a possibility.

So they toned it down and they shouldn't have done that. We've got a break, so when we get Matt, you can have the floor, OK? Hey folks, we'll be right back after these messages.

Please stay tuned. All right, everybody, welcome back to the show. Let's get back to Chuck. So there you go, Chuck, I gave a lot of information. There's more, but hope that helped. Yeah, that was good.

One thing, and I did not have this on my mind when I called you, I promise. Revelation 20, 11 to 15, it states that the unbelievers will be judged by their work. That would seem like a universal atonement, but I'm not a universalist in no way.

I give the gospel out, I give the tracts out. Well, universal atonement is refuted by 1 Samuel 3.14. And let me just read that to you because, you know, the theory is that Jesus bore everybody's sins. Well, this is what God says, God speaking. Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli's house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever. There can't be a universal atonement just from that verse alone, okay?

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, your hermeneutic principle, just by studying the Bible, I guess that's the best kind is pretty good, man. Yeah, I just study it.

I don't need people's commentary. Well, I go to them and I look and give some insights and some help, but I don't need church tradition and some authority of some denomination to tell me what it has to mean. Yeah, it's not that hard, just go read, go study, you know? Yeah, yeah, my desire is just to be true to the Bible, to, you know, just lifelong study, study, yeah. Yeah, my eyes are wearing out, man. I can't do it anymore. I'm 68 and my eyes say to my brain, no, I'm not going to read.

That's the truth. Audiobooks, but you can write big letters, you can do whatever you got to do, but yeah, I actually take something for my eyes. I take actually something for my eyes on a daily basis so I can keep myself in as good shape as possible to serve my Lord as long as possible. So I take lutein. What do you take?

Lutein, L-U-T-E-I-N, lutein, one a day. I'm told about it, there's some research on it. It's really good for the eyes and it just helps them.

It doesn't make them better, it just helps them stop from getting worse, that kind of a thing. It's a very good vision, even though I'm in my 60s. I used to have 20-10 vision instead of 20-20. Wow, said William. Yeah. Okay, Matt, thanks a lot. You've got a great ministry. Praise the Lord for you, brother.

Well, praise God. Thank you. All right. Okay, hey, folks, if you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 8772072276. We have three open lines. Give me a call. Mike from Durham, North Carolina, welcome. You're on Matt's Look Live. Yes, sir, thank you so much.

Sure. And real quick, a side note for the brother before. Those judged were either judged by our works or the work of Jesus on the cross, so praise the Lord for that. That's right. To build on what you were saying about sticking to certain traditions and not doing that and reading ourselves, I wanted to ask you about the two witnesses. And like you said, with tradition, we see that there are two men.

And when I read the olive trees and the lampstand and do a little research into that, it seems as though the olive trees and the lampstand kind of generally speaks to the Jewish and Gentile believers. Is that consistent, or am I off on that? I would say you're in the right track, yeah. That's what I've understood, too.

Okay. And so my question is, and I'm not trying to pick one theory or the other, I'm just looking for discernment and stuff, is there a possibility that it may not be just two men? Is it a possibility that it's maybe two groups of maybe Jewish, Messianic Jews and Gentile Christians or something like that?

Or if it is a Gentile as well, if it is two gentlemen, would it be a Jew and a Gentile? Or maybe, I don't know, I guess I threw a lot out there. Yeah, there's a lot to talk about in that, and this is out of Revelation 11. And what it says is, I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1260 days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth.

Now, what does that mean? Are the two witnesses the manifestation of the olive trees and the lampstands? And what do they stand for?

Olive oil, anointing, lampstands, light. One theory is that, just along the lines of what it is you're saying, that they are groups of people. Then there's the theory that it might be Moses and Elijah. And then some say it's Moses and Enoch.

So who is it? I'm not exactly sure. But it says fire flows out of their mouth and devours their enemies. So do we take that literally? Do we take it literally if we say they open their mouth and fire comes out of their mouth? Or is it that they're speaking and fire, which I have no problem with, comes down out of heaven and devours them?

But then we know that they get killed, and the world rejoices because every eye can see them. All the people everywhere, it says, they will not permit their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb, and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, over their deaths. And after three and a half days, the breath of life came of God into them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell upon those who were watching them. And then a loud voice in heaven saying, Come up here, and they went into the heaven cloud. Now, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if people say, Well, that's the rapture.

It may be, you know, it's so symbolic, but it seems to me it's more in line with just two individuals that represent the law and the prophets, and they go forth, they speak. But I don't know. I don't know for sure. Right, one of those issues where, Hey, you know what, we all kind of parse in it, and it's not a salvation issue, so, you know, let's throw it around as Christians and look forward to it and see how close we're not.

That's right. See how close we're not. There's some things that will be spot on, and stuff like this, you know. There's been theories offered, and we'll just have to wait and see, finally. And so I don't know. But it says these two prophets, so it looks like, you know, they're individuals.

I lean towards that. They're two prophets. It's either Moses and Elijah or Moses and Enoch. It might be Moses and Elijah.

One quick question about Elijah is, we referred to the verses in Malachi, correct, that the Lord's going to send him back, Malachi 4, I believe, where the Lord will send him back to turn the eyes of the Father back to the Son and back to the Father, is that correct? It's been a long time, so I don't remember it off the top of my head. Sorry. Okay, just checking.

I just want to make sure. Thank you so much for your time, and I appreciate your guidance. Okay, well, God bless. Okay. All right, you too. Bye-bye.

All right. Okay, folks, if you want to give me a call, we have four open lines. 877-207-2276.

Let's get to Doug from Salt Lake City, and it was how to study the Bible. And we've got nobody waiting, so I might as well talk about that. So if you want to call me, we have five open lines, 877-207-2276. And please give me a call.

We have five open lines. Now, all I can do is tell you how I study the Bible. And what I do and what I've always done is keep notes. So when I study the Bible, I underline. When I study the Bible, I consider something in a scripture that might bring me to study something else. So what I'll do is if I'm reading something like, for example, which has happened, you know, John 3.16.

You know, God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son. I'm going to look up the word only begotten. Why am I going to look up that word? I just want to see what it is. I don't know what it is in the Greek.

You know, monogones, from the verb monogonao, from the gonao in the monos, it's a compound form, and so it's only begotten. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to see, how does that word appear in any other places? What is God saying with it? How is it used?

What context is it? This is what I do when I study. Just stuff like that. It doesn't take brilliance. It doesn't take all this education.

It just takes some time. I used to have literally on my desk four, five, six, seven, eight books open to different pages. And my wife would come in, and she would see all these books open, and I'd be bent over at these books looking, reading, and she wouldn't even bother to talk to me because I had to come out of the study.

And she'd go, I'll talk to you later. Okay, good. And I'm in the middle. I call it juggling. I'm juggling a lot of stuff right now in my head. I'm learning this, I'm learning that, and learning. And that's how I would study. One thing would usually lead to another, and I would discover things. And it became intriguing. And sometimes I would study so much that I wouldn't learn really much of anything. And sometimes I'd study and learn a whole bunch of great things.

But you see, the thing is, it's just studying. The Lord's gonna lead you to where he wants you to go. All you have to do is open the Bible and read.

Start reading and see what words mean. Like, go to a book of Ephesians. Go to Ephesians. And just start reading the book of Ephesians.

It's short. There's a lot of good stuff in there. And you can look up phrases, you know.

Chose, predestined, Jesus, all things. You can look them up, see where they take you. That's how you study.

That's what I do anyway. Hey, we have five open lines, folks. Give me a call. The last segment of the show, 877-207-2276.

Be right back after these messages. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, welcome back to the show. If you wanna give me a call, three open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get on the lines with, let's see. That would be Michael from Utah. Michael, welcome. You're on the air.

Hi, Matt. Could you comment on, you mentioned something about being willing to debate on abortion. Can I comment on, I'd be willing to debate on abortion. I would be willing to debate on all abortion. Yeah, and in light of the Dred Scott decision, like from Civil War days and how they reversed it after the Civil War, and about Roe v. Wade, or would that be one of your talking points?

We have a question, but I'm not sure what the question is, so I'm not sure. So the question would be like the personhood of the child. Like Dred Scott's decision basically said Dred Scott didn't have any legal rights because he was like not considered a citizen, and the baby seems to be not considered a citizen even though it's like the child is considered a person in the Bible. There's certain arguments I'll use dealing with the issue of abortion and things like that, and when I'm talking about this with people, and I can find out where they are at, but there are logical problems with this, and ethical problems with the idea of killing the life in the womb, because one of the things I'll do is I'll ask them is the life human or not human? Let's say it's six months in the womb. Is it human or not human?

These are test questions, and when I debate people, I'm going to ask these questions. If they don't have an answer, then they should not be risking killing it if they don't know, because it might be human. If they say it's not human, then I'm going to ask other questions related to that. How do you know it's not human? What happens and when does it happen that changes the nature from non-human to human? If it's not human, then what is it?

I've asked these questions of people. They can't answer them, but I've had people say to me, well, this is not human. Well, then what is it? I don't know, but it's not human. And so it has eyes, human eyes, human feet, human hands, human backbone, human brain, but it's just not human. And they'll say, well, it's not viable. So viability makes it human? So when does it become viable, when it's born? And I think people say, yeah. Oh, so before birth, one minute before birth, it's not human, and then one minute after birth, it's human? Just simply because of location?

How does location determine humanity? They just don't have any good answers. There aren't any good answers for them.

Because if they're going to enter into a debate with someone who's seriously going to consider this issue, they're going to lose because they can't answer these difficult questions. They can go back and say, well, man, are you telling me it's a human being as soon as the egg is fertilized? And I'll say everything necessary for humanity is there, and we don't know what the essence of humanity is.

You can't put it in a jar. And since life does not begin at conception, a lot of people make that mistake. They'll say life begins at conception.

No, it does not. Life does not come from non-life. Life comes from life. And the sperm and the egg are both alive, and they join, and life continues. So when we say, you know, they mistakenly say life begins at conception. I say, no, it doesn't. It continues at conception.

It's the correct view. And, well, if it's there, it has all the DNA and the essence of what a human is. Well, then, are you going to just wipe it away because it's inconvenient? Does it lose value because it's not desired? So then its ontological worth and essence is based upon your whim, what you want or don't want?

Well, that's an impossibility. This kind of a thing goes back to the days of chattel slavery where the owner would say about that life he owned. You can do whatever you want with it. It doesn't matter. It may be human. This is what happens in the mentality of those who are not clear thinkers about things like this.

I've got a whole section on karma about abortion, and I've asked questions. One of the things I've asked them, and I'll say, well, you don't even know that you're pregnant until a couple, three weeks or four weeks, whatever it is, right? Then you find out, right?

So by that time, we have this formation, and it's super complex already. And it's not simply a skin cell because it contains skin cells. So I'm going to ask, you know, I'm going to say it's not human, and I'm going to say it's not human. I'll say, okay, well, then is it okay to take it out of a woman's womb and place it into the womb of a dog? That's the question I asked. And some people have said yes. And I'll say, okay, so then is it compatible with life there?

No. Well, then they're different in essence, aren't they? And they don't want to answer any further because they're different in essence than how is it that this makes it okay to do this because now you're playing with human life. See, it's not hard to defeat abortion. Now what they're going to say is, well, it's a woman's right to choose. Well, what does that mean?

See, they use this broad expression. She could choose. Are you against choice? It is not the issue. You can choose what shirt you want to wear?

No problem. Wear a shirt. You want to wear that shirt, one of those pants?

Pick the shoes you want to wear. But you can't just choose to go out and shoot somebody, can you? Because are you against my ability of free choice?

I want to shoot somebody. Are you against my ability to choose? Well, in that context, absolutely.

This is the ambiguity that they use when they use this vague phrase, to choose. All right, so I'm going to say, so this life inside of your body, is it your life? Your life, do you own this life? What are they going to say? They say, yes. Oh, so you believe in slavery.

We can go down that road. And they'll say, well, no, it's my body. I can do what I want with my body. Well, I agree. But you don't have the right to do anything with somebody else's body, do you?

And they don't want to answer the question because they know where I'm going. If it's your body, do you have four arms and four legs and two heads? So if it's your body, then does that mean that it is your body? But if you say it is your body, then you have two heads, four arms, four legs. But you don't have two heads, four arms, and four legs. So therefore, it is not your body, is it? It's someone else's body.

Just happens to be inside of you. So now you want to kill it. And what's the reason you want to kill it? Because it's inconvenient. That's what it comes down to.

It's inconvenient. So let's kill it. This is the hardness of heart. You know, not that this makes it okay, but I've heard over the years and somewhat am not surprised by the fact that men kill their families and gotten killed and stuff like that. Men are a little bit more barbaric than women. I remember decades ago, I forgot her name, but this mother drove her children into a lake and drowned them because she didn't want them.

There's some reason. I remember hearing about this. I remember being astounded by this, that a mother could do this. Someone who had given birth out of her own body to these children could do something like this. It was shocking to me. Now, if a father had done it, it's still shocking, but not as much as when a mom does it.

And you know, from then on, I started noticing more and more moms behaving more like men in this respect. Selfish. Self-seeking. Not holding up the end of the responsibility. People will say, well, Matt, I can see your point about something. She says, what about someone who's forced? R-A-P-E, because there might be children listening.

What about that, Matt? They get pregnant then. Well, you know, my wife and I discussed this very issue. If that ever happened to her and she became pregnant, I would insist that that person perpetrated it, if caught, was punished to the maximum ability of that law. And then I would make sure, and it wouldn't make any difference to me what race, as we use in colloquial terminology, the father was, but I would make sure that that child was my child.

And I'd raise that child as my own. And that's how that would be, because it's not the child's fault. And so when we look at this, and if a woman suffers that great atrocity, people say, well, we have to defend ourselves. Then defend yourself. But do you have the right to defend yourself against someone else? Yes. But is a child attacking you in your body? No. Is it harming you?

No. Well, that's another issue. What happens if the development of the child will kill you? Well, believe it or not, I've had to face this one, too, because my wife has had some medical issues, and I had to go through a vasectomy, and I'll just say this. The anesthesia only partially worked, and I went through it anyway. Let's just say it was memorable. And the reason I had to do this was because the next pregnancy the doctor said might have killed her.

And we talked about it. What would happen if she got pregnant? It might kill her, she says, and she'll trust God in that. My wife's a great woman, like I say, frequently, except for her taste in men.

She's awesome. But when something bad happens like this, do we punish the product? Do we punish the child for the crimes of someone else? How is that justified? And is it an atrocity? Yes, it is. Is it shameful? Yes, it is. Does the woman have to suffer because of the sin of somebody else?

Yes. This is the reality of our world. But we don't make one mistake to cover another. We don't do one bad thing to correct another bad thing. We just don't do that. If someone wrecks my car, drives through a red light and wrecks my car, or causes me, let's just say, to veer off the side of the road and their car is not injured, veer off the side of the road and my car is totaled, do I then justify by going over and destroying their car?

Because look what happened. You made me suffer. Your failure, your wrong, your sin, your whatever, and now I have to pay the consequences, so now what I'm going to do is destroy your car.

Two wrongs don't make a right. So, you know, I'll debate people on the abortion issue. I'll ask these difficult questions. And there are more difficult questions I could ask. Get into the ontos, essence, change, categories. We could talk about morality, righteousness, obligation, humanity.

We could talk about all kinds of stuff. But they don't want to have public debates. You'll never see a pro-abortionist, I've got bad words I say about that, but it really is, you'll never see a real, live, competent debate between two people on the opposite side of the issue.

And the reason you won't is because the leftist wacko majority agenda holders don't want truth. They want hypocrisy and they want their own sin. And then they hide it all under, in this case, under a woman's right to choose. And in so doing, they kill. And so when a mom kills the life growing within her own body, that to me is a great atrocity.

It's a great pain, a great difficulty. And there are other issues we could talk about, but there you go. All right. Thanks, man. Yeah.

Yeah, I wish I could debate somebody publicly on this, but no one in all the years I've offered challenges has ever accepted. You know, this is what happens. All right, folks, we're out of time. May the Lord bless you. And it was Michael from Utah, so are you.

Braden from Idaho, hey, call back another time. All right, God bless everybody. We'll see you, by God's grace, back on there tomorrow. We'll talk to you then. We'll see you. Bye-bye.