Matt Slick Live

A previously recorded Matt Slick show. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at karm.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick live.

Francis, taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, buddy, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick.

Listen to Matt Slick live. Boy, really out of breath there. That's so much going on today. Wow. Hey, look, if you want, give me a call.

Just dial 877-207-2276 and we can talk. And what we do here is answer questions on the Bible and all kinds of stuff. Apologetics. That reminds me, last night I was in a debate on total depravity. And if any of you watched it or whatever, if you want to call in and comment about it, love to hear from you about that, we could talk. I don't think my opponent did very well.

I think he was committing some heretical teachings and it's really sad. And we can go over some of that if you're interested, but it's not a big deal. All right, so we do have one caller. And if you want to get in line, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276 so we can get on the phone with you. Let's just do that right away. Let's get to Jamal from North Carolina.

Jamal, just jump right in there, man. You're on the air, buddy. All right. Thank you once again for taking my call. I just want to say thank you for your ministry, for your radio show. I've learned a lot.

I told other people about your radio show and I thank God for you. My question is, and I'm actually asking for someone else. So you know, you have to forgive me if I don't have any detail. The question that was asked of me was the priestly editor about the Pentateuch. Oh, the JEDP theory? I'm sorry.

Called the JEDP theory or the Graf-Wellhausen theory. The priestly author. The Yawest, the JE, the Elohist, P is the priest and the Deuteronomist. Okay. Wow.

Does that happen to be on your website so I can reference it later and maybe take some notes? Oh yeah. So what you're talking about is, like you said, the priestly author, right? Yeah.

Okay. So that's JEDP, which is the short version of JEDP theory. And what that theory is, is that different authors were involved in writing the Pentateuch, the first five books of Moses.

In fact, there were four. That's what they'll say, J-E-D-P. And the reason they say that is because there seems to be different styles and there seems to be different levels of writing. And so they say, see, this means that they're different authors. So what they're doing is, I'm going to get my notes here.

Hold on a sec. So what they're doing is assuming certain things. So the JEDP theory, all right, that's called the documentary hypothesis. Okay. It's another way to look at it.

And so what is it? It's like I said, it's these different authors. Now basically it has been refuted thoroughly in different books over the years.

It's just been reduced to ashes, but people still hold up to it because they don't know what the truth is and et cetera. Now I'm going to go over some things. One day on a Sunday before I went to church, I got up and I remember very clearly I was in Escondido, California, and I wrote the introduction to the documentary hypothesis.

It's called JEDP, the Graf Wellhausen or the documentary hypothesis, all the same thing they're talking about. And I wrote an article on it. And then I went to church and I came back and I wrote a response refuting JEDP or the documentary hypothesis. And then what I did was I went in and I did it in Word Perfect.

And Word Perfect at the time had a feature that could analyze passive voice, voice complexity, and vocabulary complexity. So when I wrote the article, two articles on the same day, just a few hours apart, one explaining and one answering the JEDP. The one explaining it, the grade level analysis was 13.64, but answering it was 10.35. In other words, college level versus sophomore and high school level. The first one explaining it was in a college level, but the other one was in a high school level sophomore. The passive voice were both at 9%. That reflects my writing style. The sentence complexity, explaining it was at 60, level of 60, but answering it was at level 43.

Vocabulary complexity, explaining it was 38 and answering it was 22. Now this is from the same author, me, writing on the same day on the same subject. One explaining it and one answering it and they were different. Now, if we were to look at this, you'd say, well, they're different authors.

That's what they do. See? They're different authors.

Why? Because it has a little bit of different structure, a little different this or that. Well, the thing is, you know, I've written a science fiction novel and I write that differently than I wrote my humor book, which I write differently than when I do my outline features for analysis, which I do differently than when I do an exposition of a passage of scripture, which I do differently when I'm just explaining a doctrine. Because I take different levels of sense. Right.

So if I were to talk about, for example, atheism and refuting the atheistic worldview, I would then go into the issue of materialism and I would compare property dualism with substance dualism as it relates to materialism and how out of a destructive syllogism, when you have two options, there's no third and one of them is negated, the other one is validated and I can negate the option of atheism based on a materialistic self-refutation. No, I just use all those big words. But if I'm going to write about a devotional, I'm not going to be using words like that. So the intent brings different results. Plus, in the documentary hypothesis, it goes so as far as to say, for example, in Genesis 7, verses 1-5, verse 6 is from the priestly, but verses 1-5 is from the Yahwist. And then it jumps over to verses 7-10 is the Yahwist, or from J. And then verse 11 is P. But then the next verse, 12, is J, written by J. But the next four verses, 13-16a, a means the first part of the verse, b means the second part. So the first part, verse 12 and 13 and 14 and 15 and 16, but the first part of 16 is, excuse me, verse 12 is J, but P wrote verses 13, 14, 15, and the first half of 16, and then J wrote the second half of 16.

And then P wrote the first half of verse 17, but J wrote the second half of verse 17. This is what they're doing. So just picture a bunch of guys with brandy or beers, big thick glasses, who talk with, you know, trying to sound, well, excuse me, but I think that what we have to understand here. And they talk like this in a room of leather chairs when there's no windows because they can't see, you know, in front of their face because they're what they're doing. And then they assign certain values based upon what they see and they interpret it. That's the J-E-D-P thing. Wow, that is certainly a lot.

Get the letters on your website so I can kind of take my time to go through it. Yeah, it's a load of baloney. Now, Jesus quoted J, what they say is J, as coming from Moses. So Jesus said it's from Moses. And Jesus quoted the Ten Commandments, which is E, remember J-E-D-P, which is E, and he said it came from Moses. Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 24, which is D, he said it's from Moses. And he said in Matthew 8, he quoted Leviticus 14, which is equivalent to P, but he said it comes from Moses. So he went and he, all these stupid categories, he's just morons for the book of Nonsensicus, you know. So they write this stuff in the book of Nonsensicus and they rewrite it in 2nd Moronicals. And so Jesus, and so Jesus equated sections of J-E-D-P all to the one author, Moses. So who's right?

Jesus, obviously. Okay. All right.

Well, thank you very much. I have one more quick question I'll make it real quick. I was wondering if you had some kind of Bible study, maybe online or some kind of call or anything that people can take advantage of.

Yeah. Yeah, there are Bible studies that I've done that are, I'll explain what they are. Where are they? Bible study.

Let's see if I can find the URL on CARM. Bible study. And Bible studies, Bible-studies.

Okay. And so I got John chapter 1, 2, 3, and 4 and Colossians chapter 1, 2, 3, and 4. And so what I did was, for example, John chapter 1, when I was teaching, I don't know why I only have part of them up.

It's been so long. So what I would do is create my own notes. And then I would make points in the notes. And then I would, when I teach Bible studies, I would go through my notes. So I decided one day to take the notes and just publish them.

And that's what those Bible studies are. Okay. Okay. All right. Well, thank you very much for your time, for the very good show. I appreciate it, man. You're here and God bless. All right, man.

God bless, Jamal. All right. Why don't we get on the phone with Mary from North Carolina. Mary, welcome. You're on the air.

Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Yes, I can.

Okay. My question is, when Noah built the ark, all those people, did they perish? Yes.

It's three. In the promised land, before they all made it into the promised land, did they all perish? Then also Sodom and Gomorrah, all those people, did they perish forever?

Yes. Or are they coming back at the resurrection? Well, you said, did they perish?

When you say perish forever. Yeah. Are they perished forever? Yeah. Are they gone forever? Wait, wait, wait, wait.

When you say perish forever, what do you mean by that? You mean they don't exist anymore? Yeah.

Yeah. Well, that's a false teaching because annihilationists teach that when you die, you don't exist anymore. That's not the case. That's not biblical. On any of them, it's not biblical. I don't know what you mean by any. Wait a second, wait a second. You say something and then go on. So, when you say any of them, it's not biblical.

I don't know what any of them means. So, here's the thing. You remember Noah and the ark and then those people that didn't get on the ark? They died in the flood. They died in the flood.

The people who died, their spirits continued on afterwards and they went to a place of punishment, judgment. Okay. Okay. Okay.

So, they're not actually gone on forever. Well, when you see, annihilationism, unfortunately, is making a comeback and it's a false teaching and we've got a break coming up. I'll get back.

I'll talk about annihilationism, why it's bad and how this relates to the issue of the flood. Okay. So, we'll be right back folks after we leave some messages and let's see, there we go.

We have a few of the lines if you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. Be right back. Before we get back to Mary, I just want to let you know that during this holiday season you're going to go to Amazon and you're going to buy stuff for presents and that's great. Did you know that if you go to smile.amazon.com, it's still the Amazon website, it's a subdomain that you can set up a charity of your choice and a little portion of what you spend getting something then goes to that charity, smile.amazon.com.

Please consider setting up a CARM as a beneficiary and that it does help us. All right, Mary, are you still there? I'm still here, Matt.

All right. So, the people who died in the flood, I'll get into a little bit more detail about it. The people, they were all wicked, period. That's what Genesis 6 talks about and so they were judged and they went to the bad place. Now, there's another theory that the half-breeds between the fallen angels and women called the Nephilim were also destroyed and their released spirits some think are demonic forces. We get into all the details but either way, those who died were bad and so there's a judgment on them. People who died continue to exist after death. They don't go into soul sleep where they're just not conscious and whatever that means and no one can tell me what it is. When I ask annihilation, define exactly what it is. They don't know what it is but yet they believe it.

It's ridiculous. So, it's not an issue of soul sleep and it's not non-existence. We continue on after our death and then there's a resurrection of judgment but that doesn't mean we aren't aware during that period of time and there's a final judgment that comes. Okay?

Okay. And that's the same as Sodom and Gomorrah? All people were destroyed in the flood. So, by logic, that would mean Sodom and Gomorrah as well but they were destroyed later.

Because they were bad. That was bad in Sodom and Gomorrah. That area in the flood was destroyed but people grew and became wicked again in a different form of wickedness inside of Gomorrah.

Okay? And then Abraham and the Promised Land, all those people did the same thing? They just turned away from God? Abraham? Yeah, Abraham and the Promised Land. All those people that didn't make it to the Promised Land.

I guess you don't understand the timeline. So, Abraham was way after Noah. So, the Noahic flood happened hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years before Abraham. So, the people on the earth at the time of the flood were destroyed and then they multiplied later and it always happens.

People are fallen by nature in spite of what my opponent in the debate last night said and they rebelled against God again. Oh, wow. Alright. Okay. I was just thinking about that last night.

I thought, this is weird, you know, thinking about it. What happened to all them people? Are they lost forever? Did they have an opportunity? They already had the opportunity to be saved but they failed?

In the flood? That's the part I don't understand. They were all wicked people. Either one of them, all three of them.

I don't know what all three of them means. Well, I'm talking about Noah, then the Promised Land, then Sodom and Gomorrah, all those people. And when I read it in the Bible it says they all care. You're not hearing me.

You're not hearing what I'm saying. Different timelines and you're talking about different categories of things. The flood covered the whole earth. Sodom and Gomorrah are located on the earth. The area of Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed.

But Sodom and Gomorrah probably did not exist at the time of the flood because it happened so far afterwards as was Abraham way after the flood. Yeah, I knew that part but I got confused. Yeah, you're right. Noah destroyed the whole world and that's why we have the rainbow now from the flood.

But the other two are not actually the whole world. Yeah. Okay, I think I understand.

Okay, well good. I just felt like, didn't they have the opportunity to be saved also like we do? Or did they have that opportunity?

Who's they? The ones at the Promised Land and Sodom and Gomorrah. Or really all of them, all those people. Well, do they have the opportunity to be saved?

I'm not sure what that means. Well, it sounds like to me that Abraham and all those people were at one time with God and then they just fell somehow away. But Abraham.

Hold on. Abraham was alive when the Egyptians were alive and all kinds of people were alive. So this is hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years after the flood when they had children and they dispersed all over the world and in, you know, 20, 30 generations, whatever, you have thousands and millions of people which is mathematically certainly possible. And there were people in Egypt, there were people all over the place. Israel moved from the, or the, I mean, Abraham went from the Erolicalites into the Egyptian area, let's just say. And then later, 430 years later they came back to the Promised Land.

But around the time of Abraham, Lot was there and Sodom and Gomorrah got destroyed just locally because of their sexual perversion. Yeah. Okay. Right. Yeah, I understand that.

Okay. So they're lost forever though. Who's the they? Who's the they? Well, all those people like Sodom and Gomorrah and all the people that didn't make it to the Promised Land. Well, when you say all, I don't know if it means every individual.

Well, Abraham. Hold on, let me finish. Let me finish the statement. Okay. When you say all, I don't know if it means every single individual in Sodom and Gomorrah or if it was just representative that they were basically all bad but there were a few people who were okay. We don't know.

But generally speaking, they were all destroyed. Okay? Okay. Okay. Okay.

I think I got it now. All right. Thank you, Matt. You're welcome, Mary. Have a good evening. You too, thanks. All right. Let's get on the phones with Sarah from northeast or the northeast. Sarah, welcome.

You're on the air. Hi, could you please speak to Hebrews 1217 when it talks about Esau? For he found no chance to repent though he sought it with tears. Does that mean that he tried to repent and could you just speak to that?

Sure. Remember Jacob and Esau. Now Esau was born first and Jacob was born second but Jacob was deceptive and stole so that with through deception the birthright of Esau. What is the birthright? The birthright deals with the firstborn. So firstborn is a transferable title and that's the people who don't know that. So it doesn't mean first created.

It means it's a title preeminence. So what Esau did is he sold his birthright and then Abraham blessed Jacob and the blessing of Jacob was a one time thing. They could only be given once and Esau said hey I'm sorry for doing what I did.

Well too late. The deed had been done so he couldn't undo the deed. It's like someone who drives drunk and crashes into people and puts them in the hospital. And afterwards he repents of what he's done but he can't undo the damage that's done. So that's what it means he sought repentance. He wanted it to be undone, to be fixed but he couldn't because the one time blessing had been offered. So it's not saying that he tried to repent and he was beyond repentance or that God wouldn't forgive him. It's not an issue of forgiveness. It's an issue of getting the blessing back. He was turning trying to get it back. He repented and had a change of mind.

It repents means a change of mind. We'll be right back after the break. We'll be right back folks.

We have one open line 877-207-2277. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right. Welcome back to the show. Sarah, are you still there?

Yes, I am. All right. So repentance comes from the Greek word metanoeo. It's comprised of two words, change and mind. Change of mind, an attitudinal change. So what he had done was he had an attitudinal change. He changed his mind about what he had done in the past. He didn't want it to continue on, but he'd already done it. It's just like, you know, I go out and buy a car tomorrow and then the next day I go, what have I done?

I don't want to have a car, but I've already done it. So I've repented, but the effect of it is still there. It's not an issue of repentance as we think. You've got to be repentant in order to have forgiveness of sins. It's not talking about that.

It's a different context. Okay? Thank you. You are welcome.

Please keep calling back. Okay. All right, Sarah. God bless.

All right. Let's get to Nazael from California. Nazael, I hope I get that right. Welcome. You're on the air. It's Nazael.

Nazael. Okay. Sorry about that. Yeah. Oh yeah. My question was that, what's your perspective on Steven Anderson?

Steven Anderson from Arizona, the preacher teacher. He does not have all his paws in a litter box. Okay? I do not recommend people listen to the guy. I appreciate his zeal and his dedication to the word. He's King James only, anti-Calvinist, and he's inappropriately condemnatory and accusatory.

He causes division in the body of Christ. Okay? And I'd be glad to debate the guy.

I've offered it publicly before. I'd be glad to debate him on Reformed theology and some other aspects, but you know, I'm sure he won't do it. But nevertheless, that's what I would say about him.

Why? What do you think? Well, my perspective on him is that I, everything that he preaches on, obviously, I don't agree with everything. Well, most of it, and I respect a lot his, just like you said, man, his zeal, the way he expresses himself, and the way he's against bottom life, that's 100% correct as well. And I just want to know, I just, I don't know, here's the perspective on him.

It's hard to differentiate through the good and bad with this guy. So you have to be careful, because what does the Bible tell us to do with unbelievers? Does it say that we should have homosexuals killed? Does it say that? Not the New Testament.

No, it thinks to reject them. No, it says that they are given over by God to their own judgment. It doesn't say that we have to kill them. And what he does is he appeals to the Old Testament, except that's the Old Testament covenant.

No, wait, go ahead. I was going to say, so the question then becomes, is the Old Testament moral requirement in the judicial sense of execution required in the New Testament covenant? That's the exegetical question. And he doesn't deal with that. He does not deal with things like that very well at all. So what we're commanded to do in the New Testament is to treat with gentleness and grace those who are outside, if perchance God might lead them to repentance. Is he doing that? He's not.

Yeah, but it's the difference between having a roughly fine and someone that's not saved. Okay, you didn't hear me. What does the Bible say? It says, conduct yourself with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of your opportunity.

Let your speech always be with grace as it was seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to respond to each person. Is he doing that? Is he doing that? I'm asking you a question.

Is he doing that? No, I know. No, I understand.

It's very strong. Tell me you understand. Tell me the answer to the question. Is he doing that? The answer is yes or no. Yes, yes. Yes, he is? Yes. Oh, he's doing that. Okay.

I wish I could totally disagree with you. So let me ask you this. The Lord's sponsor must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach patient when wrong, with gentleness, correcting those who are in opposition, if perchance God may grant them repentance. Is he doing that? With gentleness, correcting those who are in opposition. Is he doing that?

Well, it's very broad. Is he doing that? Okay, the fact that you can't answer the question tells me you see the problem and you know there's a problem here.

I just said yes. Oh, he is doing that. But the word gentleness when he says that Obama needs to be killed and that Jews need to be killed and the Holocaust never happened. No, he never said anything like that. He said about Obama, yes, that is correct. Okay.

Here's the thing, Nazell. What you're doing is you're defending him and you call up, you ask my opinion, I've given you my opinion. And you can reject it, you can do whatever you want.

That's fine. But the scriptures that I've given you are how we're supposed to be with unbelievers is he doing that is he being patient and kind and gentle or is he being demanding and condemnatory unnecessarily, now I'm not saying don't condemn homosexuality absolutely it is sinful and they need to repent of it but we are told how to behave by God's, in God's word we're told how we're to handle this the question, one of the questions of God is does he do it that way, and the answer is no so why is he disobeying the word of God in his respect and he's King James only which, if he wants to be King James only that's fine but how far does he take it and that's another issue especially, I follow the question you said about Leviticus 2013 when Christ starts to reign for a thousand years is that going to be part of the law is it going to be part of the law, when Christ comes to reign for a thousand years is the mosaic law such as Leviticus 2013 that he that equals to the man as he does in the forming time should be put to death is that going to be active when Christ reigns I don't know because I don't hold to that position I don't believe there's a future thousand year reign I believe we're in the millennium and that the thousand years of revelation twenty is embedded in a figurative context and I've got other things that I have to defend that position so that's just assuming that position is true which I don't assume so for me it's a non-answer, it's a non-question we know that Christ will reign and people in the in the pre-millennial view they say that Christ will reign and there will be people who will rebel against him and he will be the one who destroys them later nothing in the bible says that during this millennium that I've ever heard from any of the pre-millennialists says there will be a theonomic rule where God Christ will be executing people what I'm saying is that the forty-two, the mosaic law obviously speaks about the moral law is it still justified for a man to sleep at nighttime and sleep at the desk? okay you're hard to understand for one thing but you're not responding to what I'm actually saying and it's a sign of being brainwashed when I bring something up and you ignore it and you go into some other thing repeatedly it means you're not hearing you're just you've got an agenda that's all it means it means you're not interacting you're not thinking and so we're going to move along we're almost out of time anyway let's get to Adrian from Winston-Salem, North Carolina Adrian welcome you're on the air hey man how are you doing man? I'm doing well, you? hanging in there by God's grace so what are you doing? my question was nowadays recently I've been kind of struggling with my faith I grew up Christian and you know grew up in the church but now I'm kind of struggling with that so my question is how could I what do you think I should do to strengthen that? okay so what I would recommend is I'm going to give you three simple things this is not exhaustive this is not exhaustive like I give you these three you talk to somebody well there's eight more you know someone might say I'm not going to overload you the first thing you must do is seek Christ you must seek Him God is faithful through whom you're called into fellowship with the Son Christ Jesus 1 Corinthians 1.9 you spend time with Christ you read His word you pray even if you don't feel like it I'm not saying you have to do it eight hours a day and if you don't you're not a good person no just you know pick a time read one verse two three four five whatever you want to do just think about it and just talk to the Lord so it's not a demanding legalistic thing okay because you need to have that relationship with Him you know you and I aren't friends we're not enemies but we're not friends because we don't spend time together but if we did we'd become friends and you'd become more you know you'd either like me more or like me less you know depending on a few things you know you need to spend time with someone to have fellowship with them okay that's one thing all right so seek Christ first number two this is a dangerous thing seek the exposure of your sin the reason I'm saying that is because your lack of fellowship with Him is due to your sin we've got a break coming up and I'll expand on that after the break if you don't mind holding on okay hold on buddy alright folks we'll be right back after these messages we have one open line eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six we'll be right back it's Matt Slick live taking your calls at eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six here's Matt Slick alright everybody welcome back to the show Adrian are you still there?

you still there man? Adrian don't know if he's listening maybe he's having trouble with his phone he's panicking who knows but uh... let's try it again can you hear me? yeah there we go I think I hit the wrong button again I do that every now and then yeah I hear you you there? yes yes sir yeah I think I messed up on that uh... alright so what I was saying is you seek Jesus first and to do that you need to pray to him read his word and you need to seek the exposure of your sins because our sin is what separates us from God Isaiah fifty nine two says this and so you know you're a sinner and I'm not just pointing fingers and accusing you I mean hey you and me we're sinners and whenever we have these problems with our faith with God and our fellowship it's because of us not because of God so you gotta ask God to expose your sin to you but it's not fun because when he starts doing it it gets pretty rough and it can be discouraging but this is what's necessary to show what areas in your life are roadblocks to that fellowship because that's what you want you can't have fellowship with them if you're in sin now you know you may think things you're not supposed to think every now and then but it could be you're in a pretty bad sin I'm not going to accuse you or I'm not saying you are or I'm not going to ask but it could be and it could be that you know what that is it could be you don't know what it is but either way it's an issue of sin and the suppression of the truth and unrighteousness and then what you also need to do is get fellowship fellowship okay fellowship is with other Christians you need to be in company with other Christians so that's what I would say is seek Christ expose and repent of your sins and seek the fellowship and there's a little bitty kind of a thing I have called CPR you know CPR keeps you alive right CPR right? well confess pray and read seek Christian CPR keep you spiritually alive confess your sins pray to God read his word and of course you want fellowship with other believers so Christian CPR confess pray and read that'll help you and it takes time and you gotta you gotta go through what you're going through in order to get where you need to be you call me back in a week I want to hear what you had to say in a week yes sir I'll start that tonight I want you to do that and pray and and if you feel good great if you feel not good that doesn't matter just do what you're supposed to be doing and then let me know what happens in a week okay buddy? yes sir okay okay thank you Matt well God bless man God bless alright let's get to Josh from North Carolina Josh welcome you're on the air Josh Hey Matt I want to praise God for his grace and mercy you got that right I want to pray for that last uh last uh color wow that's I remember what I was like yeah I'd like to talk to you about Matthew 16 verses 27 and 28 yep a son of man is going to come and everyone will see him some people standing here will not pass away till they see yeah right so I was listening to a sermon by uh Jeff Durbin you know I know he's a uh he's a post-millennial uh-huh um but I'm I'm I'm I don't know I'm reformed I'm I'm all millennial I'm just wondering how does that fit um he was pointing that towards uh it would be good by the standards of Jesus was talking about you know the destruction of the temple I'm just trying to see how that that fits into the son of man coming in his kingdom well um this is a good amillennial verse actually because in the amillennial position the kingdom of God is now and right plus Satan has to be bound or not that reign and Jesus said he was bound in Matthew 12 so right you know okay and so this is for the son of man is uh going to come in the glory of his father with his angels will repay to every man according to his deeds now that seems to be speaking of the final return of Christ truly I say to you there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the son of man coming in his kingdom I take it for what it means the very next chapter is a transfiguration and in that I believe this is the demonstration of his kingdom and his lordship in the transfiguration where the glory of the Lord Jesus was manifested and Elijah and Moses were there which represents the law and the prophets Moses is the law Elijah the prophet all the prophets the rest of the bible so the old testament was was basically divided into two sometimes three groups law prophet and psalms or just the law and the prophets which is a generic kind of a quick way to say it so Moses and Elijah were there representative of the law the prophets the old testament economy and covenant of stuff that were there to bear witness of the truth of Christ who said that the bible was about him in john 539 you search the scriptures because in them you think you have eternal life but it is either bear witness of me so I think that it was fulfilled in matthew 17 that they okay I was listening to him in the sermon though he was he was doing it sounded like pretty good harmonics comparing the language to old testament um uh speech about judgment and so he was he was comparing uh what was being said right here in matthew 16 to uh was said I think it was in Isaiah Isaiah 65 I can't remember but uh he was comparing it to the destruction of a temple would you say that would be a good interpretation I'd have to see which particular verse he's talking about because if you're talking about verse 27 I wouldn't say it's dealing with the issue of the destruction of the temple because that leads lends itself in concert with full preterism which is false now I've talked to Jeff you know we've met we did a conference together in Canada and I've talked to him I got his cell number we talk every now and then okay so you know I could always call him and ask him but uh you know so I don't know what what context he's talking about so I just don't know but um that verse 27 will repay every man according to his deeds I don't see how that can be tied if he is if you're saying is I don't know if it's accurate tied to the destruction of the temple I don't see it as standing okay well I think what he was getting at was you know it was you know paying back Israel for their rebellion against the son of man by crucifying him when Jesus when he was being tried uh they say crucify him his blood will be on our hands of the sons of our children right and and it was I think he was tying into that well the susan vassal treaty pattern of the third millennium bc which is where the old testament covenant pattern is is is developed means that those who break the covenant will have the penalties of that covenant requirements put upon them because jews the jews missed the messiah they broke the covenant that god had established when they're with them to send the cup the messiah to them so therefore the consequences the negative consequences of the covenant came upon them the judgment upon them and so they were dispersed their temple was destroyed however god is not done with israel you go to romans 11 24 25 and 26 talks about this he's not done with israel covenantally so some people who are post mill and some who are well get other things hold to a full preterism which I believe is quite false but partial preterism is certainly within orthodoxy full preterism would say jesus returned in the the armies of israel and the armies of jerusalem the armies of rome and destroyed jerusalem and that was the judgment but that's not how he returned if they say that's that was the the fulfillment of the return of christ that's simply false that's refuted by acts 1 9 through 10 but if they're to say it's a kind of return of christ in judgment but it wasn't him personally okay I could see that I wouldn't necessarily agree with it but okay I could see that you know or if they were to say god used the pagans to discipline his people yeah I would definitely agree with that so it just depends okay so I'm not sure what he said and don't know all right you know listen listen to the whole thing it makes me wonder is the whole tribulation this was going into a cyclical event I believe it is because of daniel chapter 9 verses 24 through 27 it says the messiah will be cut off in mid the midweek and this the when jesus himself quotes the fulfillment I forgot where out of jeremiah out of isaiah I think it is I can't remember he stops midpoint and and it seems to be saying that the rest of the tribulation period will come to pass and it's that talk about the great tribulation period and so the tribulation is talked about a type of tribulation is talked about in second thessalonians chapter 2 which says that the arrival of the anti-christ by the apostles he has to comes first and so where people will be running through the hills and jesus talks about that about 24 and 25 in luke 17 so he talks about these kind of things where people are running to the hills because it's so bad well people ran to the hills in the 60s in ad 60 64 when nero was in charge and people fled to the hills so partial praetorism seems to be the way to handle all of this that at the first coming of christ there was pain and suffering the second coming is going to be pain and suffering for the unbelievers in that sense but and also for the believers who will be persecuted as you can tell in our world christians are becoming more and more persecuted it's happening and the news media says nothing about it the lying sacks of crud that they are so right okay it's there's a you know there's a lot to talk about this is not just an easy oh here's a verse that refutes everything no right it's not exactly like that and so what they'll do and it's a good thing is the post-millennial post-millennialists they will and i agree with this will go to the old testament say this is how this phraseology is used and so we we will use it here but they've got to be careful you don't want to take the old testament to interpret the new the new has to interpret the old and a lot of times false theologies are developed whenever someone says let's take the new testament revelation let's look at the old testament and the old testament will tell us how to interpret the new and that's there's some points of validity to it but there's a warning because it's never how it's done in the scriptures it's always this is what was written to you know to be fulfilled blah blah blah and by this and 30 things happen like 30 pieces of silver this was to fulfill what was said over here so the new testament interprets the old testament that's the right way to do it but it doesn't mean we don't look at the old testament it means we do and it sheds light on how we interpret the new testament but the new testament's the ultimate authority in that sense of interpretive priority absolutely right with you on that one that's good that's one thing we re on at least so far i'm kidding all right well thank you very much you're welcome very much well god bless okay god bless you all right that was josh from north carolina he wasn't kidding around hey a couple of things before uh the end of the show got a minute left nobody waiting um smile.amazon.com is a place you can go to to help a karm if you are so inclined you can go to smile.amazon.com it's uh it's an amazon subdomain and you can set up a charity so when you purchase anything in amazon a little bit goes to that charity also starting on december 11th we're going to be having a matching funds drive so if you donate anything to karm from the 11th to the end of the year it'll be matched by a donor so if you just donate 10 it'll become 20 if you donate 50 to become 100 etc we'll talk more about that in the coming days lord bless you and i am out of here and by his grace we're back on there tomorrow talk to you then god bless you