Matt Slick Live

A previously recorded Matt Slick show.

All you have to do is click and subscribe to this video. amazon dot com and everything uh... then it goes to your charity a little bit little a bit of what you do post charity all right to zero still at the wrong phone number uh... eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six let's get to doctor art from utah welcome you're on the air anything to check in my column at uh... i hear you're doing a great job i haven't listened to you much but the things that they can work all personal present you're welcome to listen yeah but i just wanted to call and uh... first with dominating the headlines uh... everywhere especially here in utah we're getting our new vaccine or cobra nineteen vaccine i just want uh... just uh... but you know my research in my history again from a christian background okay this thing is is really i want to make make it clear it's not a vaccine in the pure sense of the world and uh... you know typically vaccine or something that the body uses uh... in and going back to them uh... edward generous work and all that of course you know you have a unattended virus or bacteria that causes the body to have immune response i want to make it clear i think that uh... uh... ever will listen to this that this is not that at all so it doesn't really fit the definition of a vaccine per se that we have synthetic messenger RNA going into our body and i just want to declare that and this does not does not fit in the creator's plan uh... i i maintain that our DNA is our genetic blueprint directly from god himself that we are created uh... just a little bit lower than the angels and uh... putting on the world i think that we would like okay correct you on that jesus was created a little bit more than the angels he was two nine but i wouldn't want to talk to us but uh... but i know what you mean so what are you are you a doctor or what i i have by unit for traffic position i'm kind of retired from that and i'll just basically a research uh... doctor i i have a background in that my PhDs in nutrition actually and uh... i was a lot of we should talk up to lose some weight sorry clinton well you know i really think that about what the polls yeah i know that you are i've been following you know that the poll brand as far as uh... i call it the the virus mania you know it's a question from uh... let you uh... ask a question uh... i've heard that uh... the virus or the cure so to speak the vaccine whatever you want to call it has artificial DNA DNA or RNA in it that gets injected and is infused into our own is that correct that's exactly right that's what makes this so very dangerous i uh... my goodness i could spend hours telling you but i wanted to kind of focus on what it's designed to do from from the research if i could okay the the messenger RNA or mRNA is basically a blueprint that our deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA strands will take uh... when you inject synthetics into the structure of the cell and the blood starts to carry and absorb it it basically forms a third strand of foreign DNA a third strand structure and it's meant to do that it's designed to do that most people don't realize that twenty plus years of research on on m r n a based vaccine never made it past the animal model because of all of the problem with the animal why in the world are they thinking it's okay to put this into humans right now that's a good question does it use any fetal cells in the process of developing well not not there's been an accusation for that there is in fact a part of the product that it's grown from an aborted fetus cell but it's basically synthetically grown in the lab but it doesn't have any harvested fetal cells as far as i can determine yeah because i would not take it if it did and uh... there's no way it's going to have a foreign DNA uh... that gets injected into our system uh... no thank you i mean i've seen i like aliens movies you know i've seen is a little foreign dna and you and you've got a problem so you're right how about the movie uh... i a m you know there you go and what i want to know is that they're going to have a catalyst in there that'll make you turn into a communist leftist wacko moron uh... eighty you know we we can laugh about that that but honestly the the thing that that kind of really got me concerned victory of the i am legend story if i can just explain that a little bit of interest yet you know course two thousand seven will miss uh... starting to end the right the movie but the actual book was written in nineteen fifty four by a guy named richard mathison now richard mathison story is pretty amazing because he uh... coming out of uh... uh... world war two he was suffering quite a bit of uh... uh... pro-storm post-traumatic shock syndrome right and he was connected with them from researchers back he's been specifically a man named frank also in the food in nineteen fifty-two with the head uh... of uh... creating back to your logical weapons at port dietrich uh... most americans haven't heard anything about frankly and his own timely death he was murdered why because frank golden had a constant moment where you basically realize what he was doing he's fit to his wife and his family and even two friends what i'm doing the work i'm doing out the potential of hurting humanity worse than the manhattan project in nuclear weapons what was freckles and working on let me tell you uh... he was doing using what's called recombinant or messenger RNA splicing on bacillus and bacterium to make the ultimate bacteriological weapon and i'm here to tell you that he had indeed isolated and named a mutated bacteria called and called it of all things bacilli vampira because it absolutely created living dead let me ask you is this enough there's a lot of yeah this is interesting uh... so let me ask you does the uh... all the uh... fake so to speak d n a is it passed down a ball you know is it going into the uh... the reproductive areas and then get passed down or is it just a good question it doesn't need to do that if it alters your very d n a everything that you do as far as reproductions going to be altered and the research suggest that means that doctor eagor shepherd greater resources for us to stop the vaccine dot com uh... doctor eagor suggest that it could last as much as two or three generations and the but the problem is we don't know exactly what the alterations are designed to do that's the big question mark it is because definitely altering altering something in the gene structure like i could talk to you offline about some theories but uh... yeah developed if there's also a lot of information that for whatever reason the mainstream media refuses to divulge for instance uh... in australia the it's been about six months since the astra zenica trials there and it's a very similar almost identical vaccine to the fizer the one that's coming out now uh... what they're finding in the and and let's have is about two-thirds the volunteers are testing positive as if they had hiv injected into them well human immunosuppressant virus attacks a certain part of your genome that causes you to not produce what's called uh... exosomes and these exosomes are what keeps your body basically the immune system is it's hinging on these exosomes and that's what leads to a acquired immune deficiency syndrome or AIDS it's very possible this vaccine could create an AIDS-like epidemic in six months to a year after injection uh... uh... you know i've never either normally don't let someone come on to say things like that but uh... but but i know that i've listed some of the words and code so i know that you know you've you've got some understanding and training a lot of obviously you should email me sometime we should uh... talk you're in utah where are you in utah just curious what city i'm in northern utah october uh... but but but but a bit of a twenty uh... okay and uh... i've got a good friend of mine to do it maybe if uh... matt slick will let you on his uh... my friend has been on your show a few times as a call in he really thinks highly of you so okay i thought i would call in well i appreciate it matt thanks a lot god bless you, email that to you alright god bless hey folks we've got a break right there we have three open lines if you want to give me a call 877-207-2276 we'll be right back it's matt slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276 here's matt slick welcome back to the show we have three open lines if you want to give me a call all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276 don't forget to sign up with smile.amazon.com and you can check out uh... that because when you purchase something on amazon then uh... if you've signed up with smile.amazon.com then uh... a bit of it goes to the charity of your choice when you sign up smile.amazon.com alright let's get to kent from durham north carolina welcome you're on the air hey matt how you doing i'm fine how are you alright what i was talking about sir now in the hebrew bible and the 1611 king jane version it mentions that the only in Acts 4 and 12 the only that you can be saved up under is shahushah hamashiach which is your hebrew version and jesus christ is the greek in latin which name is the proper name to be saved up under do you have a question yes sir which name is the proper name is it jesus christ to be saved up under or yahushah hamashiach yeh-sus the greek word is yeh-sus that's what is said in uh... the documents written by the apostles you gotta be counting for your actions i said that that's what the apostles wrote they wrote it in greek so you believe that right? you believe that the apostles wrote like for example did paul write the book of ephesians yes sir but it's been twisted you tell the truth for god hold on so in ephesians 1 verse 1 paul the apostle of christ jesus by the will of god paul wrote that why would paul use the name jesus yah-sus the name's been changed they were yeh-o-shah hamashiach they're saying it was yeh-o-shah it's in greek he wrote in greek so why did he and the others just used the greek name why do they not agree with you because they twisted it and changed it paul twisted it? no not paul no no no not paul sir it's been taken out if paul didn't then uh... who did? the Bible's been edited are you telling me that people got all of the six thousand manuscripts that were written and copied at different times at different locations all over the mediterranean and changed all of the manuscript from the yahshua hamashiach to yah-sus they did that to all of them? yes sir every one of them that's not the original script no sir i have a question what evidence do you have that all of them were changed that they had to find all of them even the ones they still keep finding were changed somehow somebody was really smart to find out that we're all over the world all over the mediterranean area did the Vatican or the roman catholic church maybe you don't understand that roman catholic church did not have all the documents they have found other documents since then the past two hundred years they have found stuff and the name is in greek in greek manuscripts so let me ask you a question sir what's the original name the hebrew original name there they are accountable to your actions what is the original name there is no original name written in hebrew of jesus it's in greek well you better hold that in greek the original name is hebrew can you show me can you show me the name of jesus in hebrew in the new testament greek manuscripts no because it's been hidden, if you get your 1611 king jam version I can show you so the thing is it's called non falsifiability no matter what i say to you you'll just respond you'll just respond with it's been changed the hell you know it's a lie i know it for a fact sir that's not the name if you get your 1611 king jam version in a hebrew bible excuse me i'm just asking how do you know it's been changed sir i know for a fact that i traveled to jerusalem and israel i was a christian and i questioned if i got to jerusalem and israel the name has been changed well i've been to jerusalem too uh... and i don't see any place where it's changed so what verse what verse in the 1611 king james does this whatever you say it is the real name what verse is it Acts 4 and 12 there is no other name that helpeth heaven and earth may be saved upon the earth through the name of Yehoshua Hamashiach and the change just came out 400 years ago darkeneth be his name or the name 2000 years ago four twelve it says uh... neither is there salvation any other for there's no other name under heaven which may be saved it doesn't say yeshua hamashiach doesn't say that in there in fact it does say in verse it says in verse 10 of the 1611 which i'm looking at the name of jesus christ or christ of nazareth say what you said it says the opposite i think what it is is you're in a non-christian cult and you've been deceived and you don't have any evidence to believe what it is that you espouse and you are deceived can you say over there honest to god that's not his name can you prove it his name is in the old test excuse me in the new testament and it's written uh... let's see i'll tell you how many times it occurs in the new testament okay and let's see it occurs 914 times so that's what it is it's been ended sir well you said the king james 1611 has it in acts 4-12 and i'm looking at it right now it doesn't have what you said do you have a seifer?

do you have a divine seifer? the torah the divine seifer look at that the seifer is in the 80s in other words no matter what i say it doesn't matter it's rose so let me ask you do you believe in the trinity? i absolutely one god in three distinct let me define it for you one god in three distinct simultaneous persons yes sir, father, son, the holy spirit is jesus god in flesh? his name is jesus is he god in flesh? his name is yahushua is he god in flesh? is he god in flesh? yes he is, yahushua is how are your sins forgiven? what do you have to do to be forgiven in your sins? you have to confess and confess and you will be seized and confess and believe that he died alone which was yahushua how much he has do you have to be baptized to be saved?

you have to be submerged submerged under water so you have to be submerged under water in order to be saved? under the name of yahua and yahushua how much he has alright ok, I'm just saying you're confirming you're in a cult because you teach that water baptism by immersion is necessary under a particular name formula so you have salvation not by faith in Christ second person of the trinity but in a particular name of pronunciation that you have to utter we call that sorcery that you have to utter the same name a certain way that's what sorcery does certain formulas, certain pronunciations and things like that we've got a break coming up folks if you want to give me a call three open lines 877-207-2276 it's matt slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276 here's matt slick alright everybody welcome back to the show we have three open lines if you want to give me a call 877-207-2276 877-207-2276 we just lost but she had a question the question was what language did adam and eve speak and uh... we don't know what language adam and eve spoke however uh... some of the jewish uh... theologians say that it probably was hebrew and I'll just go with some of what they say because uh... some of the wording makes sense in uh... hebrew only for example made woman out of man it's ish and ishah and their roots it only makes sense if you understand that ishah is from man and ishah's word something like that I forgot but it has to do with that and also adam uh... man uh... but from adamah which is earth and so it's either the case that he spoke hebrew which is possible it's also possible it's not the case but anyway it's possible that he spoke hebrew or when moses wrote this he just converted stuff into uh... the hebrew language to make it make sense but that doesn't quite really do it so what language did uh... adam and eve speak i don't know the bible doesn't tell us but there seems to be some evidence it could have been hebrew but we don't know for sure so you know that's okay alright let's get on the phone with riley from alabama riley alright you're on the air hi uh... my dad used to listen to my dad still listens to you a lot and I'm eleven years old and I wanted to ask a question and my question is um... how would you explain what god did uh... before he made uh... earth and... sure well because god in the bible is revealed as father son and holy spirit that means three persons in one god not three gods but we don't understand how it works but that's what god reveals so most probably what he was doing for uh... that time before the universe was created by him was he was fellowshiping inside that trinitarian uh... communion trinity and there's one more thing there's an issue of what time is now when you look at a clock in your house you'll see the second hand take one second next second well was when did that come about when did time come about did it come about before god created the universe or after if it didn't exist where god is then the question might not even apply to god because if he did something it would require time but what if there was no time this gets into more difficult stuff to talk about but the people have talked about it and what you asked was a great question too okay thank you you're welcome please call back again okay all right really complex okay that's what there we go uh... that was riley i love it when uh... youngins call up i think we had the youngest was six or seven once a few years ago and really enjoyed that hey folks we have four open lines if you want to give me a call eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six give me a call we have jeff for michigan jeff welcome you're on the air it that i don't but all right hang in there man we have a uh... so just wanted to uh... if u or like the opportunity to uh... go a little deeper into the uh... they usually bring up uh... like bromance three twenty eight uh... and bromance i think you usually dip over there like bromance four five is that all panel yes where out you've basically prove that uh... date alone state for salvation and don't work at the post-war uh... but i would period about the burt that somebody might say all well you're just very particular you know you're just taking the one that seems to be a bit but if you look at it in context it really want to prove that so i'm uh... i was period that you uh... would just take the take a couple of minutes just a walk through that all passage from three twenty eight the four five and maybe just comment on some of the burt in between it out of here that you really don't address yes or what no problem what search you go to just curious uh... i'd go currently to our christian reform church okay uh... seriously i can alright let me tackle this i'll start in verse twenty seven it's kind of paragraph break where that is boasting it it is excluded by what kind of law of works no but by law of faith for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law now we know that the works of the law include all the old testament commandments which are six hundred and thirteen that's the whole summation of the law but jesus also said in matthew twenty two thirty seven through thirty nine he said uh... the greatest commandment is to love god in the second greatest commandment is love your neighbor he was quoting uh... deuteronomy six five and leviticus nineteen eighteen respectively love god and love your neighbor and in verse forty of matthew twenty two he says this is the summation of the law in all the law is comprised here in those two commandments so when it says we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law the works of the law include loving god as well as loving your neighbor we're not justified before god because we love god we're not justified before god because we love our neighbor but without that because it's not by works verse twenty nine or is the god of the jews only is he not the god of the gentiles also yes of gentiles also since indeed god who will justify the circumcised by faith that means the jews and the uncircumcised through faith is one so justification is by faith not by works because what he's doing is talking contextually here he says there is no boasting there's boasting if you have any works you have to do to contribute or keep or maintain salvation he says on the contrary we maintain that justifications by faith apart from the works of the law and then he goes on to verse thirty we you know god who justifies the uncircumcised or the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised by faith is one so faith is without works there because faith is alone justification by faith well verse thirty one do we then nullify the law of god may it never be on the contrary we establish the law well how do we establish the law well verse one of chapter four what then shall we say that abraham our forefather according to the flesh is found for if abraham was justified by works he has something to boast about but not before god for what does the scripture say abraham believed god and it was credited in his righteousness now he's quoting genesis fifteen six so the law is said to be the torah which is genesis exodus leviticus numbers in deuteronomy so what happens here is it's interesting is that paul goes to genesis fifteen six and puts it in here he says abraham believes god it was credited in his righteousness and notice that it's in the past tense believed god is credited in his righteousness and this is before the law was codified and written in the mosaic covenant in verse four now to the one who works his wage is not credited as a favor but what is due to what he's talking about here is uh... when people say they have to work then there's a certain obligation to that then he contrasts it and he says but to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly his faith is credited as righteousness now notice in verse three abraham believed past tense god and it was past tense credited to him as righteousness notice verse five present tense to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly his faith is credited as righteousness it's the same thing justification by faith in abraham's time is justification by faith now as in paul's teaching this is why we cannot be justified by faith and works because romans four five clearly teaches we're justified by faith alone because there's two options faith and works and works are negated faith therefore is left alone that's what paul's teaching and anybody who would disagree with it is a heretic on the way to hell are you there well for some reason you faded out a little bit there but I I caught the end and now I lost your volume yeah you're very very uh... faint all of a sudden maybe there's a technical issue I don't know but uh... I don't know if others can hear me okay but that's the that's a quick slicking quick version of it I could teach that section for two weeks but uh... it's what it's what I go to and there's more stuff before and stuff after that little pericope that I could get into quite a bit but I love teaching right and uh... when it comes to someone like for example a Roman Catholic they try to get around that by saying that the law there is only like the mosaic uh... like the ceremonial law or what do they usually try to do yeah they will start to differentiate and say it's the only ceremonial law or it's only the priestly law and I'll say show me that in context and nothing in the context demands it what they're doing when they do that is they are admitting the text does not fit their theology so they could change the meaning of the text that's exactly what's happening that is what they're doing they get it so it has to be something different now they're admitting that they understand what it says and they've got to change it alright god bless hey folks we have two open lines 877-207-2276 we'll be right back after we've met at this position it's Matt Slick live taking your calls at 877-207-2276 here's Matt Slick welcome back to the show here on the air with David from Massachusetts welcome you're on the air hey brother so I've got a quick question concerning 1st Timothy 6, 16 I know you're familiar with it and I've heard you plenty of times use it specifically for the Mormons alright so here's my question so Revelation 19 you know we see that Jesus specifically verse 16 new king James and he has on his robe and on his thigh a name written king of kings lord of lords and then Revelation 17 that says for he is lord of lords and king of kings specifically speaking of the lamb right I know you're familiar with that now how do you get when you minister to these Mormons where is it that you see that this is 1st Timothy 6, 16 speaking of the father how is it not speaking of Christ good question and the answer is found in the context look at verse 13 I charge you in the presence of God who gives life to all things and of Christ Jesus who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate that you keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the appearing of our lord Jesus Christ which he as the father will bring about at the proper time he who is blessed the only sovereign the king of kings and the lord of lords who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light who no man has seen nor can see to him be honor and eternal dominion amen so no man has seen nor can see people have seen Jesus so it can't be Jesus that they're talking about and since the context only introduces two persons of the Godhead God in which references the father who gives life to all things and of Christ Jesus then it's the father the son and by logical elimination it cannot be the son so it has to be the father which is why I use it with Mormons because they say that I want Mormons to hear this because they say Joseph Smith saw God the father in the first vision everything is based on that but the Bible says he could not have it's impossible so this proves this proves Joseph Smith lied proves it and yet Mormons will not submit to the truth of God's word they submit to somebody else's voice and then they are deceived anyway go ahead right right okay alright I love your answer brother alright one last question it'll be quick I know it'll be quick no problem John 1 2 I believe it is when it talks about he's in the beginning with God yeah he was in the beginning with God so you know that before the King James and I hear a lot of Unitarian Jesus verse you know about the Trinity on this the Bible versions before the King James or even the King James itself said it was in the beginning with God how did the scholars know that he is supposed to be in verse 2 rather than why is that why are these newer translations a better translation because of what it says it's now I don't know if you've taken languages but there's third person singular which is he, she or it so he eats, she eats, it eats it's called third person singular third person singular is I eat second person singular is you eat singular alright in Greek like Spanish the third person singular is not gender specific so if you could translate this if it was just by itself he was in the beginning with God she was in the beginning with God it was in the beginning with God you could do that if it was by itself but we know what this is talking about in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God and it says he was in the beginning with God or you could also say this one was in the beginning with God all things came into being through him now the word him is right there and it's masculine in the Greek it's a pronoun called and the Greek is oto and it is definitely masculine and apart from him oto masculine again nothing came into being that has come into being so the antecedent of him was the third person singular in that verb of to be or ane was a me to be and then in him again which is third person third person date of singular masculine I'm looking at the notes here on the computer so that's what it is so you're saying that it's more consistent to translate it he as opposed to saying it because of the rest of the yeah because of the context yeah it's because of the context and then we have verse 14 and the word became flesh and dwelt among us well who's that?

Jesus were you going to say it? no you say he so this is what's going on to you the Unitarians could not argue their way out of a wet paper bag with a compass and a rope leading them out ok? they don't know what they're doing ok they have these bad arguments like this all the time and I'll show them in Greek and you know well it doesn't matter you're not listening and then I'll show them stuff here here's something about Unitarianism ok something to think about alright if God is a single person then there's some issues we by analogy were made in the image of God we understand that if we are alone without any other person any other thing, any other context just isolated like in solitary confinement for long periods of time that's called cruel, cruelty, punishment, cruelty the Unitarian would have to say that God was in this state for forever no fellowship, no intimacy, no communion, nothing just a single mind alone in nothingness forever how is that not torture? because we understand it, we're made as image it's torturous second since part of the necessity and the attributes of personhood are self awareness as well as awareness of others and communication and language and fellowship and intimacy how does that occur inside a single mind that is not plural as the trinity is but forever one thing how does God, that kind of Unitarian God express the true nature of his personhood which we understand is revealed in scripture how does he express that from forever ago, he can't it would be an incomplete nature an incomplete expression which implies a lack of God and that he created in order to make up for this from the Unitarian sense which would deny his aseity and get into some other heresies so these are some of the problems with the idea of God being one the Trinitarian nature makes more sense because in the trinity we have the Father and the Son expressing fellowship, intimacy with each other an object to give and an object to receive because if God is love, 1 John 4-8 he then loves but you have to have someone to love in the Unitarian sense there is no sense of being able to love the very nature of love which is other centered John 15-13 where Jesus says greater love has this than no man but he lay his life down for his friend well then if God is love and is other centered how does that express throughout eternity without a plurality within the Godhead so the plurality exists in the Trinitarian sense we have God the Father who loves God the Son and the medium of the love expressed is the Holy Spirit himself three persons if the love expressed from the Father the Son was only an abstract idea then it would mean the abstract idea was fundamental to the property and the nature of God who is personal but then you'd have an abstract, impersonal essence a part of the essence of God and that can't be so Binitarianism doesn't work this is why Neutronitarianism as a revealed word of God gives us I don't know if that makes sense, ok?

Thank you man we'll talk soon brother right man, God bless buddy alright alright, let's get to Cynthia from New Jersey hey Cynthia, welcome you're on the air hi Matt, how are you? I'm fine, I'm blessed because I get to speak the truth of God's word that's how I am so what do you got? thank you everyone who prayed for me I was in a bad place a couple of days ago and I just want everyone to know and hear me that you all pulled me out of darkness and I haven't been in it in a long time so thank you but that's not my question my question is regarding Luke chapter 1 verse 37 alright we all know it as for nothing will be impossible with God yeah, I was reading recently in the American Standard Version that was the ASB, yeah and it says for no word from God will ever fail or that's one translation that's a little different and then the other one is about the power I can't find it and I like the one about the power better but when I look up in the inter-linear it is that nothing will be impossible with God so help so what's going on? it says in Greek hati uk pan rema the word rema is what we're talking about uk means nothing for, hati, uk nothing, that's the negator all, pan, from pas, all for nothing, uk pan nothing is as word, it will be impossible so the word rema here is what we're looking at and the word rema is like the word logos it's similar to the word logos which means word but rema is a particularly interesting word in that it deals with that which is uttered in speech and in the positive confession movement they try and say, well it's the rema the rema of God, it has that power in it and there's some truth in that but the word for power is dunamis and it's not used there so what we can say is that if we're to translate it a little bit differently nothing will be impossible no word of God is impossible to be accomplished for nothing is impossible the word, what he says goes that's just the way it is and so that's generally how you kind of want to look at it because nothing will be impossible with God but people will say, if nothing is impossible with God can he lie? because of Titus 1 and 2 and you can't lie and this is why it's a little bit more advantageous to look at that Greek at this point where it says not the word and in that sense of what's going on there the power, spoken, what he says cannot be contradicted etc. because I'm looking at an interlinear and it has four not will be impossible with God every thing and they have way much translated as thing I don't get it because sometimes Greek is tough I remember studying Greek in seminary that sometimes my eyes would bug out and I would think, I need to just transport back in time and slap some Greek person up the head because of these rules of logic and rules of stuff that they would use in translations it was just ohhhh but that's just how it is sometimes so the word Rhema has what's called a semantic domain it's used in different contexts in different ways like the word green can mean envy or young or whatever so it occurs 67 times in the New Testament it's translated as statement word, charge, matter as in, it matters to you I will do as you say oh, we're out of time, discourse so it has a range and it has to do with the forcefulness of the power of the spoken word okay, we're out of time alright, you're welcome so much hey folks, we're out of time if you want to give me a call Lord bless you we'll be back on here tomorrow God bless everybody, we'll see you tomorrow