Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at 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. Everybody, welcome. It's me, Matt Slick. You're listening to Matt Slick live.

If you want to give me a call, as usual, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. I'm a little out of breath. I was running a little bit before this show.

I was pushing my schedule a bit too much here. If you want, you can watch. It's really exciting.

You can watch me sitting in a chair with the headset on, talking and things like that. It's really a lot of fun. But we do have a lot of people in the chat room.

Usually, it's about 50 people. Actually, people have made friends. Now, they've exchanged phone numbers and done all kinds of stuff and stuff like that. Anyway, if you want to give me a call, like I said, 877-207-2276. Hey, just want to let you know that we stay on the air by your support.

I'm not here begging. I don't believe in that kind of stuff. Last night, I was watching a TV. I was just, oh, man, I just couldn't believe what I saw. I think it was like midnight or something.

I was watching the religious channels, which for me is pretty frustrating. Anyway, this guy was on there saying, send your donation of $777. It was off the thing of $77. He said, if you do this, they'll send you a keychain. The keychain had a little emblem on the end of the keychain thing. It was the 12 stones of the high priest garment.

You get the 12 stones for $777. I'm thinking, what a lame gimmick to get people to give you money. People fall for it. I tell you, folks, if you're out there and some guy or girl on TV is saying, look, if you send in your seed faith, God will bless you. Don't buy into it. It's manipulation.

Don't buy into it. In our CARM meeting today, our guy, our missionary in Brazil said that one of these preacher guys in Brazil, let's see how he worded it, on TV, on his TV show, had an invisible COVID mask on. An invisible COVID mask. He would go through the motions of putting it on and say this invisible spiritual COVID mask. He says, if you send me like $5 in the mail, we'll mail you back an envelope with an invisible spiritual COVID mask that you can put on. He said he made thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars on it.

People were signing up. Okay. I was thinking, what if I were to do something like that?

What would I do? If I was on TV, I'd say, okay, look, what I'm going to do is mail you an empty envelope. It's empty.

Nothing in it's going to help you because there's nothing in it. It's just an envelope from us and we're not even going to ask you for anything. But if you want, you can send us money because it'll help us to stay on the air and we'll send you an empty envelope with nothing in it.

How's that sound? Would people sign up? No, no, no.

You've got to have the gimmick. Maybe when we go to Israel, come back, I'll bring some stones, some of the stones that did not cry out and then sell them for $25 each that I personally touched. All this idiocy that people do, and Christians fall for it. Don't fall for it, folks.

Just give because you want to support a ministry, not because you're going to give to get a little gimmick thing. It's ridiculous. It just makes me mad.

Anyway, that's my little whining opening there. Let's get to Kim from Rural Hall, North Carolina. Welcome, Kim.

You're on the air. Thank you, Matt. My question is coming from Proverbs 6, 17, and 1 Samuel 15, basically verse 3. Let's do this verse one that way. Proverbs 6, 17, and was it 1 Samuel what? 1 Samuel 15, verses 1, 2, and 3, but concentrating on verse 3. Okay, now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has and do not spare him, but put to death both men and women, child and infant, ox, sheep, camel, and donkey.

And Proverbs 6, 17, haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart. Okay, he doesn't like that. Okay.

Yeah. So my question is, I've heard pastors say that the shedding of innocent blood would be the abortion of children. But now, in Samuel, this is exactly what God told Saul to do when he told him to kill women and children, because there had to be women in that tribe that were pregnant.

Okay. So what would be considered innocent blood? Innocent blood by our standard is different than innocent blood by God's standard. According to God, none of us are innocent.

If God seeks for us to be executed, to be taken out for whatever reason he desires, it's always justified, because whatever God does is always morally right. So if he says to a people, go wipe out this, you know, men, women, and children here, there could be several reasons involved. Usually what happens in the context is the nation has been warned numerous times about their sin and would not repent. And so God wipes them out. And so everybody's guilty, because that's just how it is. And in other times, it's the nation is going to be there to corrupt Israel and block the messianic line, so they're wiped out. Another time is because God desires, for reasons he doesn't always tell us, to wipe out a group of people.

Usually it's, though, to make way for something else. And when he does men, women, and children, people say, well, they're all innocent. No, no, no. Nobody's innocent. Everybody is guilty of sin, and everybody deserves to be judged and taken out. It's only the mercy of God that lets anybody live.

People then say, well, wait a minute. What about babies? They haven't sinned. But babies have a sin nature. And I know people may not like that theology, but that's what it says. Ephesians 2, 3, we are by nature children of wrath. We are by nature born this way. We have that fallen nature. The only one who did not was Adam and Eve when they were created. And, of course, they fell. And Jesus, who never sinned and never had a sin nature.

So this is what's going on there. None of them are innocent. But in Proverbs, what it's talking about is a different context. Someone who's innocent, it's not innocent before God in the theological sense, but it's innocent before, say, you or me. They didn't do anything wrong, and we're killing them. That's murder at that point.

You don't want to do that. But if they have murdered someone and they're found guilty at a trial and they are then executed accordingly, then that's not the shutting of innocent blood. Does that make sense? I'm still trying to grapple with the fact that you just said there's no such thing as someone being innocent. So if you use the phrase, a boy and a child would be shedding innocent blood, then that wouldn't be correct, right? No, no, no.

Okay, I understand. When God executes somebody, it's always the right thing that God has done. He has the right to take anybody's life because all people have sinned against him, and the weight of his sin is death. The fact that God does not take people out is just a demonstration of His grace and His patience and His mercy with us. But He has the right to execute anybody at any time because all people have sinned against Him.

That's what's going on there. When it's talking in Proverbs about we don't shed innocent blood, it's speaking about people like you and me. We are not the ones who can go out and just destroy someone because, well, they haven't sinned against us. But all people have sinned against God, so He has the right to execute them. But not all people have sinned against, say, you or me.

We don't have the right to execute them. In that sense, they're innocent. So a baby in the womb, from a human perspective, is innocent.

It hasn't done anything wrong to anybody, okay? So that's it. So that's the shedding of innocent blood, and the pastor is correct.

But if God wants to take a baby, then He has the right to do it. And another thing is, you know, with these people in the Old Testament in this nation, like, for example, the Canaanites were worshiping Moloch. And what they were doing was taking a...

Hold on a sec. There we go. They were taking these bronze idols that they would heat up, and there were human bodies, and the heads were of oxen. And the human arms of these idols would be extended out, you know, the elbows at the side, and then the arms out, palms up, and they would take their babies, newborn babies, and put them on these arms. But they did this after the belly of this idol was heated up with fire so that the whole thing was just red hot, and then they would put their newborn babies on here and sacrifice them to Moloch. So they were pagan. They were murdering. They were shedding innocent blood in that sense, because it was innocent to them. The babies hadn't done anything to them. There was no law breaking that the babies had done. So God warned the nation, sent prophets in, don't do this for, like, I don't know, 200, 300 years. I forgot what it was.

And finally, God had them wiped out. People will criticize God. Well, you can't do that. Yes, you can.

Yes, he can. We have to have a standard by which we can say that God is or is not right. And this is the thing. A lot of times people will say, well, I don't approve of that. Well, you can argue with God on the day of judgment.

He's the infinite God. Who are you to say it's right or it's wrong? You have to submit to what God has said and what God has done.

So when people criticize, they have to have a standard of morality that is universal and applicable that God himself must adhere to. And they don't. So they can just sit down and shut up, that kind of a thing. But here's another thought. The parents or the adults were already given over to the depravity of their hearts and their mind. And when they die, they would go to hell. Well, what if part of the deliverance of the people was what they're all wiped out, then one of the potential theories here is that all babies that when they die in infancy go to heaven. And that's a debatable issue. But if it's the case, then God would be saving people out of hell by having the babies killed as children killed young so they can go to heaven. That's one theory.

Another thing is that if the population had continued to produce children and pagans, you know, hundreds and hundreds and thousands and thousands of people in their ungodliness, then more and more people would have gone to hell, and God's stopping that. So there's different ways of looking at this and say, well, it's good, it's bad, it's right, it's wrong. But it's just not as simple as one is innocent, one is not innocent. It does get more complicated. Does that make sense?

It does. One other question. Would you say that some sins can be carried on, can be hereditary? Let's say hate. You've got hate in your heart, and you keep it, and you produce another child that that child can produce or have that hate in it. Well, it's not a genetic thing that's passed down through DNA. But there is a condition of federal headship where the male represents a descendant, and so the sins of the father can be passed down to the children.

But what that means is, for example, the Canaanites were pagans serving the false demonic gods. Their children would also suffer because of that. They'd be raised in that, and so in that sense, the sins of the parents were passed down. Not that it became theirs because the father did something bad.

But in their own raising up, they became as bad as the parents in that sense. That's what that could mean. Okay, buddy? All right. Thank you, Matt. God bless. All right, Kim, God bless. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages.

One open line, 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. Let's get on the air with Richard from Richmond, Virginia.

Welcome. You're on the air. Hey, Matt. How you doing, brother? Doing all right. Hanging in there.

What do you got, buddy? I just had a question that I'm getting some feedback from you, but... It's okay. Anyways, you'd spoken before about certain religions or churches, I should say, as far as like being kind of occult type churches. I grew up in a Catholic church, and that I can kind of understand.

I walked away from the Catholic church a while ago. I've been going to a Assembly of God church, and not that you were throwing them in the same mix as Catholic churches, but you did say they were somewhat of a type of occult type church. And I just was wondering if you could expand on that a little bit and explain it. I never did get a definition of that before. Yeah, the Assemblies of God is within Christian Orthodoxy, but they teach women can be pastors and elders, and for that alone, I would not attend.

What was the last part? They affirm women pastors and elders. Right, okay.

That's true. I've gone through their material, and it's an unbiblical position that they have. And I've gone through their position, their position paper, and the arguments that they use in support of it are very bad. I would debate their best person.

Let's go public. Let's do a debate on this issue. Because I know their arguments, and their arguments are pretty weak. And they misinterpret things. They misapply things. They're not very specific in their understanding. And so this is a serious issue.

And the reason it's a serious issue is twofold. One, men are the leaders in the church. They're supposed to be the leaders of the church. And if men don't lead in the church, churches go apostate. And the apostasy is prophesied. Second Thessalonians 2, 3, and that's in the issue of the visible church. So we need to have men who are standing up on biblical truth and not compromising.

And when women get in leadership positions, men tend to do nothing and become lazy about this issue. And it's just out of place. It's wrong. I can get into more theological issues about it, but not right now.

I don't need to. The other thing is that 80%, in my personal research, when I did a lot of research on this, I don't know, three, four years ago, 80% of the denominations in churches that adopt women pastors within two generations also start adopting homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle. You've got to understand something. The Bible says, I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over men but to remain silent, for Adam was first created. That's 1 Timothy 2, 12, and 13. One is not to have authority over men. And people will complain about that, but the very next chapter, Paul says in 1 Timothy 3, 15, he's giving instructions on how we're to behave in the household of God, the church.

He's specifically stating that. And then in Titus 1, verses 5 through 7, in 1 Timothy 3, Paul is telling us that the elder and a pastor is an elder. The elder is to be anermeus gunaikas, a man of one woman. How is that happening for a woman?

This is very serious. It's a theological issue. Let me give you a little bit of background. Adam and Eve were in the garden, and she ate of the fruit first. She ate the fruit first. Then she gave it to Adam, and then he ate. So she sinned first, and then Adam sinned.

They both hid. In Romans 5, 12, it says that sin entered the world through one man, not through a woman. She and he were both in the world. She was in the world and ate the fruit, but sin did not enter the world through her, but through Adam.

This is important theological information, at least, to be included in this discussion of women leadership. Furthermore, when they were hiding, the pre-incarnate Christ came to them and said, to the man, where are you? He didn't say, Eve, what have you done? He didn't say, Adam and Eve, what have you done? He said, to the man, where are you? He addressed Adam.

Why? Because he was the one in spiritual authority. He's the one where the buck had to stop. So this is how God set it up. This is why Paul says what he says in 1 Timothy 2, 12, 13, because Adam was first created. Now, when it says a woman is to remain silent, in 1 Timothy 2, 12, it's silent. What it means in Greek, the Greek word is hessokia. Hessokia means you can be even more silent. It means you're not quiet, as in no sound. That's the word sagao, and it's not used there.

It's hessokia, which is used there, which means keep it down. So if they're talking, say, hey, be even more silent. But we don't have a word like that. What do you mean more silent? You're either silent or you're not silent.

But in Greek, they have it more silent, more quiet. Keep it down. Hush it.

Keep it down. And so this is what he's using as the Greek word. He's not saying they can't talk. They're not to be speaking up and dealing in the authoritative position in the church, period. This is what Paul is saying. So having said this, if anybody out there listening to me is attending a church with a woman pastor and woman elder, just leave.

Just leave. Go find a church that has a good godly man teaching and preaching. And if you don't like it, you can talk to your woman pastor and elder and have them call me on the show. We'll set up a debate, and we'll go through the scriptures. Let's see what the word of God says.

I understand what you're saying, and I guess that's the basic issue that you have about it. And the church I go to has a male. It's a lead pastor, but you're right. There is one female assistant pastor, and occasionally she gets up and preaches. But taking everything you said into consideration, what church out there would you recommend that actually follows the examples that you laid out? Well, there's a denomination called Calvary Chapel. OK, I've heard of them. I'm Reformed in my theology. They're not. I'm all male. They're not.

It's OK. But they go verse by verse. They won't have women pastors and elders. So it's a pretty good denomination.

Another one is, oh, man, I was hoping. The United Reformed Church is good. Generally, there's a rule I tell people. If a church or a denomination has a word united in it, it's bad. And it's true. It's bad. The only exception I'm aware of is United Reformed. They're good. Reformed, OK. United Reformed, OK.

They're good. They're a good denomination. And then the evangelical free is a good denomination, but I've heard a couple of things.

I don't know. Evangelical, what was the last part? Evangelical free.

EV free. It's called evangelical free. So what I would do is go to my website, go to CARM, and go to the search engine and look up the article what to look for in a church. What to look for in a church.

And I go through. I've written this article. I list it out. Here are the things to consider because there are issues like charismatic gifts or not charismatic gifts. That's a debatable issue. You can go to a church that affirms or denies.

It's OK. But there are certain things you want to look at. And what I would recommend you do at this point is call up the church and interview them over the phone according to some of the things that are listed in there.

And you'll know right away. That's a good idea. And if they seem to be OK and you get there, if it's a church facility and it has a library, go into the library and see what kind of books they have.

If they have books from Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland, then just get out of there. They're all here. OK? OK.

I hear you. Hey, thanks a lot. I appreciate it. God bless you.

God bless. OK. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Stay tuned. Welcome back, everyone. Let's get on the phones with Chris from Toledo, Ohio.

Chris, welcome. You're on the air. How's it going? Can you hear me clear, brother? I hear you, brother. What's up, man?

What do you got? All right. Good. Good.

Y'all got a couple questions for you now. Are you a Calvinist? Yes, I am. OK. Good. Good. Now, they crave me if I'm wrong.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this. Because I'm not a Calvinist. But I just want to kind of get your input on this.

Sure. How a Calvinist would think about the scripture right here. Mm-hmm. So Romans 11, 17. Right?

17 through I'd say 21, if I'm not mistaken. Mm-hmm. Where it speaks about how, like, the Jews was, you know, they was the natural branches and they was taken out in the wild where the unnatural branches was grafted in, meaning the Gentiles. And then Paul says that, basically, like, don't be, like, high-minded.

Don't look down upon them. Because if God could take away the natural branches, surely he could take away the unnatural branches. Now, the way I read that, I was taking that as Paul saying that when you grab the dam, you're in the faith.

But God can take you out. So how do you read that? Am I misreading that? Because it seems to me as saying, like, Paul said you can lose your salvation, in a sense. What do you think about that?

Maybe I'm misreading it. Well, there's a lot here. Let me go through it quickly. Okay.

And, excuse me, I want to clear my throat. And we don't have time to go through it all, but in John 6, 37 through 40, Jesus talks about him coming down to do the will of the Father, and the will of the Father is that Jesus lose none. Of all that he's given me is the will of the Father who sent me, that all that he's given me, I lose none. This is what Jesus says in John 6, 37 through 40. So Jesus always knows the will of the Father, so therefore he can't lose any, period. This is real simple, and there's other verses. Some people then will go to, and I'm going to bring all this together, some people will go to Hebrews 10, 26. If we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin. And they'll also go to Hebrews 6, 4 through 6. And Hebrews 6, 4 through 6, it says, in the case of those who have been enlightened, have tasted the heavenly gift, and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance.

Okay. So there's a lot here, and I'm not trying to confuse the issue, but I'll just let you know, this is not a super easy topic. So now I'm going to go back to Romans 11, and I'm going to reference some stuff. In Romans 11, what I believe has happened, is my opinion about this area of scripture, that God works covenantally, and he's speaking covenantally, because when we understand that the olive branch is something out of Jeremiah 11, that God refers to Israel, Israel was a covenant people. A covenant is a pact or an agreement between two or more parties, and covenants have signs. So you could stay in the covenant by keeping the covenant boundaries, or you could be excluded from the covenant by breaking the covenant boundaries, and I could talk about this quite a bit. But an example of a covenant is a marriage. My wife and I have married, we have promised to be faithful to each other, neither one of us have broken that covenant responsibility, even though sometimes we haven't liked each other, we're still committed to each other, and we keep our covenant bonds. And the symbol of the covenant is our wedding rings, okay?

And this is how it is, and we love the Lord, so we are forced to love each other, and say that with tongue in cheek. Okay, now, so the thing is that Israel, according to Jeremiah 11, 16, is called the vine, is called, excuse me, the olive tree. God speaks covenantally of Israel.

People were included in the covenant by circumcision, even though they really weren't aware of what was going on, by the covenant necessity they were kept in, and they were put into a covenant. God works covenantally with Israel. This is why Jesus says in Matthew 15, 24, he said, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Jesus was not sent to the whole world.

He was only sent to Israel, because that's covenant requirement, of the covenant that God made with Abraham. But because Israel broke the covenant, we were grafted in to the vine, because they broke it. So when we get to Romans 11, this is the kind of stuff that's all back there behind what Paul's talking about. And he says, I'll show you something. He says, don't be arrogant towards one another, because if you, the Gentiles, have been grafted in to this olive tree, this branch, into this system, it means the covenant nation of Israel and God's covenant faithfulness, you've been grafted in to what God has been doing.

Don't be arrogant. Since they have failed, they broke the covenant, you can be wiped out, or you can be taken out of that covenant. It never says that you were saved in that.

It says, but they were either unbelief, that they were taken out, okay? If it means that you're saved, and then you lose your salvation, then it contradicts what Jesus says when he said that the will of the Father is that he lose none. Jesus always loved the will of the Father, so Jesus can't lose any.

So he can't have that. Also, as I reference in Hebrews 6, 4 through 6, it says to those who once have been enlightened in heaven that they fall away, it's impossible to renew them again to repentance. If the people are saying you can lose your salvation, according to Hebrews 6, 4 through 6, which they often use for that position, you cannot be returned to that position, because it says it's impossible to renew them again to repentance.

That's what it says. If that verse, which I don't agree with, but if they say it means you can lose your salvation as so many people use these verses. If it means that you cannot be renewed again to repentance, then we have a problem with the Romans 11, 23. And if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God's able to graft them in again. So wait a minute, so now what we see is God's able to graft in the unbelievers back in. But wait a minute, if that's the case, then how is it that they could have been in if they were saved, lost their salvation, which Jesus says can't happen, because of his words in John 6, 37 through 40. And if you could lose your salvation, Hebrews 6, 4 through 6 is used, well it says there it's impossible to renew them again to repentance, then how can they be grafted in again?

It doesn't make any sense. So this is why I say this has to be covenant language. Because as I said, Jesus was sent to Israel, he was not sent to the whole world. This floors a lot of people when I show them this, Jesus' own words in Matthew 15, 24, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This is because of the covenant that God had made, that Israel would be blessed. And the whole nation ultimately too, Genesis 12, 3, which Paul quotes in Galatians 3, 8 calling it the gospel, but nevertheless. So this is how I look at Romans 11, because God is not done with Israel. And it says in verse 24, for if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? Wait a minute, they're grafted in? They're already in if they're Israelites. That means they're saved when they were in, and then they're grafted in, but they're already there. So you see what's going on? This can't be about just salvation.

It cannot be. And this is why Paul goes on, I do not want you to be unaware brethren, or I want you to be aware brethren, to be, do not want you brethren to be uninformed to this mystery so that you will not be wise in your own estimation that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in so that all Israel will be saved. And then he gets to quote the Old Testament, and he's quoting the Old Testament covenant language. He's talking about the covenant and what he's doing with Israel. This is covenant language, and when you understand covenant, it makes sense. But if you say, hey, you can lose your salvation, then it doesn't make sense because it says here they can be grafted in again, verse 23, but Hebrews 6, 4 through 6 says they cannot be renewed again in repentance, and Hebrews 10, 26 says that there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin that they've left. So we have conflicting interpretations that can't work.

The way to harmonize them is to say, nope, you never lose your salvation because Jesus said so, and it's covenant language because it's referencing Jeremiah 11 about the olive tree, which is Israel, covenantal Israel. Make sense? Kind of? That makes perfect sense. That's a good answer right there. Okay. And do you have time for another question or no? We have full lines. Call back and get in line if you can because people have been waiting, all right? Okay. Half hour so we can get to them. All right, Chris.

Thanks a lot. Great question, though. Great question. Okay. God bless.

All right. Let's get to Ryan from Pennsylvania. Ryan, welcome.

You're on the air. Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me to call back anytime. I just got finished reading your book Apologetics and Atheism, and I'm going to be doing a video book review of this book, and I'm going to be recording this call. I'm going to be including a complete text of this conversation in that.

I was wondering, what atheist did you read or study to prepare yourself for writing this book? Are you aware that the book is meant to be a low-level, just a flowing kind of discussion? First of all, do you worry about that because that's the intent of it. Well, it is supposed to be accurate, right? Yeah. It is supposed to be accurate, though, right? Are you saying it's inaccurate? Yes, of course. Okay.

And exactly what area is it inaccurate in? Well, first of all, you didn't answer my questions about what atheists you've read or studied. Have you read or studied Freud, Nietzsche, Marx, or Burch and Russell? We'll be right back. Okay, after the break.

Hold on, buddy. We'll be right back, folks, after these messages. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right. I want to welcome back to the last segment. Ryan, are you still there? Yes, I am.

Thank you very much. Okay. So, you want to know what atheists I've studied? Well, let's see, Dan Barker, Eddie Tabash, I've read Burch and Russell, I've seen a little bit of Kant. He's not an atheist, but he wasn't, but that I've talked to hundreds, hundreds of atheists over the years and stuff, and I've had formal debates with him, so okay. Well, you do realize that Dan Barker, using Dan Barker as a source for atheism is like using Dave Hunt as a source for Calvinism. There are many atheists that disavow Dan Barker.

Okay, that's fine. And there's many atheists who don't, so okay. So what's your point?

So in what area am I inaccurate? Okay, first of all, are humans transcendent creatures? What does that mean, humans transcendent creatures? What do you mean by that? Are humans transcendent creatures? Okay, let me ask you another question. So what do you mean by that?

Okay. You talk about transcendent truth in the book that I just read, how is it that humans come to a knowledge of something that is transcendently true? Because they're made in God's image, Genesis 1 26 to 28, and we can think God's thoughts after him. So humans are transcendent creatures? So then we can apprehend the transcendent nature of what God has provided for us. Okay, so we can understand something that is transcendent and we can understand it as transcendent? When you say understand it as transcendent, you're not clear what you mean by that? Okay, we understand truth to be transcendent, but we also understand it as transcendent. Well, its nature is that it's transcendent. We have varying truths that we all, not all, but people hopefully apprehend in various ways, the transcendent nature of certain objects, you know, abstract objects. The fact of the matter is humans are not transcendent creatures. And the idea that we can understand a transcendent truth is platonic and humanist, actually. And if you're going to write a criticism, you really should learn a little bit more about what Christian apologetics is in the issue of transcendent.

I've been doing Christian apologetics far more than you have, and I've been doing it for far longer than you have, and more thoroughly, and I'm more better at it. How old are you? How old am I? I'm going to be 65 soon.

65? Okay. Well, I've been doing apologetics for 41 years. No, you haven't. You've been doing the first year 41 times. It's awesome. Okay, so I've been doing the first year 41 times, well then that means I've been doing it 41 years.

So 41 times 1 is still 41. So okay. Anyway, what did you use as a source to come to understand your definition of worldview? What source? I don't document every definition of everything I've learned throughout my life. You just learn things. And when I do an examination of what a worldview is, what I'll do is write an article like I did on Karm. What's a worldview? And I bet you if I were to go look it up right now, I would have quoted different sources just to define what it is. You just look around.

It's not that hard. No, the reason I'd like to say, I'm recording this and I wanted to do this for the video to get it from your own mouth, so apparently you have not studied much of atheists, certainly not Nietzsche, Freud or Marx in understanding atheism. Wait, Karl Marx? Yes. Well, I've read the Communist Manifesto and Nietzsche, I've read some of Nietzsche also. Okay.

So let me ask you a question. In order for me to be acceptable to you, do I have to have read all these people? Not only read them, you've had to have studied them, yes. So in other words, for your subjective preference, in order for me to be acceptable, I have to submit to a list you come up with?

No. What I'm saying is that if you're going to write about it, you should be informed about it. So I'm not informed about atheism? You're not informed about logic, you're not informed about atheism, you're not even informed about Calvinism.

And you've shown today that you're not even informed about the issues concerning women and preaching. So anyway, I told you a long time ago. That's incredible.

That's incredible. Well, hey, look, I enjoyed our conversation, but it just jumped into the realm of the ridiculous. So we're going to move along.

We've got our call this way. Have a great weekend. All right. Let's get to Kelly from Los Angeles. Kelly, welcome. You're on the air.

Man, that guy took up all my time. Sorry. I'm sorry. But let me just ask real quick then. I'm hearing some feedback. Okay, go ahead.

I can barely hear you, let me close my computer, maybe that's what's wrong. Okay, so Matt, for years since the 80s, I've always heard people saying while I was growing up, are you ready for Christ's return? You need to be prepared. You need to make sure that you're ready when he comes back. And now I'm hearing that again, like, are you prepared for Christ's return? My thing is, as a Christian, whose name is already written in the Lamb's Book of Life, and I'm a part of the elect, how much more ready do I need to be? Like, I feel like I'm ready to go now.

So why do they say that? Well, I would do more stretching. What do I need to be prepared for? I'm still laughing for the other guy. So the other guy made me laugh. So how much more ready are you going to be? Well, do some stretching.

But it's a bad joke. Do some stretching. Yeah. Get ready. Do some stretching.

Loosen up, warm up. No, what you do, sorry, oh, but I love the ridiculous. It makes me crack up. Sorry. He was killing me.

I was sitting there like, oh my God, come on. He said, I'm uninformed about Calvinism. I've been defending and writing about it for 30 years. I went to a Calvinist seminary.

You're uninformed about Calvinism. Well, okay. It's nice talking to you. Yeah. And then you did, you haven't done it for 41 years. You did one year, 41 times.

That's still 41 years. I'm sorry. He's cracking me up. Oh, man. Oh, okay.

People don't know that. No, we were cracking up in the chat too. We were in the chat cracking up like, what?

Like what? I'm sorry. It's hilarious. Okay, Keith. Keith is the production guy we were talking about having a sense of humor before the show started.

So Keith, I know he's laughing. He's cracking up. Okay.

Sorry. I had, you know, it's, oh, when I get going, you know, I can be pretty ridiculous. This is fodder for the ridiculous. I like to have fun. Oh, he smiled it back at me. He gave me a smiley face.

So I know he's chuckling. Okay. It's serious.

Okay. Now, should we get ready for Jesus' return? Yes, we should. We should always be ready.

That's the whole point. And why I believe that the New Testament does not tell us very much about exactly when he's going to come back. He wants us always to be ready and expecting his return. And if, unfortunately, you believe in, and I'm going to slowly step on toes now, believe in pre-Trib rapture, then one of the problems there is, hey, I'm getting ready for the rapture and the escape of everything. But if you believe you're going through it, you're saying, I'll be getting ready to go through it. I'm going to prepare myself and get that gospel message out because people are going to be, you know, there'll be a perfect opportunity to preach and teach, you know, so, uh, okay. Yeah. But since my name, I mean, cause I could be laying across my bed and watching TV when Jesus come back.

My name is, since I'm already, I believe that I'm a part of the elect, I don't need to do anything special or extra, right? No. Oh no. You're saved. You're saved. Yeah.

Okay. That's, that's what I'm thinking. They say, are you ready for Christ's return? I'll be like, uh, as ready as I'm ever going to be, but you said it's more so to like, you know, get out and preach because yeah, you're right.

And now that I think about it and from your perspective, because I have family members who need to hear it and they're not ready. That's right. And so you wouldn't want Jesus to come back right now because they'd go to hell. Right. Oh my gosh.

If he tarries, there's more time for more people to come into the faith. So understood. Yeah.

Okay. Well, thank you, Matt. Well, you know what? Hey, if today taught us anything, the caller before me does not trust the guy named Matt on the radio name slick. Yeah, he tried to out slick me. He and I have had discussions before over the years and he has many times called back and apologized. You were right about this and when I was wrong, he's doesn't, I mean, that's a good thing about him. I feel he'll do that, but it's been so often, you know, and it's like, Oh, yeah, yeah. Oh, but he will call back and apologize. Well, that's nice. I don't know. Maybe he will, but he did get a reputation.

Who knows? All right. All right.

Well, Matt, I appreciate your answer and thank you and enjoy your weekend. You too will. God bless. God bless. Bye bye. Okay. All right.

Matt Birmingham, no Burlington, North Carolina. Sorry. You had a long wait there, buddy.

Thanks for waiting. You're on the air. That's all right, Matt. I enjoyed you talking to that. That was great. Sorry.

I'm going to start laughing. Yeah. He wanted you to read doc's copy tell on it and write a report on every page, you know? Yeah.

And I have to, yeah, I have to go with his standard of what, what is sufficient, what he didn't know. He didn't bring him up with that question. He goes, that's right. Okay. Oh yeah. Yeah.

I know you've been doing this for 47 years, but you have a pretty good knowledge of human nature, how, you know, that's why I always have to check my heart and be very careful that I'm trying to do the right thing when I call you. But I just wanted to tell you, it was real upsetting. Just, you know, I heard on the news just before you came on the air now, president Biden thinking about expanding the Supreme court. Yep.

Terrible. The leftist whacko morons in control of our government are going to destroy America. They want to control us. And the reason they want the guns away is they are getting afraid of the people that they're insulting and the people that their step whose rights are stepping on. And they don't want them to have the power to resist, which is what the preamble, the constitution says we're obligated to do. So they don't want us to have that ability to say, we've had enough of this. So they want to disarm us and control us with their propaganda.

Yeah, it's, uh, it's terrible. They'll have tanks running down our street, you know, and we'll get this, you know, get this. So I know something I'll be vague on purpose. I know somebody let's just say this, uh, where the, there are, um, vehicles being made that can go down the streets and aim, uh, electronic devices at your house. And they can tell how many guns you've got, where they are, where, and where you are in your house. Yeah.

And it's supposed to be for the bad guys, except they're designed for going through neighborhoods. Yeah. Yeah. Oh yeah. Okay.

So you really know what they're really real intentions are. This is what's happening because the Christians aren't supposed to be doing the unbelievers are prospering and they're going to continue to do so. And if we Christians don't stand up and resist that, what happens in Canada, where that church of the rest of the pastor, and then he put a fence around his church and normally go back in, it's going to start happening here. And our country is divided. The leftists are causing racism to become just all over the place about everything. I even read an article to my wife yesterday where certain fonts, a font, you know, cursive and non cursive and block letters. Some of them are racist fonts. Yeah.

Yeah, darkness declared, yeah, darkness declared the English language racist. Really there you go. I don't know what's going to happen. It's time. Well, it's time for people to rise up. I'm I, you know, I've been waiting, but is this time for people to rise up? Yep.

It is. I'm gonna get in trouble for saying that. You watch.

I'll come to my door. God bless you. We love you Matt. Yeah. Good man. All right, man. We've got to go buddy.

We'll see you later. All right. God bless. Thank you. All right, folks. There we go. So hey folks, be right back.

Maybe. We're back on the air on Monday. And by God's grace, I hope you have a great weekend. We'll talk to you later. God bless. Another program powered by the truth network.