Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network Podcast. If you are interested in watching, you can. If you want to and on this YouTube channel, check as an inclination of their disgust and disapproval of you. So that's what I understand.

That's about all I know about it. Are you there? Okay, well thank you, man. All right, man. Okay, buddy, God bless. Hey, folks, wide open lines. If you wanna give me a call, all you have to do is dial 8772072276.

It means no one's got any, you know, hit calls right now. So on Saturday, I was in a debate with an Eastern Orthodox individual and very respectful guy, and I thought that they went well, and I've been studying Eastern Orthodox theology now. And the more I study it, the more I'm convinced it's really bad. And tomorrow night, I'll be debating, formal debate with a oneness Pentecostal guy, with a guy who denies the doctrine of the Trinity. And so, you know, I'll be putting the links and stuff up, information up on that, on my website on karm.org. Tomorrow, if, when I get that URL and stuff, if you were to go to karm.org forward slash calendar, it'll take you to the calendar page. And what I've been doing lately is keeping up to date with the things that are happening.

It's just a list with the newest stuff is at the top. So let's see, oh, no, that's right, I gotta change that. The date is wrong on that one, it'll be the 11th.

We had to move it, I didn't change the date here. So it's on the 11th tomorrow that I'll be debating the guy on oneness and the Trinity or oneness, what is the biblical view? And then on the 30th, no, no, on the 30th, on the 24th, I have another debate on the doctrine of the Trinity with a guy named Rodney Smith, another one tomorrow with a guy named Stacy Turbeville. And so I'll be defending the biblical position of the Trinitarian nature of God. And I have been studying the doctrine of the Trinity for quite a while now. And I have been working on a statement about the Trinity. And I've been thinking about teaching on it in depth in my Patreon account.

Because it's where I can tackle one thing at a time and go in it in depth. So I have been talking about this for a while, the definition of God. And so there's a lot here.

Yeah, there's a lot here. The definition I've been working on, on who the Christian God is, is around, let's see how many words is it? Yep, 328 words, but just on the definition of who God is, the Christian God. And the reason this is important is when I've been debating atheists recently, they will misrepresent the Christian God. And a lot of people who condemn the Christian God don't understand the Christian God. And so what I try and do is offer a definition to them and say, here, this is what the biblical position is. This is what Christianity teaches about God.

And we've had some very interesting conversations. Sometimes people will say, well, how did the Christian God come into existence? And the proper response is he did not come into existence. Because to say he came into existence would not be the Christian God. To say that he was created would not be the Christian God. To say that he wasn't necessary would also not be the Christian God. In Christianity, we would say that the Trinity is eternal in the past tense, and that God himself is the necessary being. Without him, nothing else could or would exist in any way. And we would say that God is what's called non-contingent, which means he does not depend upon anything else.

He's completely self-sufficient. We'd also say that he is unchanging. And we would say he's transcendent. Now, the issue of transcendence means that in relation to the created order, he is transcendent. Because without the created order, God is still spiritual. God is still non-contingent. God is still unchanging. But when he creates, then the issue of transcendence becomes a reality because transcendence means not dependent upon space and time.

That's one of the main definitions that is used. And so God has, in that sense, an emergent property in relationship to the created order, which he transcends it. And he is in it, but not defined by it.

And just stuff like this. And here's an important concept that a lot of people don't understand, is that God has nothing against which he can be compared and defined. So when people say, how do you know he's good, that means they're implying a standard of goodness apart from God, by which he could then be defined or judged. But it's the wrong question to ask in relationship to the Christian definition of who God is.

So what I try and do is get people to understand the biblical Christian God. And then when we get into the Trinitarian aspect, we can then account for what's called the one and the many issue. The one and the many issue deals with stuff like how can you have a sphere in one thing called a sphere, but spheres can exist everywhere.

And there's one thing called sphere-ness, but there's particular instances of spheres everywhere. What unifies them as being of the one nature and essence? This is a real philosophical discussion that occurs.

It has to do with particulars and is our world monistic or is it pluralistic? And these are things that philosophers have been discussing and it gets down into Christian theology as well. At any rate, so these are some of the things I'll be discussing and thinking about. And anyway, if you wanna give me a call, 877-207-2276, let's get to, oh, hey, Charlie, how you doing, buddy?

Hey, I'm doing good. I was fascinated by your first call or the number 12 verse. I was, I had some insight from customs of the Bible lands at the time and Walter Martin preached a whole sermon on that. He says, he called that chapter the spit of God because it was a custom among the Hebrews. When the daughter insulted the father, the father would have her, he would spit on her and put her outside the camp for seven days and then she could come back in clean and have a fresh start and her complaint and her brother's complaint was Moses had married a black woman from Ethiopia and it's sort of like ironic that he would say, well, if you're worried about color, how about white as snow as the scripture described her, turns her white as snow with leprosy and she has to sit outside the camp. And then of course, Moses goes to bat for her with the Lord and after the seven days she's cleansed and is allowed to come back. So it's a temporary punishment that the customs of the people of the day understood exactly what the punishment was, what it was for, that it was limited and it was mirrored in that action that the Lord did to judge her for insulting him. And you're right, I didn't touch Aaron because he was the high priest and he couldn't be defiled in such a way but she wasn't and so she did suffer that penalty but then was restored. And so it's a neat picture that the Lord paints about why it's good not to be a racist.

I like it, that's right. I remember that from Walter Martin, what he said, you wanna be white? Okay, here, you can be white, you can be leprous.

And I don't know if it was really an issue of that she was black just because she was outside the Jewish circle and that's why- Well, yeah, he was- We got a break. Yeah, he was, yep. Okay, buddy. All right, Charlie, God bless, man. All right, so that's Charlie. He's actually a good buddy of mine.

He's the guy who helps out here on the show. So hey, four open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back.

Stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276, here's Matt Slick. Everybody, welcome back to the show.

We have some open lines if you wanna give me a call, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Robert from Washington State. Robert, welcome. You're on the air. Hi, Matt, how are you? Doing all right, man. Hanging in there.

Where do you go, buddy? Good, good. Hey, you know, I haven't watched your show that much, but I mean, theologically, from what I hear, we're pretty much on the same line.

Okay. I haven't found too many things that I would take to task with what you've written on Karm or the videos you've presented, which I appreciate your ministry and I thank you for being here. I was wondering if you can kind of give me some helpful working Bible verses or a good way to formulate a doctrine to some of my friends. A lot of them are conservative, evangelical, but they struggle with the idea of predestination and it's not Romans 8 issue so much as it is that if they accept predestination, they're also accepting the idea that God condemns people to hell. I tried to explain to them that it comes down to their view of the nature of man in that if they believe man is naturally good or naturally evil. What are your thoughts on that?

Maybe you can help elaborate and help me give me some working points to bring to them. Yeah, predestination is definitely biblical and when they generally raise that objection, you have to go to Romans 9, 9 through 23 and that answers their objection. But before we get to that, I'll talk to you about that a little bit. The issue of predestination is right there in scripture. Acts 2 23, this man delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God you nailed to a cross.

In Acts 4 27 and 28, it says, for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus whom you anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever your hand and purpose predestined to occur. And now here's something that's really important about Romans 8 29 and 30. I don't know if you know this already, but it says those whom he foreknew he also predestined. What most people think the word foreknew means is he looks into the future to see what's gonna happen and he predestines people. And that's problematic because it would mean then that God, it implies that God would learn by looking into the future and that can't work.

It would also mean that God's choice is based upon foreseen choice of man and then that would be favoritism and that can't work. And what you do is you look at Romans 8 29 and it says for those whom he foreknew he also predestined. The foreknown ones are also the predestined ones. It does not say he looked into the future to know who's gonna be and all the ones he foreknew in advance, some of them he predestined because they're gonna choose him.

That's how most people understand that verse and that section, that's not what it says. For those of me foreknew he also predestined. Ephesians 1 four and five just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blameless before him in love he predestined us to adoption as sons. In Ephesians 1 11 also we have obtained an inheritance having been predestined according to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will. So these are the verses that clearly teach predestination. I believe that's what the word is and you have to ask them what do they think predestination means and can they defend it biblically? And you'll find that people generally speaking cannot because what they've done is, they have submitted the word of God to their understanding and their feelings and their sensibilities because God would never predestinate anybody to hell. And then what I say, well he never says he predestines anybody to hell. He only predestines people to salvation, predestines to be justified and things like that.

It never says he predestines anyone to hell. But I'll then say to them, but I do believe that God would make even the wicked for the day of destruction. And they say, no, no, no, no, that would never happen. And I say, well, I believe it. They go, no, you're wrong. And they don't realize I'm quoting Proverbs 16 four.

The Lord has made everything for its own purpose even the wicked for the day of evil. So I say, I believe he would do that. And then they say, no, he wouldn't. And I say, well, that's what the scripture says. And this is a sign that people are subjecting the word of God to their sensibilities.

And this happens all the time. And when you go to Romans nine, nine through 23 to deal with the objections, you'll find out that their objections are written into the text. The objections of those who are against God's sovereignty and predestination are written in the text of Romans nine. And this is for those who don't know, I suspect you already know this.

Let me go through it really quickly for them, for the hearers. For this is the word of promise, at this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this, but there was Rebecca also when she had conceived twins by one man, her father Isaac. For though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad so that God's purpose according to his choice would stand, not because of works, but because of him who calls, it was said to her, the older will serve the younger. Joseph said, as it is written, Jacob, I love thee, so I hate it.

Well, people at that point said, well, that's not fair. He didn't do anything good or bad and he's judging them. He hates one and loves another, that's not fair. And the very next verse says, well, what shall we say? There is no injustice with God, is there?

May it never be. That objection is right there. Because if you raise the same objection, you're understanding what he's saying. If you don't raise an objection, then you don't understand the text. And he goes on and he says, I will have mercy in whom I have mercy, I have compassion in whom I have compassion. So it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs upon God who has mercy. And it goes on and the objections like this are listed in there and then it concludes with, does not the potter, well, why do you still find fault? In verse 20, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not stay to the molder.

Why did you make me like this? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay to make the same lump? One vessel for honorable use and another for common use. Would have God, although willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make his power known, endured with much patience, vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. And he did so to make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, that's Romans nine, nine through 23. So in those verses that I've given you, you have all your answers that you need in order to get them to hopefully to see the biblical position, not that they will accept it, okay?

Yeah, because I mean, that's the main reference I have been going through with them. I was wondering if there's any other areas in scripture that I could use to help support that, but if that's the main text you're pointing to, I'll just keep on driving that with them and if they have an issue with it, that's on them. So you wanna know other verses about God's, for example, his sovereignty? Well, yeah, but I mean, because they say, well, then, you know, God, if he knows that people are gonna sin and he still creates them, then he's allowing them to sin. Yeah, exactly correct, he is allowing them to sin.

What's the problem with that? He allowed Adam and Eve to sin, what's the problem? Of course, God allows them to sin. And I ask him, do you want God to stop them from sinning? And they'll say, well, yeah, stop people from murdering.

Okay, what about murdering their hearts? Should God stop their thinking something bad? How far do you want God to go? What standard do you have by which you say, this is how far God should go and shouldn't go? People don't realize that what they're doing, Christians do this all the time, they want God to be made in their own image. They want God, the blonde hair, blue eyed, Caucasian surfer Jesus, who's dressed in a woman's nightgown, standing at the door of your heart, asking for permission for you to let him in.

This is humanism and it rejects the sovereignty of God and it is apostasy in the Christian church and so many Christians are guilty of it. Hey, hold on buddy, we've got a break coming up, okay? Hey folks, three open lines, 8772072276, give me a call, we'll be right back. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 8772072276, here's Matt Slick. Right away, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, 8772072276. Robert, you still there?

Yes, still here. All right, okay, I know we got a break there, kind of cut you off there, but we've got anything else? You want to go through a little bit more?

Yeah, no, so that helps. And I think fundamentally, like I said before, it just comes down to the nature of man and what people believe, that either man is actually good or naturally evil, and then their view of scripture on top of that. Are you familiar with the verses that teach that man is by nature evil? Yeah, that's found in Romans 1, and I believe 1 Corinthians, and it speaks in the Proverbs. And then in Genesis. And he has the verses, but yeah.

Yeah. Also, I have a friend who's a messianic Christian, and he's always kind of challenging me, well how come we don't do some of the Jewish observances in today's day and age? Because we're not under the law. We have died with Christ, Romans 6, 6, and therefore, those who have died are freed from the law, Romans 7, 4. We're not obligated to keep that law. Furthermore, in Romans 14, 1 through 12, and particularly verse five, it says, let each man be fully convinced in his own mind, and it's in regard to worship days and Sabbath days. And so if we're obligated to keep those certain days, and why does Paul say one man regards every day alike, let each man be fully convinced in his own mind.

So have him answer the questions of scripture. I'm 14. Appreciate that. No, that answers my question, brother. You take care, and I appreciate the work you do. Amen, God bless, and thanks. Appreciate it. You're welcome, yep.

All right. Hey folks, we have four open lines. Give me a call, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Craig from Louisville, Kentucky. Craig, welcome.

You're on the air. Hey, thank you, Matt. Just want to start off by telling you how much I've appreciated your work the past couple years. So I am a, what I would consider a student of apologetics. And like, for instance, I just got done reading Banco's Apologetics by Bonston just a few weeks ago.

I've taken a couple of Bonston classes that are available online and whatnot. And so I'm not a Protestant, and there are, I'm not Catholic, and I'm not Eastern Orthodox either, but, and there are a couple of issues that I would one day love to debate with you on, but that's for another time. The purpose of my call today is actually to offer some insight. So ironically, over the past year and a half, just due to the nature of my job and how much time I have to listen to things in the background, I have just inadvertently, over the past year and a half, delved into Eastern Orthodoxy, and specifically, actually, and this is what I'll brought this about. So I was watching yours in vocabs, Malone's livestream the other day, perhaps yesterday, and I didn't realize the tenor of the debate that you had with Dr. Deacon at a time.

So I went back and did that sermon. It wasn't really a debate, it was a discussion. That's all it was.

Yes. People call it a debate, but it wasn't. Well, can I say something? But anyway, but go ahead, yeah.

You're right, you're right. But my point is that you pressed upon my heart in that conversation that you had with him because of the vitriol and just the un-hospitable nature of your opponent. You weren't even in a debate, and yet you still had opponents. So I listened to that whole debate, and yeah. So long story short, I have a number of issues, or a number, I have about three and a half pages of isolated arguments and tidbits of information that took me years to realize was always right in front of me. A lot of this came through repetition of particular videos or particular lessons that they would have.

And so there are particular theories that I listened to three times, and only on the third time did I come to understand the transcendental argument in a way that I had not before, in the way that the EO utilizes it. So yeah, I have a lot of notes, and I don't know. Do you? Yeah, I absolutely can. Yeah, info at karm.org. Yeah, you want me to add a karm.org, and what would you like me to put in the subject heading?

Yeah, just, Matt Slick is wonderful, handsome, and great. That'd be good subject heading. Then I can forward it to my wife. I got you. No, just put EO information for Matt Slick. Absolutely. And I always like documentation. Hey, thank you. Yeah, but hold on before you go.

Yeah. So I went to the gym today, and I listened to some Eastern Orthodox priests talk about Eastern Orthodox. I don't know what your view is. In fact, let me ask you, what is your view of Eastern Orthodox?

Do you think it's good or bad? Oh, well, so I have a lot of, my triadology, my understanding of the Trinity has grown profoundly because of their doctrines and whatnot, but I disagree ultimately with the energy essence distinction. I disagree with their approach to soteriology. There's so many components that I disagree with.

So generally, yeah, I'm against the person or some of the people and their approaches to apologetics, and then just generally the theology and the philosophy, I find a lot of errors all the time today. So I would agree with you that EO, and I would say even Roman Catholicism, can really explain the doctrine of the Trinity very well. Now, I know Catholicism can. I don't know if EO can yet because I haven't really studied that particular thing, but from what I've seen, what I've read, it seems pretty good. And they can also deal pretty well with the hypostatic union. And I'm assuming, okay.

It's soteriology that is the issue because if they're going to teach what they do, what the EO teaches, the more I understand from Eastern Orthodox soteriology, the more I'm convinced it's a false gospel. I'm absolutely convinced it is. Absolutely. Okay, good.

I'm glad that... Yeah. They will frame it this way. They will say that the Protestant issue, and Catholicism as well, that their issue is their ordo theologie or their ordo theology. And what they'll say specifically about Protestants is that they begin with soteriology and will work out their triadology, their eschatology, and every... Yeah, I disagree with that. Right. Well, what they end up doing, though, conversely, is they begin with triadology simply because they believe that it allows them to begin their epistemology with church tradition and apostolic succession as opposed to inerrancy. Right, they're sola ecclesia, church only. Yeah.

And they submit to the authority of the Catholic Church. And I don't know if you saw my debate with Cobain. I served him Cobain. I did. And I don't know what you thought about that.

I thought that he wasn't able to answer very well the issues dealing with imputation. Yeah, I thought Cobain was able to pivot from one topic to another a lot more effectively in order to escape dealing with the scriptural issues that you were bringing up. He was able to pivot a lot better than Dr. Deacon Ananias, who you correctly assessed, was afraid to go and dive into a particular passage of scripture and exegete it. Right.

And so, yeah. Now what the EO is doing, and they have done a little bit, is try and go precepts. Since you're discussing or you're learning transcendental arguments and you'll be doing presuppositionalism, which I assume you're reformed in your theology because it kind of leads to that, but if not, that's another discussion. And so they're trying to go precept in that they're going to assert that we don't have any right to interpret scripture. Only they do. And so if we go to anything in the word of God, they're going to say you don't have that authority to be able to say what it means. And there's ways to get around that. But this is what they're trying to do. They don't want us to be able to go to the word. They want us to have to submit to their idea of what the word says. It all comes down to...

If you... Go ahead. With Jay Dyer specifically, he came from a reformed background and went to Bonston Seminary for a semester or a year or something. And so what I believe happened, he went through Catholicism and then eventually ended up in Eastern Orthodoxy carrying his presuppositional transcendental approach with him that he learned from Bonston. And what I think he did was he took this great apologetic methodology and coupled it with the arguments from church tradition and historicity to try to create a perfect argument.

It doesn't work. And the reason it doesn't work is when we go presuppositional, we are presupposing what God has revealed as being true, that he is the final authority. And since he's revealed it in the word of who he is, we presuppose the validity of what he has said and what he has done. But what they do is presuppose the validity of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

So the Eastern Orthodox Church is the ultimate standard of truth, not God himself. There's a complete difference there. Hey, break. You want to continue or you'll be done because we've got to break? Yeah, I got it.

A little more? Okay, hold on then. Hey, folks, we have to open lines. 877-207-2276. Give me a call. Be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

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

Yeah, I'm still here. All right. Okay, so one last question. When you were speaking to vocab Malone, I believe it was yesterday, you had mentioned something, and I had this suspicion myself. You had said that you believed that the utilization of the presuppositional transcendental approach was underutilized or that people weren't using it to its fullest ability.

What did you mean by that? Presuppositionalism and transcendental issues. Transcendental, okay. So when we lay out the foundation of who and what God is in the Trinitarian essence, we then also understand the one and the many concept, but that's a side note.

So God is a necessary precondition for all intelligibility. As the universe exists, the emergent property of God's essence in his transcendence becomes actualized. What that means is that he transcends space and time, but abstractions are these principles that we would call universals or transcendentals. And so a universal, for example, would be a sphere, and there are many instances of sphere in the world, but there's only one concept of what sphere is, and sphere-ness is an abstraction. So transcendentals exist in all areas, pictures, rugs, cars, birds, insects. We have this underlying principle that we identify and we see particular manifestations of the underlying principle. Well, this principle is always an abstraction. And so therefore, the argument then goes, what must be in place in order for universal abstractions to have actuality? And then how do we utilize and apprehend those universals? And the best explanation is a Trinitarian, ubiquitous, transcendent being. And I haven't connected all the dots, but that's the basic idea.

And so you can use anything. So justice, mercy, love, a table, anything and everything ultimately will point back to God and his transcendence because nothing can have autonomy from God and all things that are actual as well as abstract, all things actual like a physical object of any sort and any kind. They do not have autonomous existence. They always exist like facts within another context. What's the ultimate foundation and the ultimate source for the context in which those issues can have their actuality? And the ultimate source can only rest in God. Make sense? Yeah, absolutely. And that was my suspicion that people utilized the presuppositional methodology while underutilizing the transcendental metaphysics or ontology.

Right. And then they have to understand the relationship between ontos and properties. And they often will separate the properties from the ontos. And then they'll say that God can change and transcendentals can change. But transcendentals are abstractions just like thoughts are. And transcendentals are not dependent upon the physical realm because the properties of the physical realm can be measured such as hardness, mass, reflectivity, refraction, energy exchange.

So rates and densities and various forms of properties cannot be measured but transcendentals cannot be. Therefore they are independent of the physical realm and how is it that they have their existence that is also independent of the physical realm since they're abstractions it implies an abstract mind. So this works for anything you go.

Anywhere. Alright? Now, do Calvinists associate the mind of God with the essence of God? Well, when you say associate then that's kind of an ambiguous term. When we get into stuff like this I so morphically identify one with the other? They would say that properties reflect the ontos. Okay. And so we can't ever know the ontos but we can understand and apprehend the properties because only God can understand the ontos down to the essential nature of what something is.

We recognize ontos by experiencing properties through our senses and sometimes through our mind. The EO would agree with you on that. Yeah, sure they can. But okay. Hey, I will email you and I appreciate your time. Thank you. Alright man, God bless. Okay. You as well.

Alright. Alright, so I love talking like that. It sounds like a lot of fun.

Well, it is a lot of fun for me. I don't know if you guys are like what did he say? I teach people how to do this and it's very powerful in arguing with atheists and others.

You could apply it in different directions. Let's get to Brad from North Carolina. Brad, welcome. You're on the air.

Hi, Matt. Good to talk to you. First of all, let me just say what you just talked about there. If anyone wants to understand those things go sign up for the Carham Schools. That's where you can learn it.

You can learn a lot of stuff in there, yeah. Yeah, I have a question for you. Sure. We're coming from a reformed perspective so that tells you where we are. So we're going to attend my wife and I a charismatic revival here in a couple days. Oh, good. And the reason we're going is because I think I have a fear that these folks are not just an error. They're not even converted. Okay.

So I want some advice on how to approach it and interact with these folks. Okay, I got a question for you. Do they say there's going to be a Holy Spirit revival at a certain day and time? Just curious. Yeah, that's part of their myth. Okay. So I always thought it was great that they could schedule the appearance of the Holy Spirit. I just got kicked out of that.

Back when I lived in San Diego County I would see that. So I affirm the charismatic gifts personally, all of them. I don't believe they're normative. I believe that God works for them in the expansion of the kingdom of God. So if you're saying that you don't think they're converted, that's really interesting. That means you've made an observation. Do you then conclude that they think they are converted by the manifestation of the ecstatic properties, the charismatic gifts and somersaults and trampolines and stuff?

What do you think? Seems to be the case because what's going on here is it's a tour. It's a revival tour. And what's happening is they're bringing people up and baptizing lots of people, getting lots of decisions.

And they're given sort of a message before they do that. It's void of the gospel. Really?

And it's a husband and wife thing. Yeah, I live in the gospel. And she's preaching?

Right, yeah. Both are preaching. Yeah, she's false for preaching.

Yeah, they're both false. She should not be preaching the gospel in a revival situation. It's a church context. And so she's out of place and he should know better than to allow that. But go ahead. Yeah. So my concern is, speaking to atheists, that's one thing.

I'm used to that. And generally, people who have questions are not converted. But when you're evangelized, you're trying to evangelize people who already think they're saved.

That's something I need to fight with. How about this? Why don't you work up a piece of paper, A&F by Eleven, with the gospel message presented on it and handed out out there? All right. All right.

Thank you. Because... That's the idea we had. We wanted to make sure that people knew... That's the focus. The idea was to go and make sure, ask people, do you know the gospel? Do you know what it is? Do you understand it?

Right. A lot of people don't know what that gospel is. Like when I was in my debate with the Eastern Orthodox guy on Saturday, a question came in. What's the gospel? He didn't even get the gospel right.

He didn't get it. Most people don't know. They don't even know where it's found in Scripture. They don't know what it is. They don't know what justification by faith alone through Christ alone is. And they think that salvation is via the manifestation of the charismatic gifts. Some people do. And that's dangerous because...

It's also void of any... There's no fear of God there. You can see that.

And that's something that... And I guess that's why it stirred us up to want to go there and... Good. Good for you. ...see a service there.

Well, just remember... I don't know what state you're in. Oh, you're in North Carolina.

North Carolina. Okay. You can write something up.

And I've done this at different places where I've written material up because there's an aberrant group of some sort there. And you can't block vehicular traffic, and you cannot block private traffic. So if you're on the sidewalk, you can't stop people from walking.

You have to make the effort to let them go. But you have the right to be there and pass out literature on public property. And at least in the 9th district in California, where I'm from, you had the right to be on private property passing out literature until a representative of that organization or group of property asks you to leave. Then you're obligated to leave, and then you can go stand in public property at that point and still pass stuff out. So those are the rules.

You might want to check with the local police department, tell them what you want to do, and write something up and pass something out because that can make a big difference in a lot of people's lives. You never know. And we're also registered to go ahead and attend, too, so we're going inside the gate. Yeah, go ahead. That was the plan anyway. Yeah, and bring a camera and have a recorder going.

Absolutely. Have an audio recorder going so that if someone hassles you, you don't tell them you're recording it. You just record it. And we can do that in California and in Idaho where I live now.

One party consent. The others record it. And it saved my rear when I was on TV with The Daily Show, and I recorded everything.

They didn't know that, and I found out that they lied about stuff. And so, at any rate, I recommend that. And if you can, you get a third person with a camera who's in his hand who's not associated with you physically but is in work and that they're 20 feet away, and they don't look at you. You're just watching.

You have the corner of their eye, and if something happens, they just put the camera up, and they start filming. And there's ways to do stuff. I believe in being quick, slick, and smart. I like your name.

That's right, because I'm totally slick. That's right. All right, men. Thank you.

Let me know what happens. All right, thank you. All right, buddy. Okay. I like that. Yeah. Do something. Kendrick from Salt Lake.

We'll try this again in English. St. Louis. Hey, Kendrick. Welcome. You're on the air. Hey, how you doing, man? Doing all right, buddy. What do you got, man? Can you hear me?

Yeah, I hear you fine. I got a question about, I guess, the different mainline religions, like Orthodoxy, Catholics, Protestants, because I'm kind of new to theology. I kind of feel like, you know, I'm kind of new to theology. I kind of, you know, I was raised Baptist, but that's when I was really little, and I came across R.C. Sproul, and he kind of taught me about theology and, I guess, Reformed theology, and I just wanted to know what the big difference was between the three, or if any, if there's another main one that's out there.

Sure. I hold a Reformed theology, and I think it's superior to Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, but I think it's superior to Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. I think it's superior to Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, which both teach that salvation is obtained through participation with the grace of God as you participate in the authority of the respective church that then administers means of grace, and you keep your relationship with God good, and that's how you keep your salvation, and you attain salvation, and that's works right to success. Faith plus works. That's exactly correct. Exactly. Now they'll both say it's not faith plus works because they'll say what we mean is the works that we do are the works that God works in us. So then you ask them, are you saved by faith alone by the grace of Christ alone through his work alone on the cross? That's the issue. They'll say, well, no.

Well, then it's their works. And Reformed theology, and I know a great deal about it. We're almost out of time. You can call back tomorrow.

You can ask me questions. But if you adopt Reformed theology, you'll be basically inoculated against false religious systems, and you'll be 10, 15 years ahead in your theological growth because you will put God in his high place of sovereign respect and honor, and you back down on the bottom where you belong, and his grace, which is down to you, not your wisdom reaching up to him. Okay?

Huge difference. Yeah, that's all I know is Reformed because I learned that from R.C. Hey, we got to go.

That's all I know. Sorry, man. Sorry, man. Call back tomorrow. We'll talk about it, okay? Call back. Call back tomorrow, okay? Okay. Thanks a lot. All right.

That's Nathan from California. Sorry about that. The true form of Satan. Call back, and let's talk about that tomorrow, all right? Hey, everybody. May the Lord bless you, and by his incredible grace, we'll be back on here tomorrow. We'll talk to you then. Have a great evening. Another program powered by the Truth Network.