Share This Episode
Matt Slick Live! Matt Slick Logo

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick
The Truth Network Radio
September 14, 2022 7:00 pm

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 993 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

September 14, 2022 7:00 pm

Open calls, questions, and discussion with Matt Slick LIVE in the studio. Topics include---1- How long is meant by a -generation- in the Bible---2- Is full preterism heretical---3- What does it mean that Jesus was tempted in every way---4- Can Jesus sympathize with us, regarding temptation, in a way that God the Father and God the Holy Spirit cannot---5- What do you think about the new definition of divine simplicity---6- What does it mean to be made in the image of God---7- If I'm with family or others who pray to another God, do I still pray with them---8- Matt reads hate mail.--9- Do people in heaven know what is going on back on earth---10- How do you know which parts of the Bible to follow---11- Matt reads more hate mail.

Core Christianity
Adriel Sanchez and Bill Maier
The Masculine Journey
Sam Main
Core Christianity
Adriel Sanchez and Bill Maier
Love Worth Finding
Adrian Rogers

The following program is recorded content created by Truth Network.

Help out at ABN Sat TV hosting people about the issue of Islam. Sorry, I forgot one little switch. Sometimes I forget to flip a switch and things like that. Alright, so there we go. We've got a call coming in.

We've got four open lines. Why don't you give me a call? 877-207-2276. 2276 actually on the dial spelled C-A-R-M. So it's CARM as in

So 877-207-CARM on your dial and you can get in there. Hope you enjoyed. For those of you who did watch the Bible study last night, started this series on the book of Romans. Got through three verses in one hour and we'll be getting into some real deep stuff there.

I put the notes and stuff online and you guys can check it out. Everything, you know, everything you want. Why don't we just jump on the air? Let's get to Rudolph from Raleigh, North Carolina. Rudolph, welcome.

You're on the air. Yes, sir. How long is a generation in the Bible? A generation is spoken of in different contexts. Some say it's one generation from, you know, a father has a son. And whatever time that might be is a generation. But often at that time back then, they had kids pretty quickly. So you could be a father at the age of 20 and a grandfather at the age of 40. And so a generation could be measured that way. Then it says this generation will not pass until, die until all these things pass or occur. So that generation interpretation could be a person is born in the year 1000, lives to be 100 years old, and that's a generation of 100 years, just depending. So it's different meanings of different contexts. Okay. Okay.

What are you asking for? Oh, because today I was listening to a pastor, and he was talking about the generation from 1948 to now. And even about 100 years from 1948 to the time when Israel, you know, came back and they had the language.

That's what he was talking about. And he was saying that generation, he was saying it was about 100 years. Yeah, so in that case, it's May 14th, 1948, when Israel became a nation again. And so this generation will not pass away. So in the partial preterist view, it would be possibly an interpretation is that people born on that day, for example, would be that generation and to the last one who's living dies. And that's one interpretation that if it means literally from that time on or that individual or those individuals of that time. And it could mean also just a group of people at that general age. So there's this difference of interpretations. The full preterists would say that everything was finished in 70 AD. The partial preterists would say, no, not everything was, but some of it was. It would be fulfilled again later and that the term generation is part of that.

And May 14th, 1948, when Israel became a nation again. So that's one possibility. Okay. All right. Yes, sir.

Yes, sir. And before I go, Michael Brown said that people who are not partial preterists. Are not what? Well, he said that the people that are full preterists are heretical. Yes, they are.

Full preterism is heretical. Okay. Okay. Thank you. There's a reason.

Have a good weekend. Let me explain why really fast because in Acts 1, 9 to 11, I'll read it. But the full preterists will say that the return of Christ occurred in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem and the armies of Rome.

But that cannot be. Acts 1, 9 to 11 refutes it because it says this. And after he had said these things, he, as Jesus, was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received them out of their sight. So it says lifted up and a cloud received them out of their sight. And as they were gazing intently into the sky or into, literally, into heaven, while he was going, behold, two men in white clothing stood beside them. They also said, men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky or into the heaven? Because this Jesus, who's taken up to you in heaven, will come just the same way you've watched him go into heaven. So in verse 9, it says a cloud received them out of their sight. Looking into heaven, looking up, he went up. That's how it is.

He went up into the sky and a cloud was there, and that's how he's prophesied by the angels as it's going to return. That's what's going on. That's what it means.

So the full preterism is proven false just by that. Period. Done. Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. Well, thank you. Have a good weekend and God bless you. I'll talk to you next week. All right, man. You too, Rudolph. God bless.

Yes. All right. If you want to give me a call, four open lines, all you have to do is dial 8772072276. Let's get to Russ from Ohio. Russ, welcome. You're on the air.

Hey, Matt. I'm calling today to get your take on your thoughts on what does it mean when the Bible says that Jesus was tempted in every way. Tempted in every way.

And what I mean by that is, yeah, right. But God hates sin. Is God tempted in every way?

God the Father? No. Okay.

So, there are two… Can I add a little more first? Sure. So, God, as we know, hates sin. So, God is diabolically opposed to sin.

Yes. And Jesus is both fully God and fully man. But on the man side, he's not in a sin-stained state like us. He's like Adam before the fall or something like that. And as far as I know, Adam wasn't struggling with not sinning or anything else before he ate the fruit. So, I guess I'm just trying to understand how Jesus, who's this unsinned man and God, would… how he would be tempted with sin when we would never say that God the Father, I don't think, is tempted with sin.

All right. So, I'm going to explain… I'll give the answer, but I'm going to explain a little bit of doctrine to Kenelea Foundation. So, the Hypostatic Union teaches that in the one person of Christ are two distinct natures.

The communicatio idiomatum states that the attributes of both natures are ascribed to the single person, the communication of the properties, communicatio idiomatum. So that means that when Jesus was one person, he would say, I am thirsty. So, he's claiming the attributes of humanity.

He would also say, I will be with you always, even at the end of the earth. And in Matthew 28, 18, he said that. And so, he was claiming the attributes of divinity as the single person, I.

All right. This means the attributes of his divine nature are ascribed to the single person and God cannot sin. So, he could not have sinned, Jesus could not have lied.

It's not possible because the attributes of divinity were ascribed to his person. Now, how then could he be tempted? Because, hey, when we tempt, we sin, right? If you go to Psalm 106, verse 14, let me go to verse 13. They quickly forgot his works, that's God's works, the people of Israel who are coming out of the wilderness. They did not wait for his counsel that craved intensely in the wilderness and tempted God in the desert. So, there are two kinds of temptation.

One is something offered that's external and one that's internal. So, the illustration I use is me. I have no interest in sports. I have none.

It just doesn't exist. So, if I've got a dinner date with my wife and someone says, hey, Matt, we live out here in Boise, Idaho. Hey, we've got a game to the whatever it is, Boise State football something.

And, you know, the best seats in the house, you want to go? They're tempting me, but I'm not tempted. They're offering it, but internally, there is no temptation. It's like, whatever, I'm not interested.

See you, thank you very much. However, if they said, hey, look, there is a new computer expo in town and they're giving away new computer setups with the CPUs and the new i9s coming out of some DR5 and everything you need. I'm like, oh, now I'm tempted because it actually is in me and it's something that I am challenged by, but I've not sinned in that I have not broken my word to my wife. Yes, we went to dinner that night. So, you see, there's a temptation that can be offered, but it's not a challenge to you. A temptation that can be offered and it is a challenge to you, but you've not succumbed to it, so you've not sinned. You can be tempted. And then there's a temptation that is offered to you and yet you have sinned and so there you go.

So, which one fits in Christ? Well, I would suspect that the very least, number one, is offered the issue of temptation. He could be offered a temptation, but it's not a temptation to him.

But, on the other hand, he has the attributes of humanity ascribed to his nature or to his personhood. So, there are probably worse things that he could be tempted by the way I'd be tempted. You know, that's tempting.

Computer Expo, ooh, that's pretty tempting. All right? And so, that to me is a temptation, but I've not sinned in being tempted because I've not succumbed to it. You know, like I said, of breaking my word with my wife going out to dinner. So, you see, it's possible that Jesus could be tempted in that sense in his human nature yet without sin. So, we don't know for sure, and I'd be careful how I say that because I don't want to assert that in any way Jesus could have sinned because, no, he could not have sinned. So, then how then could we have the balance between something external and internal at the same time when he would not succumb to it? And I do suspect that the gray area in there is between it, between the number one and two.

Okay? Okay, well, as a quick follow-up, so in the book of Hebrews, it says something along the lines that Jesus is our great high priest, and because of these temptations, he can sympathize with us as our mediator. So, my question would be, can he sympathize with us in a way that God the Father and God the Holy Spirit cannot because the Son did what he did and he was tempted in every way? Now, the answer is yes and no. Yes in that.

Yes in that. Let me, before I lose the train of thought because this is important and we're going to have to break. Because of the doctrine of the perichoresis where the persons of the Godhead all inter-dwell each other, there is a sense in which what is experienced by one person can be empathetically understood by the other two. So as Jesus is a single person tempted, we're going to raise the issue of the perichoresis and wonder at to what extent that could occur.

And then there's the intellectual aspect of it as well as experiential. We get into that where I'm going to break, so hold on, okay buddy? Hold on, I've got to break. Hey folks, if you want to give me a call for open lines 877-207-2276, I'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right everyone, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you had to do was dial 877-207-2276. Russ, are you still there?

Still here. All right. So, when you asked the question about the other persons in the Godhead, the Trinity, experiencing what Jesus experienced, the Bible doesn't say, but because of God being one thing, it's called divine simplicity, because the persons have what's called a perichoretic relationship. The caresses is the inter-dwelling, hence the cognate perichoretic. So the perichoretic relationship, then we could ask the question, it would seem, or the implication would be that they could at least empathetically experience, even though not personally experience, the temptation. So, you know, those are just thoughts, and so I wouldn't want to get too far into it though. Right, well the thought I had, the trouble I had with it, is the concept that Jesus or any person of the Godhead could come here and learn something, and then have something beyond what God has to begin with.

You know what I'm saying? No, no, just to correct you here, it cannot be that God learns in any way, shape or form. Now think about this, before the creation of the universe, God existed eternally in the Trinitarian communion, and the only thing that was existing was Himself, and there was no materiality, nothing outside of Him. This means that if all things that are possible to exist are known by God, because He knows Himself exhaustively, so it's not possible for God to increase in knowledge. Any potential experience that the Word would have in the, so to speak, real material world, would have been known ahead of time because God had picked one actuality out of an infinite number of potentialities in order to actualize them. So it cannot be, you've got to understand, it cannot be, I totally agree with you, I agree with you, but then, so what does it mean then that Jesus is somehow more sympathetic because He did get tempted?

That's then the question. There's a localization of the incarnation with the Word. The Word became flesh. This is a very important doctrine of localization because it deals with the oneness and oneness heresy.

But I won't get into that sidetrack right now. And so He was a person who was actually tempted, and because of it, He has the ability to sympathize with us. Remember, all judgment has been given to the Son by the Father. You go to John 5, 22, 24 for that, and Matthew 28, 18. But the thing is that there are things that we have to be careful about in Scripture. We don't want to get too close to try and solve some of the questions because we could accidentally teach something that's not true.

So what I'll do with a question like yours, which is a good question, is I will offer some possibilities and then I don't want to go any further because I don't want to try and solve something that God has not given us to solve. Make sense? Yeah, fair enough.

Appreciate it. Good. All right. But good questions.

Seriously, Russell. That's it. Hey, I appreciate your time. Yeah, I appreciate your time. All right. Well, God bless, buddy. Have a great weekend. All right.

Okay. Hey, we have four open lines. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Miguel from Missouri. Welcome, Miguel. You are on the air. Hello again.

I've called a couple of times before and I always appreciate you answering these questions. I have two definitions here and it's a little bit on the theological realm. The doctrine of simplicity of God is defined classically as one of the attributes of God is unavoidable unity. As a pure spirit, he is not a composite and consequently cannot be divided. That's been the classic definition.

There's been a new modern movement pushed by people like Dr. Matthew Barrett and others who define it this way. Quite simply, the doctrine of divine simplicity states that all that is in God is God. And to put it negatively, there is nothing in God that is not God. Now, the way I've understood this to be hearing... That's just a law of identity. That's just a law of identity stated in a more sophisticated theological way. That's all that is.

But go ahead. But the way I've heard it stated is it implies more that they've had influences from asylum and other Catholic sources. Anselm. You mean Anselm?

Yeah, Anselm. And they've stated things like if God is loved, then he is completely loved. If he is light, then he is all light. It's just... I'm trying to wrap my head because some people have made an issue of it. And I don't know if it is an issue at all.

Yeah, it is an issue and they shouldn't go that far. To say that God is love, therefore he is all love, is a confusion of terminology. In divine simplicity, God is simply one substance, the divine thing. The divine substance. There's no parts, nothing. There's not a third of God was the Father, a third was the Holy Spirit, a third was the Son.

It doesn't work like that. There's only one divine essence and that is God and he is one thing. On my article on divine simplicity, I have as an illustration of it, I have a sphere, a white sphere. That's it. It's just one substance.

It's just one thing. And so how God reveals himself to us out of his divine simplicity is in a Trinitarian relationship. And so we have within the doctrine of the trinity what is called the ontological trinity, the Greek ontos, essence, nature, being. So the ontological trinity says all the members of the Godhead share the same divine essence. The economic trinity from the Greek okonomia, we get economy, an interrelatedness thing.

And so the economic trinity is the teaching that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit each have different, so to speak, roles. The Father sent the Son but the Son did not send the Father. The Father sent the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Only the Son became flesh, etc. So we have the divine simplicity, God is one thing. The trinity, one God and three distinct simultaneous persons.

We also have what's called the perichoresis. And that is the teaching that each of the members indwells each of the others completely. And yet there's not three beings but only three persons with one ultimate will because of divine simplicity. Yet we can distinguish between the ontological and economic trinity.

This gets tough stuff, all right? So when we work through all of these you have to have a good understanding of all of those aspects before you can really kind of make sense of them, so to speak, makes sense. You know what I mean? As far as you can, obviously the trinity is beyond our full comprehension. That's right, I thought I was getting close to understanding it once and then I blacked out for a couple of days and then came to my IQ was 30 points less. So yeah, you know, yeah. I'm just trying to figure out, because everything you say I have knowledge of.

I appreciate the recap, it's a good thing. I'm just trying to figure out where this controversy is because there's some saying that they're bringing ideas from philosophy into the trinity that don't belong. And I've been trying to study this just to see. I don't even know what the dividing line is, the battle is, because it seems like they're parsing words or something and it doesn't seem that complete. I don't know, so I don't know if you're aware of that debate or not. Yeah, and there's been some new stuff coming up and the phraseology you used, which triggered everything else I was saying, and I forgot what the phraseology you used that they were saying, and I have a problem with it, because of the lack of definitions and precision, we have to be very, very careful of what we say about the doctrine of the trinity.

And the doctrines I've given you are pretty much well established and very biblically demonstrable. And so we've got to be careful how far we take stuff. All right, buddy, you done, or you want to hold? No, that's good.

I appreciate the answer. All right, man. Thanks a lot, buddy. Hey, folks, three open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back after these messages. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

It's Matt Slick. All right, everybody, welcome back to the show. It's the bottom of the hour on this nice Friday. If you want to give me a call, three open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Chuck from Burlington, someplace north. I don't know where that is, North Carolina. North Carolina. Welcome, Chuck. Yes, sir.

North Carolina. So I'd like to say, what's up, Chuck? You've never heard that one before. Go ahead. I'm the guy, as far as I can tell. I'm not Chuck Little, you know, speaking Little. Okay.

So what do you got, man? An explanation a fellow gave, St. Hodges, in the commentary I bought with regards to balance. He says that one good way of understanding, he said, excuse me, could not have sinned. And he said one way of understanding it is like a mountain, giant rock at the sea, and the waves hit up against the rock on the mountain. The waves hit up against the mountain.

The mountain can feel every bit of it, every ounce that's being pushed against it, but it can't be moved. Right. It's kind of simple, Chuck. Yeah, there's all kinds of analogy. You know, if that was helpful to anybody.

Right. Yeah, I just wanted to be helpful. I don't have, I can't read as much. I don't have too many theological questions, but don't feel sorry for me.

Anybody, please, I can get my mouth. That's all right. Yeah, analogies are fine, and they all fail at some point, but, you know, we've got them, and we're kind of illustrating it. There you go. Thanks a lot, man. Appreciate it. Yeah, because there's a part of Christianity that believes that God's a man, you know.

I'm not going to go into it, but we know what they believe. Right. That's true. All right, buddy. Well, thanks, man. Okay. Appreciate it. You take care. God bless you. God bless.

All right. All right, let's get to Janet from Raleigh, North Carolina. Janet, welcome. You're on the air.

Thank you very much, man. I have two quick questions to ask, and the first one is, what does it mean to be made in the image of God? Sure. Let me write this out, because I keep notes on what we do.

We talk about all the shows. To be made in the image of God deals with what's called the communicable attributes of God. So God, for example, has incommunicable and communicable attributes.

So God, incommunicable attributes. That means they cannot be communicated to us. We cannot experience them. We can't know them. For example, God is omniscient. We can't know that. God is omnipotent. We cannot experience that.

God is all places all the time. This is beyond our comprehension, and we certainly are not that. So the incommunicable attributes mean those attributes that belong to God alone and cannot be communicated to us. We cannot participate in them.

However, there are communicable attributes. So God can think. We can think. God can love. We can love. God can hate.

We can hate. God can reason. We can reason. God can show mercy. We can show mercy. God's self-aware.

We're self-aware. And so the image of God deals with what's called the communicable attributes of God. That's all. So it doesn't include anything biblical. It doesn't include anything biblical?

Of course it's biblical. No, it doesn't include anything physical. The attributes.

Right, yeah. It's not a physical thing because God does not have physicality. In John 4.24, Jesus says God is spirit. In Luke 24.39, he says spirit does not have flesh and bones.

As you see, I have. Now, Jesus is the Word made flesh. He has two natures, not just one. The God nature of God is not physical. Sorry Mormons who are listening.

God is not an exalted man for another planet who has a body of flesh and bones. Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, thank you for clearing that up.

I appreciate it. And my other question is a what to do type of question. What would you do in this case scenario?

If I'm going to give you a scenario, you tell me what you would do. So say, for example, you are going to visit a relative and it's going to be like a little family reunion. But the person who's hosting it doesn't share the same values that you do. That's Christian values that you do. But they say a prayer at the table and then they end it with a different name.

Instead of using Jesus, they use something else. What would you do in that situation? I don't pray with them.

Period. Say I was at a Mormon church or Mormon gathering and they're praying, I just do not pray. I do not bow my head. I do not acknowledge their false God. I don't participate in it. Okay.

You might not even close your eyes, right? No, no, nothing. I'm not praying in any way.

I'm not going to give them the idea even that I'm joining them in prayer to their false God. Okay, okay, okay. I just want to know what to do in that situation. I had a similar situation and I was like, I don't know what to do. That's what I do.

Let me tell you what I do. So if I was in a Catholic church and they're praying to the Lord Jesus, that's legitimate because they really do know who he is. A Mormon, forget it. A Roman Catholic, forget it. Islam, Muslims. I mean, Jehovah's Witness I meant. Muslims, I would never, never join them in prayer. Never join with a Mormon in prayer or a Jehovah's Witness or a Unitarian or a Hindu. It's just not going to happen.

You're joining and praying to a false God, a pagan God. Christians can't do that. Period. You don't do it. Ah, okay. I appreciate that. Well, thanks, Mac. That's all I had for you today, but thank you. You're welcome.

Well, God bless. Have a good one. Thank you. All right.

Oops. Cut her off there. So, hey, look, we have five open lines. Nobody waiting. If you want to give me a call, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. Okay, now, sometimes on Fridays you get the hate mail when nobody's waiting.

You get no callers and there's nobody waiting. So I'm going to get to some hate mail. I'm already smiling because the top one just came in not too long ago.

Yeah, just a few days ago or something like that. Why do you conceal that you are a Calvinist and pretend Calvinism is the gospel? So it's everybody cracking up because I don't conceal that and I do not say. I get a kick out of it. I do not say that people, they hate mail. They love it.

I do not say that Calvinism is the gospel. And notice what this person says. Why do you conceal? I don't and pretend.

Now, that always gets me. People say, you're pretending. Wait a minute.

How would you know what I'm doing internally or not? What do you mean? I know you're pretending. I've actually talked to people who said, oh, I know for a fact you're pretending. What? That's right. I know for a fact.

You know the truth and you're just denying it. Really? Wow. That's pretty good. I didn't even know I didn't know that. That's impressive that you know it.

Thank you very much for helping me out. So there's that. Let me go to another one here. We've got a caller coming in.

I'm going to get a couple of hate mails because I like to hate mail. Oh, wow. This is a big one. Let's see. I think I did this one already.

A lot of times people will write the same thing several times. All right. Oh, yeah. Let's see. Please realize you don't have authority to teach Christian doctrine and you keep asking people, what would you like me to teach you?

Calvinism, Mormonism, and JWs are all well-known major apostasy religious sects presenting themselves as people of Christianity in the world today. See, I've got to tell you, folks. Look, I don't know. I enjoy hate mail. I enjoy the bad grammar. I enjoy all of it. There's definitely something wrong with me because I like it.

They don't write well and their sentences don't make sense, and I get a kick out of it. I just do. Something's wrong with me.

So not working at a normal job and choosing this activity to generate income is so wrong. Wow, it is? Wow. I wonder what universal principle this person is in contact with by which she judges me as being wrong. Anyway, I'm praying for you to get to the roots of Christianity and get off your ego.

Remember, pride is a deadly sin. All right. See, here's the thing. If you're going to call me up or you're going to write me and you're going to insult me, don't just be so generic.

I need more specifics. You say you're prideful. Get off your ego trip. Okay. Thank you.

I appreciate that. Give me an example. What was it?

What was it? Because this person says, you don't have authority to teach Christian doctrine. Now, you know what that kind of tells me? Maybe it's a Roman Catholic.

Maybe it's a Mormon. Maybe it's an Eastern Orthodox person because they all teach that you have to have the authority from their true church, and if you don't have the authority from their true church, you don't have authority at all. So I like to ask them when I talk to them, I say, so where did you get your authority to say I don't have authority? And you know, you could see this, you know, what? You mean thinking logically?

Yeah. You said I don't have authority. Where do you get the authority to say I don't have authority? Well, the church says it.

Oh, okay. So how do you know that your church is true? Well, because do you believe it?

Because it said it was? And are you judging it's true? And if you do, you judge it's true, and that's why you're believing them.

Then aren't you subjecting their church to your authority to judge that it's true? You know, there's a logic barrel out there, and logic little, logic trues are like arrows, just getting them. Yeah, like shooting a barrel, fishing a barrel. Uh-oh.

Hey, there's a break. Instead of spreading the word of God, you spend a lot of time bashing other denominations. Is that what's known as Christian love and charity? Yes. It gives one impression that you are not secure with your beliefs.

Oh, I am so not secure with my beliefs. Man, that's a nice way to go out on the break. Hey, we'll be right back, 877-207-2276. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everybody.

Welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, three open lines, 877-207-2276. Let's get to Herb or Herb Herb from Raleigh, North Carolina.

I get that everywhere I go. You do? Like, what's your favorite herb, Herb, you know? Or what if you have a craving? What if you have a craving? Do you curb your urge, Herb? I mean, there could be some problems there. Anyway.

Yeah, I've experienced them. No, Matt, thank you for your ministry. I've called you before when I had more time. I listen to you every day, and I just love your show, and God bless you.

Thanks. I've got one little story to tell about my uncle. A few years back, before he passed away, he had a heart attack. And while he was on the gurney in the operating room or the treatment room, his heart stopped. Well, during that time of a few minutes, when they arrived and he came back to life, he said he saw his body laying on the gurney still and felt himself, I guess his spirit, just rising right out of his body. And he got so many feet up in the air or out and looked down and saw his body, dead body, laying there. And a few seconds after this happened, when they got his heart beating again, it's like instantly he was back in his body and woke up. And he said he saw the light that they talk about, and he felt like he was being led toward God, but was brought back and survived. And he's a strong Christian. He's deceased now. But, you know, he was just happy, so happy when it happened to him. He was happy to survive, but he's also thankful and happy experiencing that.

And he said whenever he's supposed to die, he's not worth it at all. He knows there's a God. But I've got one other question for you, too. Yes, sir. Yeah, he was a devout Christian all of his life.

One other quick question. What's your feeling about the story, and I don't think I told the gentleman that, what's your feeling about the story of the minister in Texas who was in a bad wreck, died, came back and he experienced visiting heaven, 90 minutes in heaven, that story. Are you familiar with that? Have you heard of it? No.

Not familiar with it. Okay. So, you know, can't comment on it. Okay. Okay. Well, last question then.

Do you think once we go to heaven and our bodies, our spirit is there, do we actually see what's going on back here on earth with our loved ones? And there's no way of knowing. I don't know. Just watch this video.

Okay. I generally don't believe we can. Yeah, I don't believe so. And the reason I say that, the scripture doesn't say yes or no, but the idea of people in heaven seeing people on earth, that's, well, like when I see somebody, it has, that person's going to be in front of me within a few feet or, you know, within a few hundred feet and then that's about it. And so someone in heaven seeing multiple people simultaneously in different locations, then you get into problems like this. And so a lot of times people will pray to their dead relatives, don't do that, that's idolatry. And they'll say, oh, there's watching over us. I don't say that either because the Bible doesn't say that. So, you know, I just don't go that way and don't lean on that and don't assert that.

And you know, like I lost my son, you know, my wife and I buried her son. And so every now and then, every now and then I'll say, Lord, I don't know how it works up there, but could you just tell them hello? And I don't even know if that's the right thing for me to ask. And I don't know, you know, and that's it. And I'm just confessing my ignorance and if it works, it works.

If it doesn't, it doesn't. And we'll find out when we get to heaven. Yeah. Well, whatever the plan is for God for us when we get there, I'm sure it'll be something wonderful regarding your son.

I mean, it has, it's bound to be. You know, God is that good. Oh, yeah.

So, yeah. And I pray for him, Matt. I'm looking forward to meeting him. I'm looking forward to talking to him. I am too. I said, I can't wait to get to heaven so I can meet the Lord.

I don't know how that works, but I can't wait to go to heaven someday. But, okay. Well, Matt, thank you so much. God bless you and your family.

I hope your wife continues to get better. And I just, I love your show. I listen to you every day. That's because you're a smart man. Keep listening.

That's what I figured. All right. Thank you so much, Matt.

Well, there you go. Have a good weekend, buddy. All right, brother. God bless, man. God bless. You too. You too. Thanks. Okay.

All right. Let's jump on the phones. We've got about eight minutes left in the show. Let's get to Jones, I think it is, from Austin, Texas. Jones, welcome. You're on the air. Hi. Is everything good? Hi.

I hear you. Yes. Yes, Matt. I was wondering, with the Bible and all that stuff, I'm still an atheist, but I was wondering what mechanism does everybody determine what parts to follow and what not to follow? Like God says to stone homosexuals to death is one thing, and then we get love thy neighbor in another. Okay. So you asked a question technically. Different people have different methods of interpreting things to understand what to follow and not to follow. What I could recommend you do for more documentation is go to CARM and look up the phrase, say to the sons of Israel, and I've done some research on this. So a covenant is a pact or an agreement between two or more parties, and the word for covenant in Latin is testamentum, so Old Covenant, New Covenant, Old Testament, New Testament. A covenant, like my wife and I have a covenant, and the covenant is till death do us part in our marriage covenant, and so when one of us dies, the other is no longer married. It's a covenant that's ratified through promise and through public declarations and is broken because it's stipulated to end under certain conditions. Likewise, with the Old Testament covenant. And so in Hebrews chapter 8 verse 13 and 9, 15 through 16, it talks about the issue of the Old Covenant that's no longer in effect when Jesus dies. The Old Testament to stone homosexuals was very important and necessary because of the issues, I can get into it more, the issues of the purity before God and before people and the development of the messianic line because homosexuality would threaten that.

That's one thing. But once the Messiah was here and he died on the cross, then we have what's called abrogation. The New Covenant is now in effect, and the Old One is, so to speak, put away, so to speak. There's certain truths we learn about it, and so now love your neighbor and love everybody.

Now love your neighbor is actually, as Jesus says in Matthew 22, 39, he's quoting Leviticus 19, 18. And so it's actually, there are certain moral things that are still true in the Old Testament as in the New Testament. The stoning was a combination of law under the theocratic and moral system. The theocratic was God was the one in control through the prophets and the executions would occur for gross immorality. Now or in the time of Christ, that was no longer the case.

They were under the Roman rule. And so the moral truth of God's character was still in effect. And so that's why it's still wrong. Homosexuality is still a sin, and it always will be a sin.

Lying is always a sin because these are against the nature of God. However, since the Messiah came, the harshness of the Old Testament is no longer necessary, and the harshness necessary to keep the messianic line pure isn't in place anymore because he arrived. So now there's a different set of rules because of the new covenant that was ratified with the death and resurrection of Christ. Okay?

Yeah. There was a little bit of confusion, though. It feels like when Jesus says, not one dot or tittle of the law shall pass along the field.

That's why there's still some stuff we got to keep, and then like me, I live in the real world. I don't want to stone anybody else to death, and I don't want to see anybody do something inappropriate with a family member and all that. It's just that in the real world, if something like that were to happen, law enforcement would see it differently, but God also sees it differently, too. Right. So if I was out witnessing someplace and I saw some people physically assaulting a homosexual, you know, I'd step in and do what I could to stop it because it's not right.

All right? We're not under a theocratic system where the very act of it, if it got loose and was predominant in society, could destroy the messianic line and all people are then damned. So it's a radically different situation in place now. And this is why we have that.

It's why the new covenant's in. Okay? Yeah. I see. Okay.

Thank you so much. All right, Jones. Keep studying. I know you said you're an atheist, but I'm glad you called. All right, buddy? Keep listening. All right? Thanks. All right. You have a very good day. Okay. You too, man.

Thanks. All right, folks. Five open lines.

Nobody waiting. We got about three minutes, so I'm just going to do some hate mail. And because I'm going to shove some hate mail in here the last couple of three minutes because I enjoy it. And let's see. Let's see.

I'm going to find one that's not... Okay. Here's a short one. I don't know what it says.

Let's go. I wish to ask you nicely to remove all the articles that misrepresent or spread falsehoods about Roman Catholicism. Okay. Well, in that case, I don't remove any of them. Simple.

All right. It goes on to spread falsehoods about Roman Catholicism, which is, in a nutshell, all your articles about Roman Catholicism. So all of my articles misrepresent and spread falsehoods. You know, when I've had Roman Catholics tell me this, you know, say, okay, give me an example. Give me something specific that's not correct. They'll say, well, you're not Christian. Well, that's the whole debate. Give me something specific.

Come on. You know, I quote them all the time. I quote their sources. I quote what they say like paragraph 2068, you know, you obtain salvation by faith, baptism, and the observers of the commandments. And I'll say, hey, you know, that's wrong, because look what it says in Mark, excuse me, Matthew 3, 28, Romans 4, 5, you know, Galatians 2, 16, I'll, you know, I'll expand on it. I show people this stuff, but anyway, you know, and he says, your reasoning in them is poor. You leave out too much information and you twist what the church actually says.

Now that's not nice. Why would that person say, I twist what the church actually says? Because I would say that twisting something that they say is sinful. I believe it's sinful. If the Roman Catholic church says what it says, I'm going to represent it with documentation of where you can go to go check it out. Because I believe that if I were to misrepresent it on purpose, that that would be sinful. I'm not going to do that. Now it's certainly possible.

I could do it accidentally, but not on purpose. And when people show me, Hey, you took this out of context. It doesn't quite say that.

And I listened to them. Okay. You know, it doesn't happen very often that they'll show me that my documentation is not correct, but it's happened on occasion. And I'll say, okay, thank you very much. And I'll correct it and move on.

They only help me make the site better. So if you have a challenge you want to offer me about something on the website that's not correct, all you got to do is cite the article, cite the sentence, whatever it is, give me the article, what it is. If I go back and find the article, because we've got thousands on CARM and then say, this is what the real position of my church group, prophet prophetess, alien leader, um, who knows?

Anthropos, so on a subject, whatever it is, you say, this is what it really is. Um, and look, let's see, what is this? I take us, well, we're out of time.

I love hate mail too bad. We're out because there's a, it's just a chaplain. He's applying for a chaplain position.

He's an atheist. I got to read this one next time. Next time we do that. Hey, I think we're out, I think we're off the air. Something happened. Oh no, there it is. It was a little bit off on the time.

Hey, that does happen, doesn't it? May the Lord bless you and by his grace, we'll be back on there. I'm going to be back on on Tuesday. Luke Wayne's going to be filling in for me on Monday. I got to do a call in TV gig thing on avian sat TV trinity and you can check that out. Another program powered by the truth network.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-02-25 19:31:25 / 2023-02-25 19:50:56 / 20

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime