Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by all of you you may see on YouTube.

I was like, are you kidding me? It doesn't have to be true. Just prove to me it's not true. That's all. And so what I would say, you know, the idea with that is they would come back and they'd say, well, no matter what you say, I'm just going to say you're still a brain of that. Well, then you don't exist, do you?

Yes, we do. Well, then what are you arguing? So it was like this. And so I almost wrote, I didn't. I almost wrote, shooting fish in a barrel. You know, this is not that hard. And then they started, oh man, they started boasting, oh man, we destroyed Matt.

He doesn't know what he's doing. And it's like, I just chuckle, oh boy. And then another guy gets on and, let's see if I can find it. I took some notes.

I got to get these notes, let's see. What was it he said? It was about, oh yeah.

What was it about? Here, let's see, it was about, if I had the power to destroy everyone in the United States so that a small child wasn't tortured, would I do it? I'm like, what planet are you from, you know? And they take this seriously. This is like a serious challenge. So you're saying if I had all power in the United States, that I could destroy every life in the United States so that one person isn't tortured, what would I do? They said, that's right.

What would you do? And I go, are you asking me this seriously? And they said, yes. And so, you know, I was like, oh man, I do what my wife does sometimes.

I rub my forehead. Are you what? Are you serious? And so I said, well, look, look, I said, for one thing, it's not my Christian worldview. So that's not a reality. So you're asking me to abandon my Christian worldview in order to argue about something. I said, I can't do that.

It's not the Christian worldview. I don't do that. And, well, no, no, it's okay.

Yes, you can. I said, no, no, I can't. And this went on for a while. This is what happened.

And it was like, oh man. So tonight, we'll see some of those atheists come by and want to ask some more really intelligent questions like this. Oh, and then we had this discussion about what's reality, you know, and what does it mean to have existence?

I said, I don't know. I occupy space and time. Well, that can't be because, and then they get into all kinds of stuff. And then they start picking on me for, do you mean this? It's a necessity. I'm like, guys, what are you talking about?

What are you doing? And they look for anything they can, it's really sad, anything they can in order to damn themselves because they work hard against the God they don't believe in. They hate this concept of the Christian God.

And I have a family member who says the same thing, who says this person hates the God of Christianity. And one of the arguments, seriously, was that there'll be no sorrow in heaven. So that means you'll have joy while your family members are in hell.

And that's not the Christian position. That's not, we don't say we're going to have joy that someone's in hell. Well, it says all your sorrows will be removed.

Well, what does that mean? You know, every sorrow will be removed, you know. It doesn't say we're going to have happy days and we're looking at it so much fun that people are in hell. That's not what's going on. People construct ideas and things about the Christian God, the Christian perspective in order to hate.

Oh man, it's so sad and it really is. So this is kind of the stuff that I deal with and sometimes it's fun and it's ridiculous and sometimes it's just sad at the level of hatred and misrepresentation that they have. So I say to people every now and then, don't do this on your own at home, let a professional do it. You know, I've had these warnings on TV about something.

Don't do this at home, let a professional. So that's what I say, don't do this at home, tackle an atheist and stuff like that when they argue like this, when they're obstreperous twits and they're just going to argue for the sake of arguing. So there you go. I just had to say that. Hey look, if you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. We're having a matching funds end of year drive. If you want, you can support CARM financially. And I need to point out though, if you send a check in, because I forgot to mention this, the address to send anything in if you want, that's fine, is at the bottom of the CARM website, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G, all you do is go there and it's at the bottom of the website. It's a P.O. box, P.O. box 1353. And if you send it, legally, it has to be postmarked before midnight of December 31st in order to be counted as a that year donation and therefore as double a bull. Just letting you know.

And if you want to help us out, just go to CARM dot O-R-G forward slash donate and everything that you need will be right there. All right, let's try this. Get to Ryan from Pennsylvania. Ryan, welcome. You're on the air. Hello, Matt.

Thank you for inviting me to call anytime. And yeah, I've occasionally run across people who ask me also about whether or not we're a brain in the vat. And I usually say, well, I have a proof for your existence.

I say, go to your garage, take an ax and chop off your arm. If you feel pain, you exist. And then they say, well, that might be an illusion. And I say, okay, well, if you bleed out and you're still alive, then you're a brain in the vat.

Hey, that's not like that. If you bleed out and you're still alive, that's how you test it. I like that. I'm going to use that one. It works. So if you chop off your arm and you feel pain, then you exist.

If you bleed out and you're still alive, you're a pain in the vat. Okay. You know what? I might use that one. That's a good one. Because, hey, I can't improve on it. That's pretty good.

If you feel pain, you exist. And I was wondering if you had a chance to look at my destruction of tag as a Christian. I got your email, and I have another email from somebody else on a whole other topic. You guys want me to tackle it now. And I've got so many things I'm catching up with, I'm going to take care of it in a few weeks kind of thing. And then I have to go to Israel for two weeks. So it's going to just take a while, because I've got a lot on my plate right now.

We've got some major changes happening with the arm and some other stuff, too. But I got it. Okay. Okay. Well, I also wanted to tell you that I hope you have a very good Christmas season, and I hope things are going well with your wife.

I hope she's improved as much as she can. You and I have something else in common. We're both taking care of a sick wife. So your situation is much more serious than mine, but nonetheless, I hope things go well for you. Okay.

And vice versa. If I can ask, what's the issue with your wife? Since 2009, she's been having a great mini-series of seizures. And it's a brain deterioration disease, and it does not fit any particular protocol.

Well, you know, I don't know why this makes any difference, but something popped into my head, and it's something called Nuplus, N-U-P-L-U-S, but it's Sunrider. It's a natural, a lot of natural stuff. I don't know if it can help, but it's helped my wife in her condition, and we've known it's helped other people, too.

I don't plug, you know, I don't do anything for them. I'm just saying it's all natural stuff. It's seriously natural, and it's really helped her.

So I don't know if it would help your wife, but whatever. I mean, I don't know. It's just, and my wife's brother, his wife, has Huntington's disease. And so, let's just say it's really bad. It's bad. Yes.

What's happening? Yeah, she has seizures like epilepsy, but it's in the wrong part of the brain. It's kind of like Parkinson's, but wrong part of the brain. Kind of like Alzheimer's, but wrong part of the brain. Unlike Huntington's, a negative blood test.

They did all sorts of things at a neurologic institute and couldn't find anything, except for one part of her brain that is thinning. So anyway, believe it or not, you and I have a lot in common. Yeah, it's, you know this is true when I say you have my sympathies, I understand. Yeah. And it's a burden.

Oh, yeah. And I extend my sympathies to you as well. I completely understand the sort of struggles that happens on a daily basis. I very much understand that, you know. But anyway, I hope you have a good holiday season.

I look forward to your responses. You too. All right, Tom. All right. All the best. You too. Thanks, Ryan. Appreciate it. All right. You know, we have a prayer ministry, prayeratkarm.org, and folks, it's a privilege to be able to pray in their seat for people, and Ryan's wife would be one of them.

There's the music. We have two open lines, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back after these messages, please stay tuned. Here's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everybody.

Welcome back to the show. Two open lines, 877-207-2276. If you want, if we run out of callers, you can email me, infoatkarm.org, and you can just ask questions there.

You can say, hey, man, what about this? All right. Let's get on the air with Andrew from Savannah, Georgia. Andrew, welcome. You're on the air. How you doing, Matt? I've called him before. I just want to say first, I'm going to start to hear about your wife. I would love to pray for her. Sure.

Me and my family are all from. I wish you a Merry Christmas as well. You too. But my question is about the step two. In the step two event, at least in the one that I am reading, it talks about how Job in the book of Job has lineage that goes back to Esau. Just want to ask a question. Have you seen this?

I guess my first question is, is the step two event authoritative? Good question. What verse is it in the Septuagint that says that?

I'm looking. Well, actually, I won't say it's more of a footnote, but it's right after the very last verse in the step two event, which is verse 17. Very last verse, very last book of Job. It's in here as a footnote, but it goes on to say, it says, this man is described in the Syriac book as the living in the land of Ostus on the border of Idumea and Arabia.

And his name before was Jodat, and having taken an Arabian wife, he himself was the son of his father, Zare, one of the sons of Esau, and of his mother, Bezorba. This is in the Septuagint, huh? I'm not familiar with it. That's interesting, though. Yeah, I mean, it's in here as a footnote. Hmm.

No, I'm not familiar with it. Let's see, Job 41, 34, in the Septuagint, let me get over there and check it out, see if I can see, 41, wow, this is, okay, it has Job 42, oh, it has Job 42, sorry. Come on, here we go, buddy. Okay, come on, I'm looking at my notes.

All right, 42, 17, Job died, old man full of his days. 42, 17, got more than that in the Septuagint. And it's hard for me to check just on the air, just to look, but, oh, there we go, wow, at the very end. All right, I gotta check it out, you know, it got me curious, now I can check it out and see, there's quite a bit of Greek at the end, and, yeah, interesting.

Yes, sir. Yeah, I mean, in Greek, I mean, that one that actually puts it into English, I mean, it's, that's what it says, talks about how Job has lineas that dates with it, and it goes back to Esau, just trying to see how, I don't want to use the word valid, but just how authoritative that really is, because we see in the book of Job and Job 1, we see how he lives in the land of Uz, and if you look at Lamentations 4.21, it talks about how the land of Uz is in fact in Edom, so I'm just trying to figure out how in the Septuagint, it has this footnote here where, you know, where this information came from, because I just don't, I don't know where it's derived from, I mean, I know it's just a student, comes from the Syriac, not Syriac, the Aryan or something like that, I'm not quite sure where the Septuagint actually is derived this information from, but I'm just trying to figure that out, how authoritative it is, number one. Well, that's the thing, there are different Septuagints, they're slightly varied, and I haven't looked at the ending of that, of Job to see what that is, and yet the disciples referenced the Septuagint in a lot of places, so it's authoritative when it's referenced, and I would say other than that, I'd be careful, but it is worth a good study, you know, a good thing to do at this point is, you know, if I were to really research it, you know, I'd be like, okay, how many things am I going to call a seminary, see if they have somebody there who studied this, because it's an interesting thing, because do all the Septuagint virgins have it, is it late, is it intended to be just a note, like you said, is it authoritative, all these are the right questions, and that's good stuff, I wonder if there's anything written on the web by it, about it, you know, I don't know.

I couldn't find much about it, the only thing I found was exactly what I'm reading for you, I really couldn't find much about, you know, where was the rhyme, I can't really find much information on it, but I'm currently in seminary, I could ask my professor if he could actually give me some insight on this, or whoever the expert is in this field, to figure out where to go. That's what I would do, yeah, because that's a really esoteric kind of an issue, I'd call, I'd talk to them and then let me know what you find, seriously, what seminary are you going to? Sure, what seminary are you going to? Oh, the Midwest Ambassadors Theological Institute. Oh, okay, yeah, that's good, I've heard good things about it, good, yeah, you doing an MDiv or what? Well, I'm currently going to school for, I'm just an associate degree in physical studies, I'm just in, I don't know, in-depth, I guess you could say, I'm just, right now, just going to school just to learn, I just want to learn and dig deeper into my studies.

Well, you're doing the right thing, that's for sure, seminary is a good degree to have just for that alone, and you've raised a good question, I don't have a good answer for you, but I am curious about it, so if you research it, let me know what you find, maybe I'll take a look into it too if I can, but I'm curious. Definitely, definitely, yes sir, thank you. All right, thank you, yeah, look at that, I'm looking at that too, and Joe, it's interesting stuff I found, okay, good, you got me thinking, all right man, you find out, I'm going to look at it too, all right, God bless. All right, interesting stuff, interesting stuff, let's get to, let's see, Ani from Houston, Texas, hey Ani, welcome, you're on the air. Hey, how's it going, man? It's going, man, it's going, so what do you got buddy? So I had two questions, but I guess we'll see how long it takes to take care of this first one, so I've been dealing with anti-ternetarians, and I know that you are no stranger to that, basically the person that I was kind of having a back and forth discussion with, he kept trying to use the argument of agency, so I brought him to Hebrews 1-3, and I was telling him, you know, here Hebrews 1-3, that's not just representational, it's ontological, because the son is the exact imprint of the father's nature, but showing him basically Hebrews 1-3, how the son upholds all things by the word of his power, etc.

And his response was, well, that word, hypostasis, that doesn't necessarily mean nature, and it challenged me by basically going through other verses in the Bible and saying, where do I go? Okay, hold on, man, we've got a break, we've got a break, buddy, I want to hear, but we've got a break, so we'll get back to this, okay, because this is good, I love talking about the Trinity. Hey folks, we'll be right back after these messages, this should be an interesting conversation, please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276, here's Matt Slick. Okay, everyone, welcome back to the show, two open lines, 877-207-2276, just want to remind you that we're staying on the air by your support, if you want to support us, Matt Slick, matching funds drive for the end of the month, and whatever you donate will be doubled, just go to karm.org, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G, if you donate 20, it'll become 40 automatically.

And also, if you want to mail us anything, people do want to mail us checks and things, it has to be postmarked by the 31st of December in order to be counted into this month, that's just the law, that's how it works. All right, there you go, let's get back on the air with Ani. Okay, welcome.

Go ahead, buddy. Okay, so yeah, basically, I had that discussion with Ani Trinitarian, and basically he was trying to argue agency, et cetera, so we ended up going to Hebrews 1-3, and I was telling him from the context that it's referring to the Son being God ontologically, because he upholds all things by the word of his power, cross-referenced that with Nehemiah 9-6, told him that hos on is present, active participle, if he's continuously been the radiant of the Father's glory. But basically, what he was kind of just staying on was, well, look at the other references for that word in the Bible, where does it mean nature? And I hadn't heard anyone really use that argument before, so even though I was using the context, and I even brought it into Hebrews 1-10, which I know we don't have to cover that because that's a whole other question, because he tried to say that's not talking about the beginning of creation, and it was ridiculous, but I just wanted to hear your thoughts on that. How do you respond to someone who tries to use that objection? Well, it's a kind of objection that a cultist will raise that's difficult to refute.

It just is. And the word, hupostasis, occurs five times in the Bible, and so for example, in the New American Standard Bible it translates it as confidence two times, in 2 Corinthians 9-4 and 11-17, and it's translated as assurance in Hebrews 3-14 and Hebrews 11-1. So for example, Hebrews 11-1, the faith is the assurance of things hoped for, and that's also the same word, hupostasis.

So what's going on? When we go to Hebrews 1-3, he's the hupostasis. Well, the problem here is that we understand that a word can have a range of meanings.

It's called a semantic domain. And the translators, what they're going to do is translate it according to the skill set of their understanding of the language. So when we go to Hebrews 1-3, the ESV says exact imprint of his nature. The King James express image of his person. The RSV says the very stamp of his nature. So if you're talking with someone about this in Hebrews 1-3, and they were to go to other Bibles that translate it this way, they're going to have wiggle room.

They just are. And it's not that they're correct, it's just that they have found a way to wiggle and they're not going to give up. So with Hebrews 1-3, when I come to a verse like this, I will say, okay, so then Jesus is who, according to this text, what you understand.

I want to ask them what they think the text means, and they're going to say, of course, he's a representation and not the divine nature. That's what they're going to do. Right, that's exactly what he did.

Yeah, that's what they will do. And so what I'll do is not concede that their point is true. It's just that I could argue this, but it's not really going to go anywhere because the word is used in different senses, confidence, nature, and assurance. And different Bibles translate it slightly differently, and then you go to different Bibles and say, are these Bible translations wrong? What are you saying?

And now you're in a very defensive position. This is why I generally don't go to Hebrews 1-3. I will sometimes, and I'll say, well, you know, what does it mean to be the representation of God's nature? What does it mean to be the imprint of his nature?

And I ask them, what does it mean? Because the word nature here is what we're talking about, and what does it mean that he is a representation of that nature? What do you think the word means there? Is it the word nature, is it the word essence?

And you ask them, what is it? And then you write down what they say if he says, well, it's a representation of God's nature. It doesn't mean he is God.

He's just representing it. Now, how are you going to argue out of that? There is a way.

I'll show you a different way to go to a different scripture. But the thing is, it's like, well, I get what you're saying. Now, how do you convince them that the foundation that they have in a gray area needs to be moved into a black and white area? This is what the cults do a lot of times as they anchor themselves into something that can be interpreted different ways, and they just say, that's just how it is. So I'm not saying you're not right. I'm just saying this is a difficult area to argue in, just for that kind of reason. Make sense?

Yeah. I definitely get what you mean, because he was just basically trying to give the impression that, oh, you guys are just arbitrarily using that definition. Because look at all these other verses and how it's used, and he tried to give that impression. And I thought by going to Hebrews 1, 10, that that was going to just kind of nail it. And to me, I mean, that's very clear, but we ended up still going on a carousel, going in circles on that one. So I'm interested to see what text you would say is more better to use as far as talking about the Son's divine nature. Oh, yeah, yeah.

I've got something that they will just trip over themselves trying to explain. But notice, before we get to it, Hebrews 1, he says, he's the representation of his nature. And then in verse 5, that's the whole context that is bearing out of that statement.

Because it says in verse 4 that Jesus became better than the angels, et cetera. So to which of the angels did they ever say, you are my son? And they'll say, see, the son is not the same thing.

They'll say, does this go with what the text says? And I'll be a father to him, and he brings the firstborn into the world. And which of the angels did he say? And then it goes on in verse 8, but of the son he says, thy throne, oh, God, is forever and ever. Why is he calling Jesus God?

And you say, why is that? And how does that relate to Hebrews 1, 3? Because if he's the exact representation of the nature. Yeah, well, he was trying to say, he went to Hebrews 1, and he was trying to say it's just functional. And he kind of tried to use the kings in the Old Testament from the Davidic line, like Solomon and David, et cetera, to try to use that. I don't want to distract us from that question.

No, that's okay. You have to show, when they do that, you say, show me the verse. And then what they'll do is they'll often go to a verse that is similar, but is taken out of context.

And I say, how does that fit here? Because what he's doing in Hebrews 1, 8 is quoting Psalm 45, verse 6. It says, thy throne, oh, God, is forever and ever. It's a quote from the Hebrew of Psalm 45, verse 6. So why is the writer of Hebrews doing this? Now, when I argue with people about this kind of stuff, I know I've got something else up my sleeve.

I'm just going through the motions with them, because I know their arguments, and I know how difficult it can be to work with them. But it does say, thy throne, oh, God, is a quote from Psalm 45, verse 6. So I'm just saying that he is God the Father, speaking of the Son, calling him God.

Why would he do that? And you keep saying the same thing. They can give you all kinds of arguments and say, if they have something, you say, where's that in the Old Testament? Show it to me. Show me the verse. And then read the context of the verse. And you'll find out that a lot of times the foundation or other argument just crumbles at that point. OK?

Now, let me show you something that works. Now, if you were to go to Psalm 116, 4, it says this. It says, then I called on the name of the Lord. Now, you can look at that, and you can see the phrase called upon the name of the Lord. The word Lord there is Yahweh.

And you can go through, and you can find out where it talks about this kind of thing in many places. It talks about, you know, I called upon the Lord in Psalm 18, 6, or Zechariah 13, 9, talks about calling upon the Lord. And to say, when it says call upon the name of the Lord, the name of Yahweh, Yahweh is his name, right?

They'll say yes. OK, so when we have the phrase, this is important, the phrase, and maybe you've heard me talk about this before on the radio, but here we go. The phrase call upon the name of the Lord. The phrase call upon the name of the Lord, not just the word call, not just the word upon, not just the word name, not just the word Lord, but the phrase call upon the name of the Lord. Whenever that occurs, it's in reference to God Almighty, right? They're going to have to say yes, because it's Yahweh. Now I'll say, OK, so whenever the Bible says call upon the name of Yahweh, it's prayer adoration to God Almighty.

Is that correct? And they'll say, well, yes, good. The Septuagint translates this into the phrase call upon the name of the Lord, hakurios. That's how the Septuagint, the Greek translation done around 250 BC, whenever you see this, it's translated into the Greek call upon the name of the Lord. Are you with me?

And they'll say yes. Then you go to 1 Corinthians 1, 2, and it says this, to the church of God, which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. And I'll ask them, why would Paul the Apostle use a phrase, a Greek phrase from the Septuagint that only means Yahweh himself, why would he apply it to Jesus? OK. Have you ever heard this argument before? Well, we kind of did get into the whole thing about the name.

And to keep it kind of condensed, I'll just say that he would talk about how, well, see the son came in the father's name. OK. Hold on. I'm not sure.

Got an answer for that, too. But we've got a break coming up. Hold on.

And we'll get back to it after that. OK, buddy? It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, well, welcome back to the show.

Let's get back to Opie. Are you there? Yes, sir. All right. So, remember, I said it was the phrase, call upon the name of the Lord.

That's what's critical. I've got an article on this, on Carm, call upon the name of the Lord. It's a very powerful argument. OK? OK. And I'll show you one more argument that's very useful. OK? OK. And this is called the Plurality Study on Carm. You can look this up.

I've been using this for 40 years, the Plurality Study. And what I'm going to do is show you something. I'll ask them, is the Bible inspired? Of course it is, they'll say.

Do you believe it? Yes. Because they want to see the representation, right? You just representation as the authority, blah, blah, blah. And I'll say, OK, can you go to Exodus 6?

And they do. And read verse 2 and 3. It says, God spoke further than Moses and said to him, I am Yahweh. And I ask them, is it God who's speaking? They have to say yes, because the Bible says God spoke. And he identifies himself as Yahweh. So that's God speaking, right?

They have to say yes. If they say it's an angel, so an angel's now God? An angel's now saying, I am Yahweh?

Give me a break. And that way, they're really stuck, and you'll see why. And he says, and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty. But by my name, Yahweh, I did not make myself known to them. That's because Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were before Moses, when Moses got the name of the burning bush. OK, now, I ask them, did God appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty? Now, don't let them up on this, because the Bible says that is the case.

If they go to John 1-18 automatically, say, yeah, I know about John 1-18. No man should see God at any time, but let's look at this. Is this what it says?

And the answer is, it has to be yes. Do not let them get out from underneath this, because the Bible says God spoke. God did this. He says, I am Yahweh. He says he appeared as God Almighty. Are you calling God a liar? Is this what God said?

You just hammer him on it, and the reason is because this is God who's speaking. Then you go to John 6-46. John 6-46, Jesus says not that anyone has seen the Father, except the one who's from God. He has seen the Father. He's talking about himself right there. So Jesus says not that any man has seen the Father.

I say, okay, so if they're seeing God Almighty in the Old Testament, then who is God Almighty who's not God the Father? Okay? Right. It's very powerful. I know a lot more to this. There's a lot more verses associated, but it's very powerful.

Go ahead. Well, yeah, that's powerful. Yeah, the person I discussed with, he just kept hammering on agency. For example, I had brought him examples in the Old Testament where God appeared, and he tried to say, that's just agency. He tried to say it's a law of...

I don't remember the name of it. Yeah, it's just agency. Later when they came up with it. Yeah. And so he tried to go with that and say, John 5-42. Exodus 6-2 and 3 refutes that. He tried to say, John 5-43.

Yeah. And he was saying, John 5-43, and he tried to couple it with John 17-2, saying, see, the Son came in the Father's name, that he didn't have the authority, et cetera. So he tried to use that whole representation. But I think, like he said, the Exodus 6-2 and 3 is very strong. Let me show you something with this, okay? You study this Exodus 6-2 and 3 thing.

It's very important. And they're going to argue, and they're going to argue, and what you do is you calmly say, but what it says is, and you repeat the address, Exodus 6-2 and 3, it says that God appeared as God Almighty. It says, God said it. That's what I believe, because that's what it says, but you're not believing it. That's why it says it in Exodus 6-2 and 3. You go over and over it, and you cross-reference it with John 6-46, okay?

Now here's a trick you can do with these guys. So they'll say, well, Jesus just had all the authority. It was just given to him. It doesn't mean he's God. So you're telling me Jesus has all the authority to forgive sins? Yes. Did Jesus say, come to me? Yes. He says, ask me anything in my name, and I'll do it, right?

Yeah. Okay, then do that. Right now, would you ask Jesus to forgive you of all of your sins? Since you believe he has that representative authority, so would you ask him to do that right now?

Now what are they going to do? No one ever thinks to ask him that. So you have the authority to forgive sins? Yes, it was given to him.

Okay, let's work with that. It was given to him, and so he can forgive sins, and he says, ask me anything in my name, and I will do it, John 14-14, right? And he says, come to me, all the way to heaven, I will give you rest, you know, Matthew 11-27-28. Okay, so, all right, so are you going to obey Christ? Are you going to ask Jesus to forgive you of all of your sins?

Then see what happens. Because if he has the authority, because it was given to him, all authority has been given to me in heaven and earth, Matthew 28-18, then go to the one who has all the authority. And how's he going to judge you? Doesn't he have to know all of your thoughts, past, present, future, and know all the intentions of everything that you've said and done in order to be able to give that judgment?

You're assigning all of this to a created thing. Okay, so now, then why would Jesus say, come to me, and ask him, since he has the authority. Well, are you going to do that? That's when you're going to see them really, really backpedal, okay, all right?

That's right. Because if he does, then do it. Then see what they do. Well, wait a minute, you said he has the authority, right?

He represents God, right? Right? Then do it. Then do it.

They won't. See, well, then why would you? Go ahead. So John 543, I don't want to hold you up because I may have other colors, but just so I make sure I'm interpreting it right, so the way that we explain John 543 as far as the son coming in the father's name, what's the best way to explain that to them? Yes, that's right. He did come in his father's name. Yeah, so?

What's the problem with that? But it's not negating the Trinity. It doesn't negate anything. It just says he came in the father's name. That's consistent with the Trinity because the Trinity would say that the son from all eternity was ordained to come in the flesh, be made under the law, Galatians 4.4, be made Lord of the angels, Hebrews 2.9, so he would come in the name of the Father, the authorities of the Father. What's the big deal?

That's not it. That's perfectly consistent with the Trinity. It doesn't negate the Trinity at all.

Then I ask them, do you even know how the Trinity's arrived at from Scripture? Look, I'd love to debate them on this, and I'll be on tonight in about two hours discussing all kinds of stuff on Clubhouse. You can invite these guys in.

They'll have my name and a title of a room. I really appreciate your help, Matt, because you've got a lot of experience. Yes, well, a little bit. I have a lot of tricks up my sleeve in Scripture. One of them is, you go to John 10, 30 through 34, and the Pharisees said that Jesus was claiming to be God, and I'll ask them, do you believe that Jesus is God? No. Did the Pharisees believe he's God? No.

Do you agree with the Pharisees? Right? There's little things like this, and if he has all the authority, then go to the one who has the authority. Why don't you do that? Just lots of stuff. Okay? All right, man. All right. Thank you so much. All right. You're welcome so much. God bless. Let me know. All right. Let's see. Alex from Orlando.

Oh, no. Alex. I'm trying to help you out by coming on the show, because I know it's slow holiday season, and I only get five minutes. What's going on? Nothing. Just doing radio. What's up, man? Oh, what's up? What's up? Yeah. I was like, oh, hey. Whenever I have the intention of coming on to get you some collars, that's when I get backed up to the last five minutes or just get cut off the show. That's because we can see who it is.

We want important people who are intelligent to come on first. This is obvious. You know?

Sheesh. I know you're smiling. I know.

I know you like the abuse. I know that that's it. What's up, man?

What do you got, buddy? Revelation 4.4. Yeah.

I like it. Yeah. Around the throne were 24 thrones, and upon those thrones, I saw 24 elders sitting, clothed in white garments and golden crowns in their heads. So I would say 12 of the elders are the disciples. Would you agree? Not necessarily.

What do you think? I think my opinion is the 24 elders represent the church. So how so? Because numbers often represent things, 153 fish, 7 days of the week, 8 is the number of new beginnings, things like this. There's all kinds of stuff. And the 24, which is just 6 times 4, but not that it's any big deal, they are clothed in white garments, and that's exactly the case for the Christians, for the church.

We have new garments. I believe this is code for the church. That's my opinion.

I could be wrong, but that's what I think it is. Okay. But, okay, go to Matthew 19.28. Okay, Matthew 19.28, Jesus said, truly say to you that you have followed me in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on his glory throne.

You shall sit upon 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. Yeah. So that's why I would say... Half of them? Yes. Who's the other 12? Who's the other 12?

Like Bob and Butch? That's my question for you. But I don't believe that that's the case, because 12 tribes, here's the thing I've learned in scripture. This is going to sound really dumb, but words mean what they mean, and they're there for a reason and not there for a reason.

That sounds kind of, well, duh. But 12 tribes is not the same thing as 24 tribes, and they're different. The 12 tribes represent the nation of Israel. The 24 thrones is different, and it says 24 elders. So the thrones are different than the tribes of Israel. So you see, 12 tribes of Israel versus 24 thrones of elders.

Okay. So you're saying there's a distinction there. So what do you think Matthew 19.28 means in context? What I think it means is that they will sit on the throne, they will judge Israel, but the disciples will do that.

That's what it says. Yeah, they're going to judge the tribes of Israel. Now what's interesting is, when they judge the tribes of Israel, what kind of judgment is it? It's going to only be a generic kind of thing, because they can't judge every heart of every individual.

So they have a judgment that's going to be given to them because they are in authority. Now here's what's interesting. Does that include Judas? 12 tribes, right? The son of man, he followed me. You who have followed me. Well, it can't be Judas. So does it mean there's going to be 12 disciples? There's more than 12 disciples.

What does it mean? You see, it asks questions. Wait, so you're saying that when the 12 tribes of Israel would be like Dan, Levi, like those tribes, and when they're resurrected, they'll be judged by the disciples? It looks like it. Now, if it's the 12 disciples, Judas at that time was part of the list. Was Jesus saying Judas will help judge them? Well, obviously not, because he said it was better that Judas never be born, so he's cursed. So is it the 12 disciples that he's specifically speaking of? Just a question we have to ask, or is he talking about the Christians as a whole? That's a question we have to ask. What's going on?

These are the questions we have to ask, and then we start researching. Interesting. Yeah, but you can't say it's a...obviously you can't say it's a specific judgment for each one's heart.

It's more of a generic for how they reigned, basically. Because a person can't know all the hearts of all individuals. It's a privilege of God. Yeah, that helps me flush it out a little more. We'll decide if I take your advice or not.

Of course you should, like all things. That's how it is. Hey, before I bash you on the radio... We're out of time.

There's the music, man. We're out of time. I'm going to have some fun right now.

So if you want to match, give right now. You only got a couple days left. Well, until the end of the month, but yeah, we appreciate it. All right, buddy. God bless, man. All right.

That's Alex, a friend of mine, obviously. Hey, folks. Matching Funds Drive. CARM.org forward slash donate. Whatever you donate will be matched, will be doubled. So please help us out. And you can do that. CARM.org forward slash donate. God bless. Talk to you tomorrow. This is another program powered by the Truth Network.