Matt Slick Live

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. Today we have people waiting. If you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276.

I want to hear from you. Let's see, I'm going to rumble. I'll let you guys know about rumble. We're on YouTube. We're not going to go away from YouTube. Someone emailed me about that and said don't leave YouTube. What we're trying to do is get people to go over to rumble and sign up there.

The reason is that YouTube is becoming rather restrictive as far as freedom of speech goes. Instead of waiting until they just pull the plug on us and then that's it, we're trying to be preemptive. We're still doing that, but we only do it for ten minutes so people can recognize that we're there. Then what we do is we recommend people go over to rumble.

We gradually want to move the people who follow us over there. It's a strategy as a form of self-protection for the ministry. Like I said, YouTube will penalize me for saying things against the COVID stuff and what I believe about it.

It's just an opinion and I can't say that. They'll penalize me. Facebook is shadow banning us. What that means is that they are making it look like we are getting traffic when we're really not.

Or another way of doing it is to get a lot more traffic than they're telling us we're getting. There's different things that happen this way and we're trying to work on that and make things better. That's it.

Let's see, get over here to this. I'm trying to fix issues here. I hope that helps right there to me if that helps.

No, not yet. Okay, I'll keep working on it. What gets me is how difficult it is to work on this and get everything going all the time. I just forgot something. This is why I've got to do this right now.

Whenever I have one little tech issue, it usually throws me into a loop. All right, so there we go. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. Wow, just stuff happening. Let's get to Aaron from Washington. Aaron, welcome back. Hello.

Hello. Thank you. All right.

I wasn't sure where we wanted to follow up or not, but you invited me to call back. Absolutely. Yes, absolutely. You're the Mormon, that's right. We talked yesterday, and I got you to admit a contradiction. That's what you did. Okay. Which is what? The Trinity you said is one god, and then you said it's three gods. You can't have the Trinity be one god and also three gods. It's not possible. Okay.

Are you there? Okay. Yes. So in the statement of the Trinity, does it not say that each the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are each god?

Yes, it does. The Bible does say that. And it's talking about the ontological nature. But here's the thing. If I were to say to you that in my briefcase, there is a single apple and there's only one apple in it, but also in the same briefcase at the same time, there's also three apples.

That's not possible. Both statements can't be true. And so therefore, you have to reject one or both of the statements. You open up the briefcase and you determine what the truth is. But logic requires that a statement that negates the possibility of another statement, you can't have both be true.

So the Trinity, according to Mormonism, is either the case that it's one God, one being, or it's not the case that it's one God and one being. So it's either the case or it's not the case. This is simple logic. It has to do with true dichotomies. So it's either the case that I'm talking to you or it's not the case that I'm talking to you.

There's no third option. Do you see what I'm saying? Yeah.

Yeah. And that's, I mean, honestly, that's why I've had issues with the Trinity. Because to me, it appears illogical to say that three are one, literally, you know? Well, we don't say that. Because it's the same.

I see it the same way. You know, that each is fully God. Each of them are fully God. The Father is not a third of God, right?

They're each fully God. And yet they are one. And so when I talk to people, other Christians generally, they say, well, it's a mystery that we're not, you know, necessarily to understand and I'm okay with that. You know, I just don't understand the double standard.

It's not a double standard and most Christians don't know how to defend the Christian faith and don't know what it is. Okay? Most Christians don't. But I do.

All right? And I'm not knocking them and they're stupid and I'm the only one. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying most Christians just don't know what the Christian faith really teaches.

Just like a lot of Mormons don't know what Mormonism really teaches. Okay? I agree.

What I'm going to do is I'll explain what the Trinity is, but I'm going to start with an analogy and it'll help you understand. Okay? So time is the analogy. So time is past, present, and future, right?

Right? Yeah. Okay. Now, here's the thing. The past, present, and future, they're not exactly the same thing because they're different.

They're not ones behind us, ones in front of us, ones that are now with us. They have different aspects. But you and I would both agree that all three, past, present, and future, are by nature time, right? Sure. Okay. So all three are by nature time and all three comprise the one thing.

All three comprise the one thing called time in its totality, right? Okay. And you wouldn't say that the past is a third of time. It doesn't make sense to say it that way. It's just not a good way to say it.

You would just say that in this context you might say something like the past is an aspect of the existence of time, right? Okay. Okay.

All right. And it's... But yet... How do you... Go ahead. Yes?

Can you... So I've made similar statements in the past of how Jesus Christ could be the Father and the Son. Well, hold on.

Let's finish this analogy. But I'm just wondering if it can lead to modalism by that definition. You're right.

It could. So modalism isn't what we want. Nor is it polytheism.

Trinitarianism is strict monotheism. But let me finish the analogy, okay? Because we're going to return to this analogy. So the aspect of the past is not the same aspect as the future. They're different.

But they still have the same nature. Right. Right?

Right? Sure. Okay.

Good. See, God is one thing. He's one being. One being. But within the nature of what God is, within the nature of time is past, present, and future. Which, within the nature of God, is Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. That's what we would say. And we would therefore not say the Father is a third of God.

If any Christian says that to you, they just don't know what you're talking about. Okay? It's a wrong... Yeah. Right. Right. Okay. If the Father is not the same thing as the future, we would say the Father is not the same person as the Holy Spirit. Right.

Okay? But we don't say there's three times. There's three times. A past is a time. The present is a time. And the future is a time. Therefore, there's three times.

No, we don't say that. We say, no, there's one thing called time. And it exists as three things. Now, this isn't a perfect analogy, but it's a pretty good one. Okay? And some people say past, present, and future are all simultaneous. You have A theory, B theory, or time.

That could get a little crud. I'm just showing you an analogy. Okay. So, in Trinitarianism, the idea of God's existence is there's only one being in all place and all time. Isaiah 43, 10, 44, 6, 44, 8, 45, 5. These verses say that where God says he doesn't even know of any other God, there's none created before, none created after. He doesn't have any awareness of any other God. Period.

That's what he says. This is called monotheism. But in the New Testament and the Old Testament, we see what we call personhood. Now, let me explain what that means because the word person has a significant theological meaning in relationship to the Trinity. I'm going to repeat this because few Christians know this.

The word person has a theologically significant meaning as it relates to the doctrine of the Trinity. Just so you know, in Latin, I think it's Latin. Or is it Greek? I forgot which.

Latin, I think. The actors, back in the day when women were not allowed to act on stage, hundreds of years ago, hundreds and hundreds of years ago, the actors were all males, and they would use a persona, and it was a mask. And the actor would have three parts memorized. Another actor might have four.

Another one might have two. And what the actors would do is take a persona, that was the name of it. It's just a mask. And they would put it over their face, and they would speak through that mask because then the audience knew it was a different person speaking. And then they would switch to another mask, and that's a different part.

I went and saw a play like that once. They didn't use masks. You had to know what was going on. It was very confusing to me. But when you had the mask, I would have gone, oh, I get it now.

But any rate, so here's the thing. The word person means the characteristic of self-awareness, awareness of others, can speak, can say you and yours and me and mine has a will, things like that. So the word person, it constitutes that. What we see, if I were to stretch the analogy of time even further, if I were to stretch it, the past, present, and future each have, and this isn't really in actuality, but I just want to use the analogy and really stretch it. It's like saying the past, present, and future each have attributes of personhood.

Okay? It's like that. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one being who is God, but each have attributes of personhood. And they speak to each other. In Mormonism, they say God is three personages. The Trinity is three personages. What they mean by personage is an actual being, an actual entity, complete in and of itself. But that's not what we're teaching.

We teach person. Go ahead. One second. So Jesus is not complete in and of himself. There's a yes and a no to that. Because there's different senses in which the answer can be given, so let me explain.

Let's take past, present, and future. Let's take the present, and this is going to be who Jesus is. You've got to bear with me with the analogy because it's not perfect, okay? And so the present becomes flesh. So now what we would say is the present is both time and man.

Okay? That's what we would say. Now, what we're saying here is that Jesus has a divine nature and a human nature. But the union of the divine and the human nature, the union, not that they were blended into a new third thing, but that the nature of the word, the eternal word, did not change. It just inhabited a woman's womb and was in union to the human nature. And the theological term for that is the hypostatic union. The union of the divine and the human nature in the one person of Christ, we've got a break coming up, there's the music, which means that he had his beginning 2,000 years ago as this single person with two natures. But the eternal nature, well, it's eternal because it's divine.

So we can say yes and no to your question, depending on how you understand. Hold on, we've got a break, okay? Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages, 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. Oh, I just remembered.

Oh, I'm glad I remembered this. Okay, so today and tomorrow are the last, well, Sunday is the last day that you can, if you sign up with the Footsteps of Paul tour for next year through Sunday is the last day you can sign up and get $100 off. And so if you're interested in that, you can go to, oh, my, where is that? That's the, just email us at info at karm.org and we'll give you the URL to it. It's the Footsteps of Paul tour that we're going to be going on next year.

It's to Turkey, to Greece, and also to Italy. And it'll be a 19-day tour. And if you are interested in checking it out, you can do that, get $100 off if you sign up by the Sunday, you know, three days, four days from now. And if you're curious to know what the URL is, maybe we'll get it after the next break and I'll tell it to you.

But email us at info at karm.org and we'll get that to you. Let's get to Aaron. Okay. You still there? Yes. Okay. Are you there?

I am here. Okay. So what I'm telling you is accurate biblical Christian theology. Most Christians do not know this. And the reason they don't know it is because the pastors don't teach it and because, well, it's kind of esoteric and people don't have to know that level.

But I do because of what I do for a living. Furthermore, going a little bit more, in the Trinity, there are two actions or two things we want to look at. One's called the ontological Trinity from the Greek ontos, nature, essence, being. The ontological Trinity is the teaching that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each of that single divine substance, divinity.

Okay. The economic Trinity is the teaching that those three persons, not three gods, not three personages, the three persons within the single being have different functions. The Father elected, the Son became incarnate and redeems, the Holy Spirit applies her depth of work.

There's different functions within it. We call it the economic Trinity. There's another doctrine called the divine simplicity. Divine simplicity means that God, the being of God, is one substance. The substance of God, the divine, consists of three persons, and we perceive him revealed in Scripture. You asked about the issue of Christ. I told you about what's called the hypostatic union, that in the one person are two distinct natures. I'll just tell these two more things to you.

I've studied this a great deal, and I teach this regularly. There's another doctrine called the communicatio idiomatum, or the communication of the properties. It sounds complicated, but all it means is that the natures of Christ, the divine nature and the human nature, each have properties, and that the properties are ascribed to the one person. What that means is simply Jesus, the one person, said, I am thirsty. That's his human attributes.

The one person Jesus says, I'll be with you always, even at the end of the year. That's his divine quality. So the attributes of both humanity and divinity are of the one person. And then there's a third doctrine that's worth noting about called inseparable operations. And it's where Jesus says, I can only do what I see the Father do. And he's talking about the present tense.

And it has to do with the continuation of the doctrine of the Trinity, the manifestation of the Trinity, in its ontological essence that is consistent with the incarnation in Christ. It's more complicated, but I'm just saying, there's a lot here. Mormons don't know this stuff. They never study this stuff.

And most Christians don't know this stuff. I generally am. Okay? I've, um, yeah, and I could explain further into Mormon beliefs to justify them, but I'm not sure if that's what you want me to do on your radio show. You can try. But I can, you know, okay.

The reason I say try is because it can't work. Because I've thought through Mormonism for over 40 years. I know it pretty well. I know it's theology. And it's impossible to be true. It cannot be true.

There's logical problems about the nature of God and existence and things. It's impossible. It's not true.

God, Joseph made it all up. Okay. It's not true. But that's believing that that's including a theology that includes Heavenly Mother. Correct?

No, I wasn't even thinking about Heavenly Mother. Okay. So if men are eternal, the spirits of men are eternal, meaning we had a pre-existence and we all existed in the beginning with God, that it says in D&C 93, that men are made of the light of Christ, which I would consider the essence of who God is.

And so we are in all impacts of the same essence and we have our agency while in mortality if we are going to remain in that glory or not. Okay. There's a problem with that. Okay.

You don't realize it and I'm not trying to insult you. You haven't thought this through and the Mormons haven't thought it through. Okay.

There's logical impossibilities here. There's difficulties. So you said in the pre-existent spirits, they're the same essence as God, right? They're the light of Christ. Okay. So let's talk about the essence. Is the essence eternal? Mm-hmm. Does it mean that the essence of such existence never had a beginning at all? It's creeping light.

Well, get a narrow. So I would say yes. So that means then that God and all pre-born spirits have eternally existed. Yes.

Right? Okay. Mm-hmm. So I'm not expecting you to give me an accurate count. Would you say that there's billions or trillions of these pre-born spirits? Okay. Potentially, right?

An innumerable amount. Sure. But they're eternal in the past tense. But yet they are all individuals that are different.

Right? You lost me there. Can you repeat that? The pre-born spirits have individuality. The spirit number one is not the same as the spirit number two and the number one trillionth, right? They're different. Okay. So they have different minds, right?

Yes. All right. Now, I can wax eloquent here and get into philosophical problems and logical problems of the one and the many, which you're uninformed about. And this has to do with the nature of logic, the nature of transcendentals, the nature of stuff that gets more complicated.

We're not going to get into that right now. But if you say these are different minds and different entities, then I have a question. How is it that you can have trillions of eternal minds?

It's just a question. Why couldn't you? Well, I didn't say you could or couldn't. How do you have trillions of eternal minds that are different in their minds? Okay.

Now I could ask questions. You see, I could say, are these minds omniscient? And you'd have to say, well, no.

Okay. Are they omnipotent? And you'd have to say, well, no. Are each one of these omnipresent?

And you'd have to say, no. But then we compare it to God. But God, your God, is supposed to be these things, yet they have the same essence.

That's a contradiction. All right. We've got a break. Hold on. Hey, folks. We'll be right back after these messages. I hope this is making sense.

We'll take some time talking about this because we don't get too often an opportunity to do this with a Mormon. Hey, we'll be right back. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. Everybody, welcome back to the show. Let's get back on with Aaron. Aaron, are you still there? Are you there?

Yep. I'm here. All right. Let's get into the scriptures that prove Mormonism false, which I can do with one verse. But I'm doing this because you seem to be willing to hear some different ideas.

And I did say Mormonism is logically possible. Oh, yeah. Okay.

You're not going to hear anybody else talk like this. Okay. Sure. Well, I just want you to know that my desire is the truth.

It always has been. And I also wanted to, if I could take a slight sidebar, is to thank you for your work and what you do. I don't consider you in opposition to me.

I do appreciate your work. It was through your forums that I went through and I talked with Christians that I was able to understand a living faith. And so it helped me understand Christianity better than there was other experiences over time. But I do believe and have a biblical understanding of Christianity.

I think I do. And it was, you know, had it not been for your resources, I wouldn't be where I am now. But at the same time, you know, I can't deny the witnesses that I've received the truth of my own religion as well. So I just wanted to let you know, I'm not in opposition. I'm not seeking to condemn you or anything like that.

It's not either or per se. I just want to let you know that. That's where I'm coming from.

Yeah. See, you don't hate me. I don't hate you.

I appreciate that. But your testimony is false. And my testimony here, I could say this, my testimony beats up your testimony. I've shared my testimony with Mormons.

I've never met a Mormon who's compared to it. I'm not trying to say, you know, hey, look at me. Oh, great.

No. Testimonies aren't the thing to determine truth. Let me show you something because I can continue with the logical impossibility of Mormonism. And I can.

I've got some stuff here. But Joseph Smith said that God appeared to him, God the Father. And this is called the first vision. There's several visions, several versions of this vision. And they manifested over the next several decades. Now, if the Bible says God the Father cannot be seen, if it was the case that God the Father could not be seen, then wouldn't that mean that Joseph Smith lied?

If that were true, yes. Okay, I'm going to read to you 1 Timothy 6, starting at verse 13. I charge you in the presence of God who gives life to all things and of Christ Jesus. So God here obviously is the Father, right? And of Christ Jesus who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate that you keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he will bring about at the proper time. He who is the blessed and only sovereign, the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, unless not the Son we're talking about here because we've seen him, but it says he dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To him be the honor and dominion forever.

Amen. So Paul the Apostle is telling us that the Father dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. Now did Joseph Smith see the Father?

So, okay, question. How did Stephen see Jesus on the right hand of the Father? He didn't. In fact, he saw in a vision of the glory of God and Jesus on the right hand. Right hand, if you take it literally, means Jesus was standing on the right hand, and it doesn't make sense. And it was a vision of the glory of God. You're talking about Acts 7, 55 through 60. And what happens there is there's a vision that he has, and he sees the position of Christ to the right of, which in the Jewish culture was a signification of authority. And that's what's going on. He saw the glory of God, didn't see God the Father. Okay? He saw the glory of God. That's what it says. That's what it says.

Okay. And I happen to know this because I've studied this a lot. Because it says in Acts 7, 55, being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. So he didn't see God the Father, but he saw the glory of God. So if you see the shirt of Matt, you're looking at my shirt. Okay? That's what's going on. The object there is the glory.

Okay? Now, you could also quote, as Mormons sometimes do, Genesis 17, 1, 18, 1, where Abraham sees God, or Exodus 24, 9 through 11, where 74 people see the God of Israel, or Exodus 6, 2 and 3, where God says that he appeared as God Almighty. But you see, the thing is, Jesus says in John 6, 46, he says, not that anyone has seen the Father. So they were seeing God Almighty in the Old Testament, but not God the Father. But doesn't he say no one has seen the Father except he who is of God? No, it doesn't say he who is. It says the one who is from God. He has seen the Father.

He's talking about himself. Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, became one of us. He has seen the Father.

That's what's going on. So Joseph Smith said he saw God the Father. He did not. I just proved Mormonism is false. And there's another way to do it, too. Prove it. It can prove us false. I'm sure you have a lot of strategies on proving Mormonism false, just as there's a lot of arguments on religion in general. And, you know, that's fine, but at the end of the day, it's what's in the Bible, not logical philosophies.

I mean, Paul said that, you know, to the Greeks, what he preaches was foolishness, right? And there's, you know, it is a mystery. Understanding the relationship between the Father and the Son is a mystery. And like you said, the esoteric, a lot of people don't understand it. You don't have to know. Do you? Do you have to know all of this to be saved?

No, you don't. But as a Christian apologist, I need to know more than the average person. Sure. But you're holding the standard to me saying that I don't have salvation because I don't believe in God in the same way that you do.

No. It's not the same way. You don't believe in the same God. You don't believe in the same God. By esoteric nature, sure.

No, no, no. In Mormonism, God is an exalted man. He was not always a God. He became exalted. He followed celestial law. Okay.

And can you find that in the standard works? I'm not trying to actually do all that kind of stuff because I think more Mormons are asking that question. But you and I both know that the apostles and your prophets have taught this for decades and decades and decades.

You know that's there. So this is why I say to Mormons, do you believe? This is why I say to Mormons, do you believe that you have the potential of becoming a God? Being a priest unto the most high God. No, do you have the potential, do you believe that you could become a God potentially of your own world? Again, I define what I believe that God is yesterday.

I would justify my belief in God that he will give me authority and dominion over his kingdom and the eternities. Yes. Okay.

I asked, do you believe you have the potential to become a God? Okay. And I've answered that. And you're trying to describe me with a yes or no question.

Yes, that's right. Okay. You do. You're giving me a binary option with a loaded question. But see, I use logic and most people are not comfortable with logic.

I'll do things like this. Is it the case or is it not the case? But there's a logical fallacy of loaded questions. But you see, it's not. I don't try and trick people when I know there's a way out. That's disingenuous.

I won't do that. Then what do I believe God is? The God that you will become according to my understanding. What God will become.

What have I stated I believe is God. I'm asking what you believe personally. Do you believe you have the potential of becoming a God of your own world? Potentially.

Do I have the potential of my own world? No, I do not. Okay.

You don't believe that. All right. So was God who you call Elohim, was he always God? Did he always exist as God? Yes. But the problem with that is that Joseph Smith said that he was exalted.

He became a God. Okay. Well, that's, again, I measure all statements based on what other prophets in our church have said.

Okay. We measure all statements, whether high or low, against the standard works. And if it's not the standard works, we have the freedom to disregard those statements. Well, the teachings of your prophet Joseph Smith, page 345, quote, Joseph Smith said that God himself was once as we are now and is an exalted man and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. We imagine that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil so that you may see. So Joseph Smith disagrees with you. We do.

So who's right? We had a break. So respond to that when you get back.

Sorry we had another break. Hey, folks. There we are. Last segment coming up. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live.

Taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Everybody, welcome back to the show. Hope you've been enjoying this.

I have. Let's get back on with Aaron. Are you still there? I am. All right. Go ahead.

I think you're making a comment. Go ahead. Okay. So you're asking if there was a conflict, right?

That's what Joseph Smith said? Mm-hmm. Okay. Well, logically, if we based something on the pure authority of someone that said it, someone with the title said something, therefore it may or may not be true, that would be the logical fallacy of appeal to authority, correct? Yeah, we just appealed to authority.

A mere appeal. Okay. Yeah. But your prophet, Joseph Smith, said this. And the church has stated that doctrine is determined, it's measured by the standard works. Okay. The scriptures that are canon in LDS.

And that, and the King Paul discourse is not in those standard works. Okay. So why should I accept what he says on a logical basis?

Okay, I'll ask you the question. Was Joseph Smith wrong for what he taught? I, again, said that God is an exalted man, that he was once a man and is exalted. I don't see that anywhere in the scriptures.

That doesn't make logical sense to me. I don't feel the spirit on it, I guess you could say. Well, you shouldn't feel the spirit on it.

That's a very good demonic deception. I'm just going to keep telling you that. Okay. False religious systems don't appeal to the supremacy of scripture, but they subject the scripture to their feelings. They think it's from the Holy Spirit, which I could demonstrate to you that you don't have. Right.

Go ahead. But man's logic is limited as well. True. So I can't just trash everything that I've received and say, well, Matt said so, therefore.

No, no, no. Look, if I'm making a statement to you on a series of things and you show me a logical problem in what I've said, then I have to say, well, that's a good point. I have to rethink this because a logical problem means that it can't be true.

Maybe there's something that needs to be clarified and things like that. And I'm asking you, if you believe that Joseph Smith was correct, because if you disagree with him, you're saying he's wrong. Okay. On that personal point, yes, I disagree with him.

Okay. Well, the problem here is that so many of your prophets and your apostles taught the same thing. So who are you then to disagree with them?

It doesn't matter who I am. I'm not the leader of the church. I'm not dictating doctrine. I'm not asking one to believe me. But if the leaders of your church say this, and you disagree with them, and you say, but I'm not the leader of the church, it's just my opinion. And they would say, and if I disagreed with them face to face, they would say, well, that's not pertinent to your salvation. It doesn't matter.

You mean the object of your faith is not pertinent to your salvation? Are you kidding? To know if he was a man on a planet? Okay.

Do they call him manhood? That can't even be answered. Yes, it can. So here's the thing, logically speaking, it cannot be the case, for example, in the statement of logic, it cannot be the case that God's an exalted man from another planet and also not the case that God's an exalted man from another planet. Both those statements cannot be true at the same time in the same sense, right?

Right? Right. Simple. So either one or the other is true. So one or the other is true. It's just simple logic.

Okay. So I have to accept everything, all or nothing, everything that is said or everything that is not said, I have to accept it. That's what you're saying. I didn't say that. I can't take a piece of what he said.

I can't disagree on one single point of that. I didn't say that. Okay. You already denied God's word. So what's the problem? The fact is you don't believe.

What are you talking about? Paul, the apostle told us, God the father cannot be seen, but you believe Joseph Smith saw God the father. If Joseph Smith could not have seen God the father, that means all of Mormonism is false and you have been deceived by demonic forces.

Absolutely. You do know that Joseph Smith was involved in the occult before he started all this. I don't know if you know that, but he was. I used to be involved in the occult before I became a Christian. So that doesn't prove he's right or wrong.

I'm just saying if you knew that or not, that's one thing because it does relate in some other areas. But moving past that, the Bible says that the father dwells in unapproachable light who no man has seen or can see. So you have to deal with this issue. You have to believe God's word or you don't believe God's word. It's either that, it's either one or the other. It's either the case that you believe God's word or it's not in this particular area right there. It's either the case that you believe God's word or you don't believe in God's word. So if you don't believe in God's word, then you contradict yourself, which you said that the Bible is true, which is contradicted by the eighth article in Mormonism, but that's another thing. And if you believe that those verses are true, well then you can't believe Mormonism is true.

You can't believe both are true at the same time. I agree with that, but I don't agree with your interpretation of the Bible either. But what I did was... So for example, for example, you said that Stephen saw the glory of God. Well, I looked at that scripture. He saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. Yeah, no problem. Acts 7 to 5.

So he saw the glory of God and he also saw Jesus standing in the right hand of that glory. No problem. But that's not what it says. That's what you say. Wait a minute. Let's go back to it. Acts 7 to 55.

Say, uh... 7 to 55. And being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently to heaven and saw the glory of God. So did he see the glory of God? Yes, he did.

Good. And Jesus. Did he see Jesus? Yeah. Standing at the right hand of God, right?

There you go. Okay, so did he see... Why does it have to make it so complicated? Standing at the right hand. On the right side of God, right? Again, so you have your interpretation and I have mine. Well, what does it mean to stand at the right hand of God?

What does it mean? It means God the Father has the full authority. Jesus has the authority. He has the full authority. And that's all that God had bodily, right? Okay.

Yeah, that's Colossians tonight. So the thing is you're saying is that Jesus standing at the right hand of God means Jesus has the authority, right? Right? Yes. Okay, great. I agree. So you and I agree that he saw the glory of God.

Right. So our only dispute is what was actually seen. Yeah, well, I'm going to go with what the Bible says. He saw the glory of God. That's what it says.

That's what I believe he saw. And Jesus. And Jesus, absolutely.

And after that. We're not worried about seeing Jesus. That's not the issue. The issue here is whether God was seen or not.

Right. Because in 1 Timothy 6 16 it says that God, and that's the Father, who alone possesses immortality dwells in unapproachable light whom no man has seen or can see. Now you go to Acts 7 55, the reason you would do that is because you see what 1 Timothy 6 16 is saying and without intending to you're trying to contradict it. You say, well, it can't mean what it actually says because over here in Acts 7 55 they saw God the Father. But it doesn't say they saw God the Father. It doesn't say that Stephen saw God the Father. It says he saw the glory of God. I'm not reading into it.

You are. And you can't set the scriptures against each other. And I can look up Timothy and I'm sure I can find other Biblical scriptures that can support my view. Well, here's the thing. I've studied this. I mean, I don't have all the resources in front of me right now. That's okay. And I would suggest that you do. And I would suggest you focus on this. I would suggest that you pay attention to 1 Timothy 6 16 because it comes down to this.

If what it says is it means the Father can't be seen, if that's the case, then Joseph Smith lied Mormonism is false. Period. That's a logical necessity. That's true. Agreed. I'm impressed you said that.

Good for you. So now it all comes down to this. If what you say is true, yeah, I agree. Good. So if the text is saying that it's in the context of God the Father who can't be seen, then Joseph Smith is a false teacher. Yes, it's called that your perspective is valid. And that's fine.

I can support that validity. I just don't necessarily agree with it. So then what's the verse in question? What's the verse in question?

Acts 7 55. No, we've already gone through that, that you and I both agree that they saw Jesus and at the right hand means the authority of, and we both know that the text says the glory of God. No, I didn't agree to that. Sorry.

Oh, I'm sorry. So you don't agree that Stephen saw the glory of God? I agree with that. And then following that, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. So the whole question at the end is at the right hand of God, what does that, those last five words mean? It means the authority.

Okay, according to you. It's used also. It's also used in Mark 16 19. When the Lord Jesus has spoken to them, he's received heaven and heaven is sent down at the right hand of God. I will research that and I'll give you call back.

Yeah, you need to research. That's okay. 1 Timothy 6 16 is what you need to research. 1 Timothy 6 16. Read the context because Acts 7 55 has to be consistent with 1 Timothy 6 16. They have to be there. And also John 6 46, no man has seen God, seen the Father at any time, Jesus says.

He's talking about the old people in the Old Testament. And so it's consistent. Okay, I know this really well. I agree. Okay, so I want to thank you for your politeness and to be honest, I'm really surprised at something you said. Not surprised because it was stupid.

No, I mean surprised because it was an example of integrity. That if it's what it says, that's what it means, then Joseph Smith is false. Well, like I said, I just seek the truth. That's all. Okay, let me ask you something.

We're almost out of time here. Jesus has all authority in heaven and earth. Matthew 28 18, right? And Luke 5 20 and 7 40, he forgives sins. Okay, and Jesus says, ask me anything in my name and I will do it John 14 14. So let me ask you, can you pray to Jesus and ask him to forgive you of all of your sins? I have done so already.

Good. Okay, but now we have to narrow the field a little bit talking about who Jesus is. We don't have time right now. Because if you pray to not through, but you actually say something like Lord Jesus would you and you're addressing him specifically. That's the issue.

Because he has the authority. Let me talk about that. Okay, because we're out of time. All right. All right. Sounds good. Okay, I got your email.

I really appreciate your email. Do you live in Utah by any chance? I grew up in Utah.

I live in Washington now. Oh, that's right. Okay, great. And something about you coming through if you want to meet in the area, you know, if you want to do that, it's fine. Okay. And I'll offer our home as a place for you to stay if you need a place to stay while you're visiting. Okay.

That would be awesome. Thank you so much. All right. Okay, so I'm out of here.

We got to go. All right. God bless. Hey, sorry, Andrew from Oklahoma.

Just wait works. The Lord bless you all. And by his grace back on your tomorrow. Have a great evening, everybody. God bless you. Have a great evening.