Share This Episode
Matt Slick Live! Matt Slick Logo

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick
The Truth Network Radio
May 2, 2023 4:53 pm

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 835 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

May 2, 2023 4:53 pm

The Matt Slick Live daily radio show broadcast is produced by The Christian Apologetics Research Ministry the show, Matt answers questions on the air, and offers insight on topics like The Bible, Theology, Apologetics, Religions, Atheism, and other issues-- The show airs live on the Truth Network, Monday through Friday, 6-7 PM, EST -3-4 PM, PST---Topics include--- 06- Are Christians accountable for religious violence in history---- 11- Atheism and logic-seeking truth.-- 28- Are Black Americans the true children of Israel--- Black Hebrew Israelites, BHI.-- 51- Racism in America, Christian responsibility.


The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network.

If you're interested in learning more about Truth Network, and playing with some settings on the cameras, send us an email at guy was there, and we both just gave up after a while. And we just had, instead of a study, we had a nice conversation with a bunch of people at the house. So two days later, I got my stuff, and I said, I'm going to beat this. I'm going to figure it out.

Took me a half hour, and I solved it. And there's a little mute button on the laptop for the microphone. That's all. There's a little bit. I didn't even know it was there. I'm like, what's that?

Click, everything works. So it was a, we call it an operator error. And I told a tech friend of mine over the weekend about it. And he laughed.

Not at mockery. He goes, yeah, been there. At any rate, so how about that? That was pretty good. And if you want to give me a call, we have open lines. So we have a problem. We have a problem with the lines. So if you call, and there's a busy signal, just wait a couple minutes while I'm off the line, then call back. So half the lines are working.

Half of them are not, of course. So we'll just work around that. And if you want to email me instead of call, you can do that by just emailing at info at

Info at And if you have a comment or question, just say comment or question for the radio show, the title, and I can get right to it. All right. No problem. Let's get on the air with Alberto from Georgia. Alberto, welcome. You're on the air.

Yes, good evening, Mass Slick. My question is, shouldn't the Christians owe an apology to the terrorists and the Muslims and the gang bangers that kill each other? Because the Puritan and the Calvinists and the reformers did the same thing. They were killing people and burning people for their belief system. So they're doing it for the name of Jesus. They were killing people left and right.

John Owen, John Knox. And in England, they started killing people. They're thinking they were witches and put them in ice.

And they drink and drop them in a hole of ice. Thinking that they drowned, they were not a witch, or they didn't drown. They were a witch. And they transferred that same ideology to Salem, Massachusetts, started burning witches and all that. What do you think?

First of all, I don't know if any of that's true. I was going to see some documentation. John Owen was doing this. John Knox was doing this. The Salem witch trials were in America. And Knox and Owens were not in America.

They were in Britain area. So I'm curious where you got that information. But let's just say that it's the case that some Christians did this, which would not be a Christian thing to do. Because this is not in the Bible. And I've had Muslims tell me, well, in the Old Testament, God had people killed. So that's what your Bible teaches. And I says, yeah, in the Old Testament, in the Old Covenant, we're not under the Old Covenant anymore. And I say, show me where the Christian scriptures teach doing what you guys do.

Just show me. And they can't, because it's not there. So we don't owe any Muslims any apologies for anything like that.

That's just how it goes. If people did kill others, well, that's on them. We don't owe them an apology. We didn't do it.

I didn't do it. My ancestors came over from Germany in the mid to late 1800s. And so none of them had any slaves. But let's just say some of my ancestors did. Do I owe any present day black people apologies? No.

Why would I? So I don't believe in that kind of thing. And the past is what it is.

Let's move on and stuff like that. But the Muslim religion is a dangerous religion. And the Quran does teach terrorism. It does teach killing people.

I have articles on that on the website. OK? Yeah, but I don't understand all that. But the point is, it did happen.

So I'm going to do a test of my definition to do that. But still, you can't forget history, I mean. I understand that the terrorists that Muslims still do with the day. But still, the Christians did do it. And they killed a lot of Catholics in Ireland. Yeah, a lot of people did a lot of bad things. Catholics killed Protestants. Protestants killed Catholics. That kind of stuff is true. You mentioned those individuals.

I don't know if that's the case. So what do we do? Do we go to the Catholics and say, hey, I'm sorry? I didn't do anything.

Why am I sorry? It's sinful if any side kills another side for those reasons that they did that. It was sinful from both sides. So if the Catholics killed a lot of Protestants, and they did lots of them in torturous ways, were the Catholics apologizing? And if a Catholic came up to me and said, look, I want to apologize for you, I'd say, why? You didn't do anything.

See, I don't get that. It's not something that they've done. If they say, on behalf of the Catholic Church, they were apologizing. I'd say, do you represent the Catholic Church? No.

Well, then how could you do that? So I'm just a little bit more level-headed about it, I guess, than a lot of people. OK? All right. Thank you. OK. Sounds good. All right.

So here's a thought. I was at the Grand Canyon years ago, and I think it was a Navajo guy I met. We're sitting, and we just got talking. And he was a full-blooded, I think it was Navajo.

I may be wrong on that, but he's American Indian. And I thought, oh, really? I said, man, it's a pleasure to meet you.

And we got talking, and it was a nice conversation. So I remember thinking how the Indians were treated badly in America, and they were. But they also treated each other badly, too. And that doesn't excuse anything, but the people that came in, they did a lot of bad stuff.

And I think that they're reaping the consequences of others' sinful actions. And I feel bad for that situation, and I would never oppress them or want them oppressed. I don't owe them an apology.

And if the guy were to look at me and say, look, you owe us an apology. Why? What did I do?

I didn't do anything. Well, you're ancestors. I'm not my ancestors, and my ancestor wouldn't come over here and do that anyway.

So I've always wondered about that and wondered why people have been out of shape about that. Like, you owe apologies. And then reparations, like, oh, my goodness. There were like 150,000 white people who were slaves in America in the 1800s. And they were from, I want to say Ireland.

Scotland, Ireland, Ireland, I think. There were Chinese slaves, and there were slave owners who were black owning black slaves in America. So it's a big topic. And do we owe apologies? I didn't do anything wrong. If I do something wrong, I'll apologize.

But I didn't do anything wrong. Let's get to Ryan from Pennsylvania. Ryan, welcome. You're on the air.

Thank you for taking my call. I was listening to your show last week, and you gave somebody a definition of agnosticism and atheism. And I was curious why you did not use the definition of atheism that Gordon Stein used in his debate with Greg Bahnson.

Because I don't remember what Gordon Stein said while he got his rear handed to him by Greg Bahnson. But I've talked to so many atheists, and I just say they're functionally the same. Agnostics and atheists are functionally the same, because neither includes God in the explanatory realm. Well, Stein's exact quote is, rather, an atheist says that he has examined the proofs that are offered by theists and finds them inadequate.

And I think that's a very, very strong position for them to take. Well, but inadequate doesn't mean he does or does not believe. You could say they're inadequate, then he's saying that his belief is based purely on his decision. And many atheists say that's not the case. You can't decide to believe something.

I've had many arguments from that. I've had atheists who are strict materialists and physicalists, and some atheists who are spiritualists, and they're still atheists. Then I have atheists who think that there's a kind of presence of divinity behind and in all things, of which we are all partakers, or kind of new age-ish, and whether to deny that there's an absolute God. So I was asked which kind of atheist you are. And if that definition from Stein is to be used, what gives him the right to say that he represents all atheists? I've talked to so many atheists over the years, and they have different definitions.

If I were debating Stein, and I would have loved to have debated Stein, I would have said, why is that definition the right one? And if it's just your opinion, that's what it is, OK. But you can't say, this is how all the atheists are.

You can just say, this is my opinion of it. Then we'll discuss things. I don't think he was trying to speak for all atheists. But anyway, I just found it interesting that, well, I mean, I agree with the idea that all the proofs that theists offer are inadequate.

But I'm a Christian. But it's an interesting scenario that I found. And like you say, I thought it was a stronger position to take to say that the proofs are inadequate, rather than possibly saying, I can prove there is no God. And so it's an evaluative sort of understanding of things.

I would disagree. But anyway, well, I mean, the thing is, and this is a point that I try to make over and over again, is that there is no necessary relationship between any logical conclusion, regardless of valid or sound, and truth. That logic does not lend itself to deciding what is true and what is not. It simply tells us what necessarily follows from a given set of premises. And there's no necessary connection between that conclusion and truth.

So wait a minute. You say there's no connection between logic and truth? No, I said there's no necessary connection between any logical conclusion and truth. OK, so if Bob is saying that there is a dish on the counter, and Frank is saying there's not a dish on the counter, and they're both talking about the same place at the same time, both statements can't be true, we conclude that one of them is wrong. Is that bearing of truth related to the conclusion? OK, if we say a or not a, a, therefore, not not a, then we are drawing a conclusion from that. And we are simply saying that not not a necessarily follows from the premises that are given.

And so, Bob. And he's a double negative. But you said there's no bearing on truth.

Double negative is a significant cause of us. How do you know that logic has no bearing on truth? Don't go to conclusions. That's right, logic and conclusions.

That's right. You said a lot. I'm going to talk about this when you get back.

Let me close, Matt. I did. I created myself.

I said there's no necessary connection between any logical conclusion and truth. Actually, between. I'm going to take a break, so hold on. I'll be right back, OK? Hey, folks. We'll be right back. We have open lines 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. All right, everybody, welcome back to the show.

Let's get back on with Ryan from Pennsylvania. Logical conclusions and truth, is that correct? No necessary relationship or no necessary relationship between any logical conclusion and truth. What logic tells us is what necessarily follows from a given set of premises or not.

That's it. So no necessary, or you're saying there is no, let me get this right, there is no necessary relationship between any logical conclusion and truth, OK? Correct. So premise one, all men are mortal. Premise two, Socrates was a man. Conclusion, therefore Socrates was mortal. That's a valid syllogism, correct? Sure. So is it true that Socrates was mortal according to the syllogism?

Sure. But again, because you have that going with Socrates, does not mean that it occurs that way with all logical conclusions. And like I say, it is a syllogism, and it necessarily follows from the premises. But whether or not it is true really has no bearing. Let me give you another example.

If we have a, go ahead. You said there's no necessary relationship between any logical conclusion and truth. I just gave you one instance. So it's true that Socrates is mortal, and that's syllogism. So therefore, if it's true, then there is a necessary relationship between a logical conclusion and truth. OK, in that circumstance, yes, we can say that that is also true, OK? Then your statement's falsified. OK, I said any conclusion, not every conclusion, OK?

OK, so any. So how do we falsify your statement? There is no necessary relationship between any logical conclusion and truth.

What's the falsification of it? What's the corollary? Showing that every conclusion has a relationship with truth. So every conclusion, can you think of any conclusion that has no bearing or relationship to truth?

Sure. Let me put this out, that let's say, for instance, we have a proof, and the valid sound conclusion of that proof is there is no God, OK? That has no bearing as to whether or not there really is a God or not.

Or we have a proof that says there is a God that has absolutely no bearing on whether or not there really is a God or not. It is simply something that necessarily follows from the premises, that's all. OK, but you said relation to the truth. So you haven't defined what you mean by relationship. Is it necessary, causal, modus ponens, modus tollens?

Is it deductive, inductive, abductive? But you see, to conclude there is no God has a relationship to the truth. God exists.

That is true. The relationship is that it is incorrect. Well, if I say the moon is made of green cheese, if the moon is made of green cheese, therefore God exists. Premise number two, the moon is made of green cheese, therefore God exists. That's a valid inference, but has no bearing on whether or not the conclusion is true.

Or, well, yes, on bearing. See, here's the thing. The problem is you're not defining your terms. No bearing on it, no relationship. You can have a relationship. There's different kinds of relationships.

There's familial relationships, marriage relationships, positional, logical. And so we're talking about logical relationships. So the premise of God's existence, for example, it's the case that God exists.

That is, it's a given. We both hold to that worldview. So the relationship to that, any conclusion where there's a negation of God's existence has a relationship to the truth. The relationship is that it is false to that other truth. So it has no truth bearing, so there's a relationship of truth to it, and then it lacks the quality and condition of truth. OK, let's say you have premise number one, which says, if the moon is made of green cheese, then God exists.

Premise number two, the moon is made of green cheese. In conclusion, therefore, God exists. Now you're taking another step and saying, therefore, that conclusion is true. So you're taking another logical step after you're drawing the conclusion. OK, so you're changing your initial thing. You said there's no necessary relation between any logical conclusion.

So that can be falsified, and I already did that. So now you're saying everyone, and I still say it has a relationship because the relationship is either that it is true or it's not the case that it's true, which is a relationship issue. And you haven't defined what relationship means. If it's necessarily true or it's necessarily not the case that it's true, if it's not the case that it's true, it still has a relationship to truth.

So I just don't agree with your condition there. Well, what I'm talking about is that the difference between saying that something is true and something is functionally true. So logic deals in truth functions, not in truth per se.

So when we say all men are mortal, Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates is a mortal, we are talking about the valid inference involved in that. And that is what logic deals with. And the conclusion definitely follows from the premises. To take the next step and say, therefore, that conclusion is true, is a step that logic does not take. The only thing logic shows is whether or not the conclusion follows from the premises. That's what logic does.

And I just showed you, when the syllogism, the classic one, all men are mortal, Socrates was a man, therefore Socrates is mortal, the conclusion is a truth value and is true. So there is a relationship. It's a truth functional value. Yeah, that's right.

There you go. A truth functional value. It functions as true or it functions as false. That's what logic deals with.

So is the statement Socrates was mortal, is it true or not true? It is true, but it also necessarily follows from the premise that you get. Yes, so the conclusion is true. Well, that conclusion, yes, you can take the next step with that, but it's not necessary to. You can simply say that it follows from the premises and leave it at that in logic, because that's all logic does.

It's necessarily true. If premise one and premise two are both valid, the conclusion is necessary given the premises in this case. Well, first of all, premises are not valid or invalid. They're either truth functionally true or truth functionally false. No, they're valid or invalid.

They use the wrong terminology for it. Now, statements are true or false. They are not valid or invalid. Inferences and proofs are valid or invalid. Yeah, well, we'll just go in circles here, but we can move along, because, you know, my falsifier statement. Well, you're wrong about valid statements and invalid statements, because again, logic does not deal with it. There's no such thing as a valid or invalid statement. It's either true or false. OK, that's fine. Validity and invalidity are the core proofs and arguments. OK, that's fine.

So it's still true that if all men are mortal and Socrates was a man, then therefore, Socrates is mortal, still truth, and it relates to the truth of actuality. So yeah, I don't have any problem with that. But we're going to move along, OK? So I appreciate you calling, Ryan. OK. All right, thanks. All right. We have open line 8772072276.

Let's get to Arnetta from Raleigh. Welcome. You're on the air. Hi, Matt.

Nice to talk with you. I just had a question, and I just kind of came in on the fill-in of one of your questions prior. But I guess my question is, who is the real children of Israel?

Because when we think about, you know, we kind of, in my eyes, we kind of cater to Israel in so many ways. Hold on, we've got a break. I want to hear this. We've got a break, so we've got to go. So hold on. After the break, we'll talk about that, OK? Hold on, OK?

OK. All right. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Give me a call, 8772072276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 8772072276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everyone, welcome back to the show.

We're at the bottom of the hour. Give me a call, 8772072276. And if you want, you can email me, info at, with a comment or a question. Just title it something with the radio show, and we can get to it. All right, let's get back on here with Arnetta from Raleigh, North Carolina.

Welcome, you're on the air. OK, where were we? I was asking the question, who is really the true children of Israel? Because as I read in the Bible, it seems like no other culture lines up, especially not the culture that we are saying they are the real true Jews.

So I'm just trying to figure out why are we not clear on this. I guess at the end of the day, to me, in my opinion, people of color have more of a description than anybody that would fit Israel. So you're a Hebrew Israelite? No, I'm just asking the question, because everybody says that we, of course, have to return to Israel.

And when we bless Israel, I don't know exactly where it's found, but as we bless them, that's the true way before the Lord's return. Do you believe in the Trinity, by any chance? Just curious.

I do. And is Jesus God in flesh? I believe he is God in flesh, not as we see it, but in spirit, but not in flesh. He's a man right now.

He's a body of flesh and bones. That's what the scriptures teach. It's a very important doctrine. So are the true Jews black people?

Oh, I don't know. I just said, according to the Bible, the description doesn't fit the people that are there. They don't have the same with the people that are there. They don't seem to love all people.

So you have to love all people. Oh, so I just got back from Israel, and the people there were polite. The Israelites were open, full of smiles. We had a great time. All of them treated us very well on our tour. They welcomed people into their country. They don't like the terrorists, of course. So they are loving them, and they do help a lot of people. So I'm not sure where you're getting that.

Are you there? Okay, if you look at statistics, and when we base it on economics, they don't engage with a lot of different diversity as far as, I won't just say people of color, I mean all people. When you look at the Jews, they stick to their culture. They stick to their communities. They say, I get it. There's a group in every society that's nice.

I mean, I got nice neighbors, but maybe my neighbors don't have nice neighbors. So I'm not getting to this little narrow point. I'm taking it to say, yeah, we're always saying, okay, no reparations. Let's not talk about this culture. Let's talk about that culture.

Every culture has been on the forefront except people of color. I don't understand what you're saying, but when I was in Israel, we went to the tomb or the area of Abraham's burial, and there was a black woman there, and she was a soldier. She was a Hebrew, and she was right there. She was a Jew, and we talked. They go, hey, you're Jewish.

She goes, yeah, perfect English, and great, you know, she spoke Hebrew also, and there were others there, too, like that, too. I mean, I'm just telling you what I saw. So do you believe in this thing called reparations? I believe what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Every culture has had reparations except black people. Do you believe that we should have reparations for the black people here in America? I believe what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I got that.

You're not answering the question. Everybody has had, everybody has received some type of compensation other than people of color. Really? Is that not true? Everybody's received reparations. So the American Indians and the Chinese here in America, did they receive reparations? Oracle survivors have received.

Well, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I asked about the Chinese and the American Indians. Have they received reparations? I'm not saying just reparations. I'm saying monies and compensation.

Every culture has. But that's what reparations is. You said everybody has except for the black people, okay? I asked about the Chinese and I asked about the American Indians. Have they received reparations?

You said everybody accepts. Under the Obama administration, I believe, I'm not sure about the Chinese, but I think we just got some laws passed to me that's still an offset of reparations. It doesn't always have to be monetary. Okay, so.

So they've had a lot of laws passed on their behalf. So you're saying then then, are you saying you'd like to get some money? Is that what you're saying? You want some?

No, no, no. I'm not saying money. I'm not saying anything that is, well, what I want is the fairness. If you felt that this group over here, it could be, when I say economics, it could be many things. It could be education, it could be housing, it could be land, it could be not, monetary is not even what we're built on. You know what I mean?

And that's a man system. Well, take myself for, I can't speak for all people, but I can tell you I'm a white guy and I went into big debt in college and seminary for education and I didn't get it paid off until about five years ago. That was in my sixties. And no one gave me any jobs.

No one gave me any education. I had to work my rear off to get everything. And so what, I mean, the benefit I had was my own elbow grease and determination to work through systems and to work the best I could. And it was not easy. It was not easy. Okay.

So I mean, how have I received, how have I personally, how have I received this economic unfair benefit, for example? I mean, I'm looking at it, not just a small little group of people, a handful. If we just go back to some history of the country, if we just revisit just Tulsa, if we revisit Black Wall Street, if we revisit Mississippi, a lot of things have not been addressed.

I get it. We've progressed a little handful of people, but I'm asking for all of those, for all of those that have participated in any type of this America, this United States, when we look at it, who really lines up in scripture, like 400 years of slavery, and who is now saying we must return to Israel because they are the true and they are the true. So wait a minute. So did you know that white people were also enslaved in America? Did you know that? Not 400 years.

No, I didn't ask that. And it wasn't 400 years. I just asked, did you know that? And the Chinese were also enslaved. I'm not saying it was okay.

It's all wrong. But did you know that? There's no other culture that matches the description of scripture than people of color. Did you know that a lot of black slave owners were in America?

Did you know that? Absolutely. But if you look at 400 years, actually 364 years to be exact, if you look right there, you just start right there, what other culture has literally been through any of that that lines up with scripture? That's what I'm asking you. The Jews.

That we would define that Israel is now the people that God is really saying, do for Israel, and I will bless you. That's all I'm asking. I'm just trying to understand that.

I'm not sure I understand. The Jews were slaves in Egypt, okay. I'm asking you who lines up with the scripture that says you will be enslaved for 400 years. You will be taken out of your land. You will be scattered. Oh, you know the word.

You are an expert. I'm just asking that question. Who defines and who says that Israel, the people there are the people that God is literally lining up, what we call end-time prophecy, end-time revelation.

I'm just trying to find out if they are the real people, then do they participate with all cultures? Because it still seems a little bit in their own little box. And I don't know. Hold on, hold on, hold on. So I'm really intrigued by this. You're talking like a black Hebrew Israelite person, okay. No, I'm talking as a child and a daughter of the multi. Hold on, hold on. And I believe in my father that will answer all questions that are inspired by people like you that study. Hold on, you haven't established anything. I'm just asking questions.

Trying to find out where you are. Are white people evil? That's not my question. I'm just trying to find out who. I know it's not, but I want to know what your answer is. Look at the Jews. I want to know, Arnetta. I want to know what your answer is. Are white people evil?

I have a reason for it. I think we're born into evil, all of us. Are the white people going to be slaves of the black people later? Oh, that's not my question.

I understand it's not your question. I'm asking you questions to find out where you are because you're speaking Hebrew Israelite stuff. And I also know that Hebrew Israelites say it's okay to lie to white people and you can kill them.

Not every one of them says that, but I know that's part of the theology of some of them. I don't know where you're coming from. I'm trying to find out. You see?

I'm trying to find out. We've got a break. We've got a break. Hold on, hold on.

We've got a break. Hold on. Hey folks, we'll be right back after this message. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, buddy, welcome back to the show.

All right. Let's get back on here with Arnetta. Are you there? Yes, I'm here. And Matt, I listen to your shows. I don't have, you know, I don't, I'm not trying to, you know, debate with you or anything about it.

I'm just trying to get my question answered because I'm really sick and tired of everybody. Bless Israel. You know, God will bless you. And I'm like, well, okay, if that's true, if that's true, then they need to bless the people of God. You know, so when we think about it, we have to, yeah, we have to really just dig deep in scripture.

And I don't know of any, let me answer, of any other coach even identify with what has happened when he did the land. Okay, can I answer? Okay. Sure.

Genesis 15, 13 and 14 says, God said to Abram, for you know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that's not theirs and they'll be enslaved in a press 400 years and it'd be their nation to judge them, et cetera. And now is that what you're referring to? That, yeah, that's part of it. Okay.

Mm-hmm. So now in Acts 7, 55 or not 7, 55, but Acts 7, five through six, the context is Stephen's preaching. And he says, God appeared to Abraham in Mesopotamia.

Then he goes on in verse five. He gave them no inheritance in it, not even a foot of ground. And yet, even when they had no child, he promised that he would give it to him as a possession and to his descendants after him. But God spoke to this effect that his descendants would be aliens in a foreign land and that they would be enslaved and mistreated 400 years. Now Paul then says in Galatians 3, 17, what I'm saying is this, the law which came 430 years later does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God so as to nullify the promise. So the 430 is just specific.

400 is a generic number. And so Stephen is saying that the 400 years deals with the time of Abraham being oppressed and of course it's in Egypt. And Paul says that the 430 years, which that's what it is, is, comes 430 years, the law came, which is Moses, which is after being set free from the land of oppression of Egypt. So what that verse in Genesis 15, 13 through 14 is talking about is the people of Israel enslaved in Egypt.

There's your scriptures for you, okay? Okay, and who are the people in Israel that were returning? Okay, I answered you. Do you understand the answer?

Do you see that this 400 something years that you want to say cannot be applied from the scriptures to the blacks who were slaves in America? Do you see that? No, I don't see that. You want to go over it again? I don't. You don't want to go over it again? No. You don't want to go over what the word of God says about this. You're talking about dates with man's law so I'm going to- Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I have a problem here.

Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me, Arnetta. You raised an issue from scripture. I addressed it from scripture showing that what you taught was incorrect. You disagree with it and then you want to go on which tells me you're not interested in the word of God. You're interested in your agenda.

That's what it's telling me. I just proved you incorrect from scripture. No, my question that you still didn't answer was who are the real children of Israel? Well, that's another question. You said that it was for 400.

You said, hold on Arnetta, Arnetta, Arnetta. You said that for over 400 years they were oppressed. Who does that apply to? I answered you who it applies to.

Now you're moving the gold post. Now you want to know who the true Jews are. Well, I tell you what, you can do some research and you can do some research on genetics. They have these genetic profiles that go back and they can trace them back into varying areas that originate out of Africa, out of Asia, out of varying places and from what I understand and what I've seen in the research, the blacks don't fit into the people of Israel in that time. It's the Jewish people who have the same genetic line today as is traced back geographically. Are you aware of that research? I am, I'm just trying to figure what at the end of the day, what culture leaves out people and Jews, white people, where do they mix in?

Okay, all you're doing is arguing out of a vague ideology, a vague concept and look, I've already answered you in two different ways and I'm trying to be mean, but it seems to me you're more interested in agenda in this issue. So I think what we're gonna do is move along. We've got to call our waiting and stuff like that, okay? But I do appreciate you calling and please continue to listen if you can, okay?

All right, appreciate it. All right, let's get to Eldrick, Eldrick. Yes. Is that you, Eldrick? Yes. All right, man.

Hey, you're on the air, buddy. Oh, okay. Well, let me turn down the radio then. Okay. Quick question.

You were just talking about the Israelites and I just wanna touch on that real quick. I got family members that's doing all that mess and I ain't gonna call it mess. I'm just gonna call it misunderstood. It's bad.

Say what now? Yes. The Hebrews like moving is really bad. It's very racist.

Yeah, it's bad. Yes, it is now. With that said, I wanna ask a question. Sure. I was born in 84.

Okay. I was born in 84. First time I went to Washington State. You know, going to see a movie, I was in my early 20s, called me a derogatory name while I'm walking down the street.

Cool. I'm like, okay, we back in the 60s. Oh, we back in the 50s, whatever. What I'm trying to ask is how do we as a culture, as a race of human beings change the narrative because like as me being born in 84, I have been harassed, I've been tamed, I've been falsely imprisoned.

And it's like just based on the area because you know, everybody can't afford to live in a nice area. So if your parents don't make a lot of money, you know, you gonna be in what they call the projects. So you know, I'm going all the way back. And it's kind of personal because I'm really trying to figure this out because in my lifetime, you know, I'm not quite 40 yet, but in my lifetime, I look back and I have to laugh because I'm a believer in Christ, I believe in eternity, I believe in God's Father, God's Son, God's Holy Spirit.

And you know, he say let his word be true and every man a liar, you know. So when I sit back and I look at the culture as a society today, and we still have a whole bunch of, you know, I'm gonna say bad apples because it's like they do, well, I ain't gonna say they do, I'm gonna say culture or society has put a bad stigma on darker colors. And I ask God all the time, you know, why is it like this? You know, why do you have to go through different trials and try to be a productive citizen in the United States?

That's all I wanna know because it kind of bothers me. Like I said, yeah. Yeah, and I'm with you, you know, I get it. I know what it means to be persecuted just because of who you are. And you know, I'm not comparing it to skin color, but yeah, but first of all, there's a lot of horrible things that are being done in America because of race. Now, I believe personally, there's only one race, a human race, and black, brown, white, green, orange, we're all the same.

And we just have different skin tones. That's how I look at it. And I also look, personally, I look at people as just containers for souls, so to speak. I see, I try and see into what a person is as a soul, as a person before God. That's how I try and see people.

What are they like inside? That's just me. Now, I remember my grandmother. She literally, and I'm 66, so she came back, she came out west in the wagons. She really did. And she would talk about black people in derogatory terms.

And I'd say, Grandma, don't do that. So there's a cultural thing that is being whittled away little by little by little. And it's getting better. It's not perfect. We've got a long way to go. We really do. And so, it's the issue of sin.

And what do we do about it? Well, what we do is we get Christ preached. Because in Christ, we're all the same. We're all one people. And that's how we're to see each other.

The regeneration of the heart needs to happen. But the unbelievers don't want to have Christ. But even then, most unbelievers I know have no prejudice against any other person of color. Most people I know. Now, I've encountered some that do. Okay, and I've rebuked them.

But what are we gonna do? We acknowledge that the sin is real and then each individual tries to work where he's at to make it better. And there's another thing is sin can be forgiven, but the effects of it continue.

And I've said this before many times. I think that the black culture has really suffered greatly because of the past slavery. When the fathers would be shipped off, breaking up families. I mean, to destroy families. And they would be, you know, slave over here, slave over there, and then bred out. I mean, this stuff is horrifying.

It's horrible. And the consequences on the black community is just not gone as soon as they're, so to speak, freed. The consequences come down for generations.

And this is sin that has caused this and the effects of it are there. So what do we do? We have to move past it the best we can.

Each person is responsible in his particular context to do the best he can and to promote harmony and happiness and fairness, et cetera. It doesn't mean it's all gonna happen all at once. But that's what we gotta do. That's how we work it. And you know, it bothers me that you've said that, not that you've said it, but that it happened. You're in Washington State and someone insulted you because of, I guess you're a black guy, on that. And it's like, man, that just bothers me. Why would anybody do that?

I don't get that. But there's less and less of that happening. So, you know, I'm not sure I'd tell you, but yeah, it's horrible. You know, it sucks. It does.

Okay. Well, I would just ask, and I thank you, you know, but I really think as a culture, we preach Christ. You know, Him crucified, Him won under His covenant. Well, in His covenant, you know, we can change a lot of things. But I feel like the body of Christ is kind of playing the sidelines.

And it's a lot of things that I think, you know, as believers, you know, true believers, I mean, you know, when I say true believers, I mean, like, you know, every man in life and God is the truth, you know. Amen. I'm with you, brother. Like, come together. Come together.

You know, I don't know. I do. I'm with you.

It would happen one day. I'm with you. I agree. And when Jesus comes back, it's gonna be taken care of. And we're all gonna be in heaven together.

And that's what I look forward to. And, you know, I don't care what color people are. And all my friends, we don't care. We just care what kind of person are you. And we need more of that. We judge them by their actions, just like Martin Luther.

I mean, Martin Luther King said, you know, by their actions. That's what, I don't care what color you are. You're a bad guy. I don't want anything to do with you. You're a good guy.

Welcome. That's it. That's how I view it, you know. So I don't care. But yeah, it's just a lot of bad stuff.

But racism is being stirred up in America, unfortunately. And that is crazy. But the truth is, I love, you know, like I say, I grew up AME, GME, and Baptist, and Catholic. I'm sorry, brother. We're out of time, man. I don't wanna cut you off. Oh, okay.

We're gonna be out of time. Call back tomorrow and let's continue talking, okay? You're welcome to. Yes, sir.

You have it going. I'd like to listen to your show. All right, man. Hey, God bless. Sorry we're out of time, but I wanted to hear you.

But that's just the way it is. All right, man. God bless, brother. Hey, folks. We're out of time. The Lord bless you. And by His grace, we're back on here tomorrow. And hopefully we'll have more good conversations. Talk to you later. This is another program powered by The Truth Network.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-05-02 10:26:50 / 2023-05-02 10:46:28 / 20

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