Share This Episode
Matt Slick Live! Matt Slick Logo

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick
The Truth Network Radio
October 13, 2023 7:05 pm

Matt Slick Live

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 967 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

October 13, 2023 7:05 pm

The Matt Slick Live daily radio show broadcast is a production of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry -CARM-. During the show, Matt answers questions on the air, and offers insight on topics like The Bible, Apologetics, Theology, World Religions, Atheism, and other issues-- The show airs live on the Truth Network, Monday through Friday, 6-7 PM, EST -3-4 PM, PST--You can also email questions to Matt using-, Please put -Radio Show Question- in the Subject line--You can also watch a live stream during the live show on RUMBLE---Time stamps are approximate due to commercials being removed for PODCAST.--Topics include--05- Job, Hedge of protection, Romans 13, Subjection to governing authorities-15- How small should government be, we need Christians in government---33- The 45 Goals of communism.-39- Atheist arguments, God's judgement, Why would God damn us---52- External vs Internal critique.


The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. It's Matt Slick live. Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick live.

Francis, taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick.

Here, listen to Matt Slick live. And if you want to give me a call, as usual, on this beautiful October 12th, 2023 day, all you have to do is call 877-207-2276. And yeah, everything's working fine there and there. We got a caller coming in. So I have a friend, Andrew Rappaport, and he's Jewish, but he's Christian. And so we got talking today and he's going to call in tomorrow and we're going to talk about Hamas and Judaism and things like that.

He's completed Jew. And so it should be interesting to talk about what's going on there. I may have another guest on some other time, too.

I know some other people who know this kind of stuff a lot better than I do. So I think it'll be interesting to have them on. But at any rate, we'll have Andrew on tomorrow. That's the plan. And we'll just see how it goes so you can have your questions and stuff like that. All right. Now, like I said, if you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. And oh, look at that.

There we go. Oh, interesting. And so people send me stuff, you know, and sometimes it catches my eye about what it is. And I have to look at that sometime. All right.

Another time, though. So I'm looking at the emails, and if you have a question, you want to email me. You just email me at info at And I just put on the subject line, let's see, just the radio question or radio comment, and either one. And then I can get to them then. All right. So there you go. All right. I think that is pretty good.

I think it's pretty good, pretty good. So let's get on to the calls. Let's get to Jamal. Hey, Jamal.

Welcome. You're on the air. Hey, Maslick. How you doing today, sir? Doing all right, man. Hanging in. Good deal.

Good deal. Kind of a long-winded question, so I'll try my best to shorten it. I think it was Joe that had the hedge protection around him, and the devil said he only obeys you because of the hedge protection. If you let me get at him, I promise you he will turn away from you. And I think it goes like God said, OK, do what you want with him, but you can't touch him. But his family, from my recollection, his family was killed.

So I was kind of wondering, how was that fair to Job's family? Oh, it's very fair. Because fairness is measured by God, not us. And so all people have sinned against God, and all people deserve death. And God lets us breathe and have heartbeats and families and jobs. And so all of that is the mercy of God always.

So if he were to remove the mercy, the grace from us at any point, and we die, that's perfectly fair, because it's within the justice of God to do that. And that's it. OK. That's all right? All right.

OK. A simple answer. You must have been ready for that one or something. I thought that was going to be a little kind of difficult for you. But it's all good, though.

Yeah, it's not that hard of a question. And because if you understand that none of us deserve life, none of us deserve anything good, and they're all under the judgment of God anyway, and then God just lets the judgment come upon them, then that's what's fair. I don't want what's fair. And I know you don't either. We don't want what's fair from God.

We want grace. Now, the question is really along the lines of, well, wait a minute. They were testing Job, and then they died. But it was about Job, not about them. And that's where you're kind of going with. And that's true. And yet, at the same time, we're all going to die sometime anyway.

And there's problems that we all have. And God just says, OK, the family is going to die. Who knows when they're going to die anyway? And they did.

And that was it. And is Job going to recant of his love for God and trust in God? Let's see when your family dies.

I've known people, or of people, I should say, when they've lost a daughter, lost a father, a mother. And they hate God when they talk about how bad God is, because God didn't treat them fairly. You better not want God to treat you fairly. You want justice.

You'd be dressed up for trouble. Yeah, yeah, that's a good point. You got time for a quick follow-up? Sure, no problem at all. All right, thanks. We talked about this before.

I need a reminder. Christians in politics, just looking for verses I can use that I can say that we should be involved in politics, where others say we should not be involved in politics. Yeah, the ones who say we should not be, they don't have anything in scripture to say that. But if you go to Romans 13, everyone has to be in subjection to their governing authorities. Not to be in subjection to the governing authorities means you're involved with politics.

Because the governing authorities will say, pay taxes, join the military in a draft. This is all political. And so if you are abiding by those things, you're being political.

That's just how it is. And so people don't realize, what they're trying to say is don't get involved and try and change politics. Don't go out and vote, for example, which I think is asinine.

We should be voting because we don't want unbelievers to be in control over us because we know what's going to happen. They're going to destroy us. Absolutely, that's right.

Going to try to. That's right. They're wicked people.

The wicked are the ones who are running our country right now, which is obvious, our border and the Biden crime family and the rise of all the costs of living and the things that they're doing, which is not in the interests of the people, not upholding the Constitution. And so with Christians, a lot of Christians, what they'll do is they'll say, well, that's just what God wanted. Is it? God says, go out and make all disciples of all nations. Are you doing that? That's what God wants. You're doing that?

Well, no, I'm just sticking here, right here. So people are inconsistent all the time. But we are obligated to be involved in politics. And we should try and get Christians involved in politics. In fact, when the Presbyterians came over from Europe, in part to escape persecution, but also to start a new Christian country. People don't know that.

But that is the case. And they whitewash history to their own liking, the people in power. But before the colonies were really even formed, the pilgrims asked the ministers to go through the word of God and develop out of scripture a biblical form of government. And that biblical form of government, which was arranged, was woven into the Constitution. A lot of people don't know that. But we have a biblical form of government that was designed. And in fact, some of the early fathers of our Constitution said that the Constitution was designed only for a godly people.

You can't work otherwise. That's right. That's right. That's right.

And so we have ungodly people, and they're destroying us. And so Christians need to get off their rears and get involved in politics. Absolutely.

They should. Absolutely. All right, well, thanks again, Matt Slick. Good show, or a good answer, as always. And God bless you, sir. God bless you, man. God bless.

All right. Hey, we have wide open lines. Oh, there's someone coming in if you want to give me a call.

877-207-2276. And let's see, what I was thinking about doing is, did you know that there's a biblical form of government? And maybe I'll go over that just a little bit. That's what the Bible talks about. And so I've read some books or notes.

I've read some articles on it. And I just went through the scriptures and did searches for various things. And I won't read all of the verses, but I'll give you the references. And Alberto's coming on, and he says, his question is, how big should government be? It's perfectly in line with this. I'm going to read this, though.

We'll get him on there, and we can discuss it. In Exodus 18, 21 through 22, we're to have a representative form of government. And in Matthew 18, 15 through 17, we're to be self-governed.

So representative and self-governing. Now, that right there is a restriction on the size of the government. Because in communism and socialism, government is expanded in all areas and all powers so that you don't have representation.

You have control. And so that's why I say socialism is unbiblical. Communism is unbiblical. And you're to have private property rights. And the more communist a country becomes, the less you have of property rights. And that property rights is in Exodus 20, verse 17, and Acts 5, 4. We have the principle of liberty and freedom and the promotion of those.

2 Corinthians 3, 17, Galatians 5, 1, 1 Peter 2, 16. Principle of liberty and freedom and promotion of those things. Also, the principle of self-defense and the defense of others. We have the right of self-defense. This is part of the reason the pilgrims said we have the right to, and the constitutional fathers, we have the right to bear arms. And so this is in Exodus 22, 2.

If the thief is caught while breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there'll be no blood guiltness on his account. And of course, Luke 22, 36, Jesus said to buy a sword. And so we also have the right to and the obligation in the defense of others. So that's Proverbs 24, 11 and Psalm 82, 4. So we're to do that. Rescue the weak and needy, deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.

How do you do that? And so sometimes this needs to be physical. So if I see a man oppressing a woman, say I just see him walking up, I can tell they're not together.

He walks up behind a woman and then knocks her down and kicks her and stealing her purse, I'm going to run in there and jump him and do what I got to do to stop him. And so that's a form of violence, but it's violence that's justified in order to stop an aggressor. And so there's that. There's capitalist principles also. Matthew 25, verses 14 through 30, Matthew 21, 33 through 41. The witnesses and a fair trial, Deuteronomy 19, 15. Matthew 18, 16. The right of taxation, that's the government. They have the right to tax, Luke 20, 24 to 25. And the limits of government.

Check this out. It says, Deuteronomy 17, 14 through 16. When you enter the land which the Lord your God gives you and you possess it and live in it and you say, I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me, you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses, one from among your countrymen and shall set as king over yourselves. You may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countrymen. This is what's happening with the United Nations. They're trying to set it up so that our Constitution is a subjection to them.

This is bad. And there's other stuff. So there's nine main proponents and things of a biblical form of government.

Christians get involved with government, get involved with politics. Let's go to Alberto. Hey, Alberto.

Now you're on the air, buddy. Yeah, good evening, my slave. My question was is that how big should the government be in these different branches, the Senate, the Congress, our representatives? I think it's the wrong question.

So it won't be over up to, hm? I think it's the wrong question. It should be how small should it be, as small as possible. Well, yeah, how small. Yeah, yeah, as small as possible. But in each branch, how, because if you say how small, but then you have to vote the right people for each branch to be the right one to rule with the country. Different, that's different, different issues. How small should the government be?

It should be as small as possible. And for the purpose of protecting the citizenry, for protecting our borders, and protecting from outside forces, it should tax in order to accomplish those means and provide roads and means of transportation and economic stability. That's the basic idea is what's going on.

Our government now is run by politicians who want to subject us to tyranny. Hey, we'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned. Three open lines, 877-207-2276. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, and welcome back to the show. We have one guy there, Albert, we'll get to him.

If you want, you can give me a call. All you got to do is dial 877-207-2276. Let's see if somebody in the control room could reactivate Albert. Oh, so I can get him back on and click him on. They're going to do that. There we go.

All right, Alberto, you're back on, buddy. Yes, I got a quick question real quick. Let him tell this stuff. Should government allow lobbyists to influence the government? Well, that's a tough one. I'd say yes and no to that. Depends on what the goal of it is and who's doing what.

I'd say that it's something up for grabs a bit. We've got to, we have to, here's the thing. We need Christians doing this stuff who won't just try and get whatever they want done because they're being paid to do it, and that's their loyalty. We need Christians in government. And so lobbyists can do their job, but they need to do it in a godly way. Of course, they're not going to do it. They don't believe in godliness. They believe in the dollar.

And so they'll lie, and they'll steal, and they'll cheat. Yep, mm-hmm. So I'd say yes and no to that one. So if you think, so you mentioned, Brother Chris, I was thinking about that same question. So you think your pastors, even though they're God calling to do with pastors, if you're preaching to church, should they be involved in politics, like to run for positions in the office in government also? I couldn't understand you.

Try it again one more time. I said your pastors also should be involved in a politics office. Of course. Your pastors. Even though God calls you a pastor or minister, but should they run for office?

Since there's nobody available, should they run also for positions in government? When you say should they as a moral obligation, I would say that not every pastor should. I think there are pastors who might be good at it and would need to talk to their congregations about it and see and the elders and things like that. They think there's a need in a particular area and they want to put their hat in the ring in order to try and do what's right before God. There's nothing wrong with that. Nothing in the Bible says a pastor shouldn't be involved in anything governmental.

Nothing at all. Christians are admonished to be involved. In fact, if you look at the governmental representative system, they were godly people who were picked. That's how it has to be.

That's how it needs to be. OK. Sometimes a lot of Christians, if they don't have financial means, because they're going to cost a lot of money for TV time, ads, campaigning and stuff. Yeah, but there are people who've won on just hardly any money, and they've entered into offices. So just do it. I say just do it. And you learn. You just never know what's going to happen. A lot of times people, they don't want to do anything until all the ducks are in place. Everything's in place.

All the money, all the this, all the that, all the approval this, all that. Sometimes you just kind of say, look, I really feel led to do this. I'm going to move forward and see what happens. And you just trust as you go.

And not to be blind about it and foolish, but sometimes we have to just be faithful and trust in God and see. All right? Mm-hmm. All right. All right, thank you.

All right, big man, OK? All right. Thank you, God bless. OK, God bless. Hey, folks, if you want to give me a call, all you've got to do is dial 8772072276. And if you want, you can email me, info at And I just put in there, you can put in the subject line, either radio comment or radio question.

We don't have anybody waiting right now, so I think what I'm going to do is get to some of the radio questions. Let's see. Josh says, I know James says that God doesn't tempt. I'm wondering if God not only allows trials, but causes, sends trials to believers. Yeah, I would say he definitely would send a trial upon a believer. Let's say, for example, there's a believer who is backsliding.

He's in sin. Would God send a trial to him? Absolutely. Would he want to discipline him?

Of course. What about somebody who's walking in faith with the Lord? Well, we see from Job, for example, that he was walking faithfully, and he got quite a trial. And yet, what it was was God said to the devil, you may do these things. So God is permitting it and even ordaining it, but there's another hand involved in the actual instrumentation of it. So God doesn't tempt anybody to sin, but he certainly can test people. So the temptation to sin and a trial are not the same thing.

So we've got to be careful. Make sure we understand that, all right? All right. That's actually going to make a good question.

You know, I think it would make a good question, like what would be the difference between God tempting and sending a trial? I like that. All right.

Radio questions, what's feedback? And a big Facebook link. That's not going to help me.

And let's try. Someone told me today that having a nativity scene in my home at Christmas is a violation of the Second Commandment. Is this true in your opinion?

No, it's not true. And the reason is, let's go to the Second Commandment, and I'll show you something here. All right, so it's Exodus 20. And you shall not make for yourself an idol or a likeness of what is heaven above, or on earth beneath, or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God. All right, so what we have here is the admonition of God not to make anything that is to be used in any form of worship and adoration. We're not to make any idols and things like that. Now, sometimes people will say, well, no, no, no, Matt, it's a nativity scene, for example, would be an idol because it's used in your Christmastime, and you see the baby Jesus there, and the camels, and the people, and all that nativity scene.

And so that's idolatry. Well, are you using it for worship? No. Is it put in a high place of adoration that you use next to Bible study? Do you kneel before it?

Of course not. All right, so let's be consistent, and they say, well, you can't even have an image of the Lord your God. OK, but notice what it says. Or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on earth beneath or in the water under the earth. I'd say, have you ever taken a picture of your loved ones? Is that a likeness of what's in heaven on the earth in the water, is it?

Or how about if you've taken a picture of a beautiful sunset, or your cat, your dog, or whatever? So people say, well, the idol, it only means idol, and the other stuff is OK. Well, why is it OK if they're going to be so strict and say, you shall not make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what's in heaven and earth? If they're not to have a nativity scene, they're not to have any likeness at all of anything in their home like that that would be an image.

And then, what do you do if you watch TV? And then they have undersea fish pictures. So those images, well, they're images. But what it says here, and notice this, you shall not make for yourself. Now, this is different than God saying, build a tabernacle, that's different than God saying, build the arc of the covenant and lift up the serpent. Where God commands these things, that's different than you shall not make for yourself an idol. So if you're making for yourself anything that is to be used in worship, adoration, that is sinful.

And that's what the Bible is forbidding. All right. Hey, we'll be right back after these messages.

We have wide open lines. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276.

Friday, last week, we had a really good after show. And I talked to a black Hebrew Israelite guy for about two hours. And people are telling me that, because we recorded it, they're telling me that they watched it several times, that they really enjoyed the apologetics and the defense of the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity of Christ that I gave to this guy.

And it was good. Now, he was supposed to give me some information, email stuff. And I've looked, and I haven't seen it, at info at, supposed to email me some of the things that he said in certain verses in the Old Testament that he's trying to use to support the Hebrew Israelite position. And so I was looking for that. If he's listening, hey, I want you to send me that stuff. All right. Now, you know what?

We have nobody waiting right now. So I think what I'm going to do is go through something that I talked about a couple of days ago, or maybe it was yesterday, the 45 goals of communism. This is on my website,, the 45 goals of communism. This was first published in March of 1961 in The Naked Communist. These goals were read into the congressional record by Albert S. Hurlong on January 10, 1963. They are the stated means by which the communist Russia would overthrow the United States. So I've got a few underlined, quite a few.

I'm not going to read all of these. But number four, for example, permit free trade between all nations regardless of communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not the items could be used for war. Capture one or both of the political parties of the US. Well, definitely the Democratic Party's captured.

And I'd say the Republican Party's definitely on its way. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

That has absolutely happened. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American communist cell was told to, quote, eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, close quote, substituting shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms. Another one, eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, and radio and TV.

This is obviously happening in our schools with the crap that they're teaching our children. Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as normal, natural, and healthy. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with social religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize a need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a religious crutch. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of separation of church and state. Let's see, discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. Discredit the American founding fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the common man. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the big picture. Give more emphasis to Russian history since the communists took over.

I'll read a few more here. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture, education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health cleansing, et cetera. Centralize government control over education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics. This is discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

There you go. Infiltrate and gain control of big businesses. That's happening.

They're woke. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from police to social agencies with a BLM stupidity and defund the police. And then they're actually trying to do that, social agencies instead of the police.

It's just ridiculous. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents.

Attribute prejudices, mental blocks, and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. Let's see. I'll do three more of these.

This is number 42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition, that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a united force to solve economic, political, or social problems. The commies are winning. Internationalize the Panama Canal, which has happened, and the last one I'm reading here. Repeal the Connolly Reservation so the US cannot prevent the world court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the world court jurisdiction over domestic problems.

Give the world court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike. And that's not even all of them. And this is the goals of the Communist Party. Are they doing this in the United States? Of course they are. They've got a Biden crime family. I'm starting to call it now the crime government. I'm going to get myself in trouble by saying this, but is our government legitimate? Well, in one sense, yes.

In another sense, no. The Constitution and the Preamble talk about throwing off the bonds of oppressors. When you have governments that open up the borders so you can be invaded, when they don't require language, when they don't require schools to teach the three Rs, but now they're indoctrination camps.

Come on, this is ridiculous. When the taxation becomes exorbitant, when it does the very things that weaken our security, like send our oil reserves to enemy countries like Biden has done. Did you know that, from what I've heard, more than one place, that we're running low on diesel. If diesel runs out in this country, our economy will collapse because everything runs on diesel, the trucks and things like this.

So what's happening in our country? It's a concerted effort to destroy us, Christians. Start praying. I know why. I teach depressing stuff, don't I? Sometimes, yeah, I do.

That's the nature of apologetics. It rises up under oppression and heresy to defend the truth, but it also has to identify the wickedness. Elijah from Philadelphia, welcome. You're on the air. Elijah. Hey, Matt.

Hey, Matt. So before I get to my question, I just wanted to say, I plan on becoming a libertarian because I don't trust Democrats or Republicans anymore. Good for you. Yeah, I'm a constitutionalist slash kind of libertarian.

I get to learn more about them, but I believe the Constitution, go with the Constitution. And I don't trust the Democrats at all. I think they're commie sympathizers, leftist wackos.

I think the Republicans are just their laptops, so. Yeah. OK, so my question will be this. So I was listening to R.N.

Law and Matt DeLaHancee lately, and R.N. Law said, he said that if God existed, he would not judge and damn us over what we merely believe. Instead, he would judge us on whether we were good or not, you know, the good works that we did, you know, while we were alive. So and so basically, he just thinks that damning us over what we believe is just a moral and a wrong. So it's like and it's similar with Matt DeLaHancee, because he said that he said that if if God would damn him over blessing the Holy Spirit, then he said that he would rightfully take his place in hell, knowing that he is morally superior to that God, because that God would damn him over over something, over something, over basically disrespecting God, you know. So what are your thoughts on what they said? Both of them couldn't in this topic could not argue their way out of a wet paper bag if it was full of holes with a chain pulling them out, pointing the way with neon oil on the bag, slipping out, they still couldn't get out. OK, I'll tell you why.

All right. And if they want to hear me say that, that's fine. And then we can have a discussion on this issue, what God ought to do. Who in the heck are they to say what God ought to do? What universal standard of morality do they have by which they can say God himself is obligated to follow? If they're atheists and if they're materialists, then how do they produce and justify the universals that are required to justify any moral system or moral code?

If they want to say it's what people say or it's common sense, whatever, then they're back into subjectivism. They need to have a universal moral ought that they can then quantify and justify. And then we have to get the issue of justified true belief in their epistemological criteria. And so they will not be able to do any of this. So to say that God damns us for what we believe is wrong, who are they to say what's right and wrong?

And he should judge us under goodness? Who are they to say this? They're just giving their opinions.

They're entitled to their opinions, but their opinions don't matter any more than salamander squat. Hey, we'll be right back after these messages. OK, so please hold on, Elijah. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everyone, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, 877-207-2276. All right, let's get back on with Elijah. Hey, Elijah, welcome. Hey, I got a question for you.

Yep, I'm still here. I got a question for you. Do you have like a camel's hair jacket you wear at all? No. OK, just curious. Because Elijah had one in the Bible. OK, so I had to really stretch for that one.

I had a little dead air time, but that worked OK. People are smiling, go shaking their head. OK, buddy. So yeah, so I've debated Matt Dillahunty.

And I've had an encounter with Aaron Raw. And when it comes to anything moral, what is called the, OK, back up. There's a problem called the is-ought problem. Is, what is. How do you get from what is to what ought to be, called the is-ought problem. So it is the case that I own my home.

You ought not break into it. So how does the ought derive out of the is, out of the state of affairs? Well, in order to connect them, you have to have a set of principles that draws a connection.

So because I own my own home, and I have the right to defend my property, you ought not break into it. So that's an expanded explanation. But then we could ask, well, why is that true? And this is one of the problems that philosophy, secular philosophy, has.

It's called a justified true belief. How do you justify, in any ultimate sense, any moral ought? The Christian does not have this problem. Because the Christian would say that God is the ultimate standard of all truth and reveals morality out of his character. There's nothing greater or equal to him. Therefore, he's the ultimate standard. And he's universal, so he has a universal moral standard. And he tells us what we ought to do. So the Christian has a way of justifying this issue of the is, ought. But an atheist does not. So if they say that if God were real, that he would not judge us on what we believe, well, then they're saying then that if God is, then this is what he ought not do. OK.

So between the is and the ought, demonstrate why that condition of is leads necessarily to that condition of ought. And they can't do it. Because no matter what they say, if I was talking to them, I'd just wait and just yawn and believe. I play backgammon on my computer a lot. I just play backgammon water talk and give me an explanation. Just OK, we're done.

OK, ready? And then just pay attention a little bit with one frontal lobe tied behind my back. And just say, OK, so they ought to do it because that's what society wants. And why is society what it wants?

Why is it true? Go back to backgammon. And then go on and what will that say? Because it reduces harm. And then say, OK, and why is reducing harm? That's what ought to be done.

And go back to playing backgammon some more. Because it's like this, OK? Because they don't have any way to bridge the is and ought. They have no right to say what God ought to do or what anybody ought to do.

They don't have that right. OK? Can I just give an example for you, and then you can respond?

Sure. OK, so I can't remember who it was. It was one of them. But anyway, one of them had said, OK, so imagine that I'm a father, and my son disrespects me. And so I decide to kill my son just because he disrespects me. Is that morally right? So like they're just giving the example of God damning someone for disrespecting the Holy Spirit or blessing the Holy Spirit or something like that. Yeah, and so what they're doing is the same thing. They're saying, well, they don't like this. They're just going to appeal to emotion.

Well, if a son disrespects me, is it OK to kill him? Well, why is it yes, or why is it no? They're going to say, well, God shouldn't do this. Their position is God, which no one should do that. I'd say, why?

I've had many, many, many discussions with atheists. And we talk about the issue of murder, for example. And I'll say, can any of you tell me why murder is wrong? Why is it wrong? Because you don't like it? Because society says so? If you say you don't like it, that's just subjectivism, and it has no bearing on obligation to me. If you say society says so, that's just argumentum ad populum. That means the majority believes it, so therefore it's true. What if the majority believes that all atheists should die?

Is that what you want? Of course not. So they have a hidden agenda in there that it should not be done. It's called begging the question. They're assuming their morality is correct. They assume that they know what is right.

And you've just got to find it. What are you saying? Are you saying it shouldn't be done? That's right, it should not. Are you saying it's OK to do that, Matt? I didn't say it was or wasn't. You're the one who said it should not be done. Well, this is what your Bible said.

Well, hold on. If you're going to do an external or an internal critique, then that's a whole other thing. An external critique is like this, an external critique. The Bible says atheists are wrong, so therefore atheists are wrong. So atheism is now judged by a criteria outside of its own worldview, outside of its own perspective. And so the Bible said it's wrong, so therefore it's wrong.

Well, it happens to be true, but atheism is wrong. So they'll say, well, that's an external critique. You can't do that. So I can, but can I justify it? And that's a whole other issue.

Generally, what we want to do is do what's called an internal critique. When an atheist comes to me and says, God did this. He killed them, and he had them killed. And I said, yeah. OK, and they'll say, well, that's wrong to do. I said, well, show me where that's wrong to do.

The Bible says, thou shalt not kill. I said, no, it doesn't. I said, it does. No, it doesn't. Yes, it does. 10 Commandments.

No, it doesn't. It says, thou shalt not murder. God kills.

He never murders. Because murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. And so if God is executing somebody, it's because it's lawful.

Go ahead. Yeah, I have a question about that, what you just said. So why was it lawful for God to order the Israelites to kill the Canaanites and the other tribes in the Bible?

I know that some people like to say that it's because God didn't want them to get corrupted by their paganism and all that stuff. But yeah. So it's like, OK, OK. Well, it's right because it is the revealed action of God and his decree. And so whatever God does by definition is correct. This is an internal critique issue at this point. And I could say that to an atheist who might raise that critique.

There's other responses I'll give here. But I'd say, this is what the Bible teaches. And so God has that right. Now, if you were to adopt that position from an internal critique, we're consistent. If you, however, say to an external critique, and you say he shouldn't do it because it's something outside the Bible, then I'm going to ask of you that you justify why the external critique is superior to the one in the scriptures.

And they're not going to be able to do that. So they're going to want to say in the internal critique, this is why they're going to quote Exodus 20, don't kill, but really don't murder. Well, he's not murdering. OK, so why did God have the Israelites wipe them out?

Well, for one thing, he's executing judgment on them. They had been warned for decades and decades and decades to stop the paganism that they were involved with. And one of the things they did was have Moloch, which was a half-human, half-bull idol with a belly. And I have it on my website, a picture drawn, copied out of a book written in the 1700s. And the belly had an open furnace in it. And then the top part of it had arms, human arms, and then a bull's head.

And the arms were out in front of them. And they would light the fire inside the belly of the statue, and it would get so red hot they'd take their newborn babies and put them on the arms and sacrifice their babies. And so they would scream, and the babies would writhe and fall into the fire. And then they would play music and loud drum beats and stuff like that to drown out the screams of the infants. And so God let them have a great amount of time to repent, and then whenever God decided it was OK, we've had enough, go kill them all. Wipe them out. And people say, well, God shouldn't do that.

Really? So then are you saying then it's OK for the people to continue to do these things and do it with the babies, not to mention the other stuff that they were doing, and slavery and beating slaves? I mean, beating, not like they'll say, well, the Bible talks about that. No, it's a different kind of thing.

And it's a whole other topic, but I'll say, this is what you want to continue. And so the Messiah is the most important person in history, and we want the Messiah to be born so that he can die for our sins. And if Israel becomes corrupted by the paganism of its neighboring countries, then the risk of destroying the messianic line would be there, and we would have no Messiah, and everybody would be damned. So God dealt with them accordingly. Now, if an atheist doesn't like it, I say, you show me a better universal moral system, where everybody ought to obey it and provide the terminus against which the moral standards are measured or revealed. And they cannot.

That's why Aaron Raw and Matt Dillahunty, they can't win this one. It's not possible. OK. All right.

In the moment in the front, though, there's this other new atheist that is on the rise. He, I can't remember his name, but his YouTube channel name is MindShift. And I think I just sent you his video. I'm not sure if you got the email or not, but if you want me to send it again, it's about maybe, say that again? Yeah, please do.

OK. So it's about maybe a half hour video of him talking about this whole list. I think it's about maybe 20 different topics about why he thinks that God is a hypocrite in the Bible, because he tells us to do one thing, but he does the same thing. And so I would like, if you could maybe, I guess, write an article on karma about that video or maybe do a response video, that would be great, because some of the stuff I could give an answer for, like one of his things he had a problem with was with God wiping out the whole world with a flood. But I have an answer for that, because I studied the angelic interpretation and all that stuff.

But there's a lot of other stuff in there that I didn't know that was in the Bible that he brought up, and I don't have an objection to. So I would like you to help me out with that. Sure.

Yeah, I'm looking at the page right now. And let's see if he's got anything about karma. Nothing.

How about Matt Slick? See if he's tackled anything I've said. And it looks like nothing also. So yeah, maybe I can check things out. Here's the thing. He's on Patreon. I'm sure he's getting a lot of money. A lot of money for people who are, oh, that's interesting. 153 videos. That's how many fish were caught in the net in John 21. 153. Interesting.

So yeah, I can check him out. Oh, dude, there's the music. There's the music, man. We got to go. Sorry about that. Call back, OK? Call back, all right? Email me about it, all right? And give me your phone number.

Maybe I'll call you. We'll figure out what you're talking about specifically. Take a look, OK? All right, man? All right, thank you, man. All right, buddy. God bless. All right, you too. Hey, we're out of time. Shara, sorry about that. God bless everybody. Another program powered by the Truth Network.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-10-20 09:28:48 / 2023-10-20 09:48:41 / 20

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