Matt Slick Live

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 karng.org. 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. Everybody, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick. Listen to Matt Slick live.

I think we're a little bit late there. I'm not sure, but that's okay. And if you want to give me a call, as usual, all you have to do is dial 877-207-2276. You can also email me info at karm.org, info at c-a-r-m-dot-o-r-g, and then we can talk. And if you have any questions about all kinds of stuff, all you have to do is just ask. And you can also email me info at karm.org, info at c-a-r-m-dot-o-r-g, and you can... And I've got something in my mind here, thinking. And you can... I'm sorry. I'm distracted by a thought.

By a thought. Maybe I'll talk about it. So if you want to email me, just put the subject line, radio comment, radio question.

And so there you go. We don't have anybody waiting right now, but I just wanted to say... I talked to... I spent some time talking to Stu, and I'm going to say hi to the people at his church. How are you doing?

I'm smiling and waving and stuff like that. And so anyway, hey, folks, look, this month, December, is the matching funds drive. And so if you want to keep this show on the air, we do need your support. Please consider supporting us. And I ask, Lord, that you put it on people's hearts to do that, that if they are getting fed here, that they would desire to support it.

Use his name. Now, so if you like what you hear, you know, and you like my style of teaching, which is direct to the point of non-compromising. Now, you know, I've talked to people about the show, and I know that I say things sometimes that are difficult for people.

And I know that I've gotten word, you know, we've got emails and stuff like that. I know I get a lot of praise, and I also get a lot of... Let's just say it's not praise. And that's okay. You know, that's all right. I don't mind. Actually, I don't mind. I don't mind when people offer criticism.

I have to listen to it, and not because I'm forced to, but because it's a smart thing to do, to listen to people's comments and criticisms and suggestions for improvement and things like that. And I welcome them. I do, honestly. They're tough sometimes, and sometimes they're true. You know, that's a good point. That's really on the mark.

I need to adjust that way. And I admit it. But I need to tell you that when you listen to me, a guy named Slick on the radio, that's the first warning, but at least, I want you to know this, that my heart is to serve my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, God in flesh, died on the cross, rose from the dead three days later. And that salvation is only through Jesus.

There's no other way to be saved from your sins, be delivered out of the eternal damnation, other than the person and work of Jesus Christ. And I'll continue to say things like Mormonism is not Christian, Jehovah's Witnesses not Christian, Islam is a false religion, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox both teach a false gospel, have a false priesthood, and have a false Mary. And I'll continue to say it.

The reason is because it's true. And I will continue to promote Reformed theology because I believe that's what the scriptures teach. And when people disagree with me and they call up, we just talk and that's fine. You know, I show them scriptures. And the question is whether or not it's in scripture.

So I will do that. And my views on eschatology, the end times, are a little bit different than the average bear. And at least I show scripture for it. And on baptism, which my view is a little bit off center from what most people teach about baptism. Now, it's not necessary for salvation, but you should get baptized. But I believe Jesus was sprinkled. And it is baptism.

And I believe that sprinkling, pouring, and immersion are all acceptable biblical modes. And that's my view, you know. And I hold to that.

And if you don't agree, that's okay. You know, call me. We can talk.

It's no big deal. And so I talk like this and I say things like this. And the reason I do is not because I'm trying to carry favor with anybody, give me favor.

I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in my obligation before my Lord and my Savior to teach the best of my ability to what I understand is the truth. Now, I'm not saying that everything I believe is correct. I believe what I believe because I think it's correct. And it's certainly possible that I'm wrong about some things.

And I'll flat out admit that. And one of my articles on predestination I wrote on another website, I wrote at the end, I'm absolutely convinced I'm right. But I'm also absolutely convinced I could be wrong. And this is how we should be. We should be at that place where we're convinced we're right.

And here are these reasons for it. However, it might be that we could make some mistakes in these areas. Now, I will go that far up to the essentials of the Christian faith, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, his physical resurrection, justification by faith. I won't compromise on those.

And if you disagree with those positions, you're just flat out wrong. That's it. And I'll die in those hills, you know, on who Jesus is and the Trinity and things like that. I will.

I'll die in those hills. And so aside from that, you know, that's it. So I'm just saying that you may not like everything I have to say, and that's fine. You know, that's fine.

But at least you'll know you're getting a man who is trying to be a man of integrity before Jesus and not going to compromise, but will speak the truth of the best of his ability of what the Word of God says. Now, why am I saying this? Because of some conversations recently, and that's fine. Good stuff.

Good conversations. And also just to encourage you that we do need your support. If you want me to stay on the air, please consider donating. And just so happens that the month of December is a matching funds drive. So if you're to donate $20, it becomes $40. And what we're asking is people to consider supporting us at $5 or $10 a month.

And that's what we want to do. So it's not much, you know. I mean, people, you know, they'll go out to get a cup of coffee, and they'll spend more than that sometimes. And yet they can't afford $5 or $10 a month for a ministry.

For someone who's been doing this since 1980, has a Masters of Divinity, has been involved in death threats and attack on the family, has written 4,000 articles, spent thousands and thousands of hours of studying, and 20 years of radio, written several books, and you can just get it. Here it is, you know. I hope it's worth $5 a month. And the reason I'm saying this and focusing on this a little bit more is because I do want you to consider supporting us. It isn't much. But if you want to, please just go to CARM.org forward slash donate.

C-A-R-M dot O-R-G forward slash donate. And that's what you're going to do. Okay, so Laura says, 4,000 articles?

I don't think so. Okay, Laura, how many do you think I've written? And Laura might know because she has a backdoor access to the CARM site. She helps a great deal. Laura's awesome. She really is.

She's a great woman and really helps out a lot. Oh, she thinks 6,000 or more. Well, I don't know. I'd go into the search in the articles in the dashboard, Laura, and it only has, I think, wait a second, I did that a little bit ago.

Let's see. All, it's 4,788 mine. That's what it says, it's 4,122. That's what the thing is with a dashboard on their post, so you can go check it out.

All the articles that with my name on them, 4,122. But I deleted the dictionaries too. That's true.

That is true. Can we delete it? We're doing SEO modification and I deleted 600 entries because they're super small and they take too much work to fix to get them to be stuff and people don't use them all that much. So I would say, you know, I probably put up 4,500 to 5,000 articles. That's what I would say, but we have about 4,122 under my name on the site right now, that's me, the author. So that's how many I've written at least in 29 years. And, oh man, sometimes what I do is I have people remote into my computer, I'll show them things. I'm teaching them something on the computer because I teach how to get the computer to do this or that because I used to teach computers. And I'll say, oh, by the way, here, check this out.

This is my folder I have on my computer on the KARM files. And I'll show them the stuff that I've written that's not even released yet. And there's another 2,000 articles, no joke.

I just haven't polished them and done stuff. So, you know, a lot of them are half done. But I got so much to do.

I got so much to do. I'm kind of whining. Is that whining? I hope it's not whining. I don't want to whine. I don't want to be a whiner or a whanny, you know.

I do a diaper and whanny. So anyway, we're just doing stuff. And I'm just letting you guys know that we could use that music. I'll just read the note from the producer. I guess I didn't hear it when it came on. I guess because I got messed up on our time and that does happen. All right.

Enough ramblation. Let's get to Sarah from Raleigh, North Carolina. Sarah, welcome you on the air. Hi, Matt.

Thanks for all you do. You've talked before about what Bible version you recommend. I just don't remember which one it was. So I was wondering if you could go over that.

Sure. What I recommend for you is the right one. What is the right one? The right one is one that meets your needs and your needs should be biblical fidelity.

You want a translation that gets to the original as much as possible and conveys the ideas. Now those Bibles, the NASB does that. NASB 95 and NASB 2020. New American Standard Bible. The ESV does that too.

And the NIV, not as much. So let me explain something. Let's just say zero to 10. Zero is, how about zero? Let's do this.

Let's do this way. I want to make sure this is right. Ten is, let's do 10 as the most literal translation you can get. And number one is a real broad paraphrase of what was going on. So that 10 is literal and one is, eh, it's really loosely stated. A paraphrase, you know, John.

So instead of saying walk the narrow path, it might say, walk the way that is what God wants you to do instead of walk the narrow path, you know? So that'd be a really loose translation. So the, there are paraphrases. The Phillips translation might be a four or a five or a six.

It's a paraphrase, but it's pretty good. Then we have the ESV, which I would say is an eight or a nine and the NSB, I'd say is a nine or a 10 as far as literalness goes. The NIV, I'd give a seven or an eight, that kind of a thing. King James, the King James, that's a tough one.

I'd say it's probably a seven, eight or nine in that range, but it has some problems with some antiquated phraseology and some not as old manuscripts, which are more accurate, but it's a, it's a good translation. So I recommend that people want to have Bibles get three of them, the NASB, either 95 or 2020, and the ESV, and maybe the King James. And the reason those three, NIV too, but with the King James, when you compare verses, you'll see differences.

A lot of times, and that might cause you to study, which is good. Now the ESV, I don't use the ESV. If someone gave me an ESV or an NASB, I'm going to put the ESV down and I'm just going to use the NASB. And the reason is because of Romans 5 18, which to me is one of the most critical verses in the Bible. And I believe that the NASB is the only one that gets it right, but really right. The legacy Bible does too, because it's an NASB, because it's the only one that gets an NASB variation.

And it's a critical thing on theology. And I think they made a mistake in the ESV and the NIV and stuff like that. So other than that, but I'm kind of narrow about stuff like that. A little uppity, you know? So just find what you need. All right. Okay. Okay.

Thank you. All right. Okay.

Well, there you go. All right. Thanks. Thank you. Have a good night. Okay. All right. Okay, so Laura says I've written 6,000, oh, 4,630 articles are published under my name.

4,630. I got issues. Hey folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Why don't you give me a call? 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. All right, everybody. Welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, we have wide open lines.

877-207-2276. So I did a little calculations for 29 years because CARM is 29 years old. That means I've been writing 160 articles a year.

160 a year, which is roughly two and a half, every two and a half days, writing an article. And that's also doing radio and annoying my wife. Because look, let me tell you, the latter takes a lot of time to really perfect it. So I don't know what led me to this. I was looking at something during the break. And I don't know, honestly, I just found this thing on Reddit.

What's your opinion on CARM's cut and paste material? And so I was reading some stuff and it said, first glance, it looks interesting. And then someone wrote, it's done there. There are a few fundamental points where you feel they're just totally incorrect. Are there?

And then people are answering questions. And one wrote, CARM is not a good resource. In their section on the Second Vatican Council, they literally fabricate quotes from conciliar documents that have false quotes describing Mary as God. They even provide a section and document, which if you check yourself, you'll see their version is wrong. Actually, what's interesting is that a lot of times the sources we quote, they will actually change their stuff after a few years. We've noticed that.

It will change what they do. And so we are always trying to recommend, or it's going to be always trying to accurately represent the opposing view. I need to go through and find what they say. And so I go to Vatican, I go to the various websites that will have stuff on Catholicism. And I read through and I go, here's a quote.

What's it saying in the context? And here we go. And I try and put it in. That doesn't mean every time I do it, I'm going to be right.

You know, cause I'm human, but it's never intentional. Nothing's fabricated like that person said. And that's another thing as I've met people online and who said things like that, and they'll say, you just fabricate quotes. I'll say, give me an example. Well, I can't do it right now. Well, okay. I get it. Can you hear? We'll be off for another hour. I'm talking to the chat room.

Can you do some research and find one? And they never do. What I've noticed a lot of times is, is that people just knee jerk react against the things that I say against the website. And this one person through karma under the bus, as well as gut questions, they're all there, just tick ear tickling thing. People have really interesting insights, let's just say, uh, to what we do. They will tell us and others what we do and what our motives are. I didn't know that they, our motives were such and such.

So they, they will do that. It's like this guy says, um, uh, those sites tickle the ears of those who believe as they do, not according to God's word. And that's a person who says that people are entitled, they're entitled to their opinions.

That's okay. But I have noticed this, uh, over the years as I've met individuals who are very critical, I'll just ask what church you go to. And invariably it's one of the churches I criticized like Catholicism, recent orthodoxy, and man, it's horrible. In fact, that reminds me last night, last night I was talking in a transsexual room. Uh, I was going in or listen to their arguments in a chat room and I, I just asked them and they know my name, but you know, I'm known on it and whatever.

I go in there and said, Matt slick, this and that. So I started asking questions and up, man, I didn't, I didn't accuse. I just said, what about this? And they would interrupt, try and dominate.

You couldn't ask anything. If people get so sensitive about the idols in their own hearts and they get very, very defensive and they also get very accusatory. A lot of times that is just how it works. Sometimes let's get to tie from Ohio. Hey, Ty, welcome. You're on the air, man. Hey, how's it going? Always going, just kind of rambling a little bit.

What do you got buddy? Good to get. Um, so you just talked about baptism, sprinkling and everything was good too. I'm new to the faith. I'm just starting to read my Bible.

I'm actually at seventh day in Venice. I believe a lot of the stuff they, they believe, I think a lot of the stuff they do is correct. Still trying to work some things out. Um, but baptism, as far as I understand, the only one in the Bible is full of immersion.

That's what people say. Okay. Now we need to talk about SDA, but let's do the baptism thing first.

Okay. And, um, uh, so the reason I hold to Jesus being so sensitive is that being sprinkled is because of, um, Matthew three 15, where Jesus is getting baptized. And he says this because to, to, uh, John the Baptist, he says permitted at this time for, in this way is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. Then you permitted him. So he says for us, notice he's talking about himself and John the Baptist to fulfill all righteousness.

This means the old Testament. You with me so far? Okay. Yep. I'm tracking. Okay. So, uh, I learned this from someone else and then I went through and studied it and expanded on it and verified.

So what was it that Jesus had to fulfill in the old Testament? I don't know if you've been to my website, karm.org. C-A-R-M dot O-R-G. Have you been there at all? I've poked around a little bit. Okay. All right. Well, there's an article I've written called why was Jesus baptized?

And you can look it up. And what I'm going to tell you is just written out there so you can verify everything. So long story short, um, Jesus had to fulfill the law and that's what he came to do. Fulfill the law. Matthew five 17 he's made under the law, Galatians four four. So what was it he had to do? Well, the chapters you find in the old Testament related to the issue of baptism, uh, are important because we also know, according to Hebrews six 20 and seven 25, that Jesus is a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.

So we know that's the case. It turns out when you go to the old Testament chapters of Leviticus eight numbers four and Exodus 29 and in those three chapters, you find some of the requirements of what a priest needed to do, a man needed to do to enter into the priesthood. And Jesus is a high priest.

So in those chapters you find you had to have a verbal blessing. This is my beloved son whom I'm well pleased anointed with oil. Well, that represents the Holy spirit and I show the verses for that. He had to be 30 years of age and Jesus was 30 and then he, uh, numbers eight, seven, he had to be sprinkled and that's what it says.

The man who enters into that priesthood work is to be sprinkled. Well, no, it's Hebrew in the old Testament. So yeah, Hebrews in the old Testament, Greek is in the new. So I have this fantastic Bible program called Logos and I've been using it for days.

And I know it really well and I can do searches. And so I searched the old Testament for every occurrence of the word water, every one of them and the word sprinkle. And I look for the word, uh, baptize in Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew. I could not find any place in the old Testament where, um, a man who enters into the priesthood, anything like that, could not find any place where he's immersed in water, could not find it. He had to be sprinkled. So, because I, I just hold the scripture, I say, well, and I believed you, this was sprinkled and I've not seen anybody refute it. And it's not like a, you know, a stupid challenge.

It's just like, I've not heard anybody find me a verse where it contradicts that. And so that's why I'm forced to believe that. Now hold on buddy, cause we've got to, we've got to break. Can you hold on buddy?

Uh, during the break? All right. Can you do that? Yeah. Yep. Go ahead. Okay.

All right. 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. All right, everyone.

Welcome back to the show. So as they reactivate Ty, I'll get back on with him and just reminding you that this is a matching funds drive month. So if you want to help us out, that would be great.

Just go to CARM.org, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G, I forward slash donate. And if you do $5 a month, the total for the year is what is counted. Not just at five.

So if you five times 12 at 60, that 60 is what does it for the whole year. All right. Ty, are you still there?

Yep, still here. All right. So, I mean, there's that. And I don't know if you want to make a comment on that, but the article's there with the documentation, and that's why I hold to it. And I can show you some other stuff if you're interested about baptism, if you're interested.

That deal? Yeah, I'll check it out. I'm all about gathering information right now. Okay. So I need to tell you something about the Seventh-day Adventist Church, though. Okay. And I'm trying to be very polite and very careful here. But the Seventh-day Adventist Church is considered by many people to be a non-Christian cult.

And the reason is, is because it seems to add works to salvation in what's called the investigative judgment, which is the idea that God investigates your works to see how you have been on that day, and that your salvation is dependent upon this. This is a very serious issue. Now, on the good side... So what I've gathered... Go ahead. Oh, sorry, go ahead. No, no, go ahead.

It's all right, go ahead. So what I've gathered so far is that it's not salvation by works, but faith without works is dead. That is, I believe, in Romans, or it's in there somewhere, right? Yeah, James, James 2, 24, talks about that. So this is what's really important doctrinally. There are groups who can use the similar phrases, but they don't mean it.

They mean the same thing. And so, for example, in the Roman Catholic Church, they'll say that you're saved by grace through faith alone in God. And works have to be part of what you do to show your faith, but the works don't save you.

And that's what they'll say, and that sounds good. But what actually is going on, for example, in paragraph 2068 of the Catholic Catechism, it says that you attain salvation through faith, baptism, and the observance of the commandments. But they'll say, when you observe the commandments, it's God's working in you. And so it's not really you doing it, it's God doing it. And so, therefore, it's by grace, because he's the one making you do the works. You do the works, and the works are necessary to be saved, to get saved, and to keep yourself saved, but it's really God who's doing it. So what they do is they deny, for example, Romans 4-5, that says to the one who does not work, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly. His faith is credited as righteousness. So just using the Catholics as an example, the Catholic doctrine sounds good, but when you take it apart, you realize, no, you're teaching a false doctrine. Now, if you're new in the faith, you don't know what to look for yet exactly.

And that's okay, I mean, you know, that's fine. But they teach that you, SDA teaches, the proper day of worship is Saturday. Some SDA teach that if you worship on Sunday, that's the mark of the beast. Is this what you're learning?

Just curious. Not that a Sunday worship is the mark of the beast, but that a law, they do believe that a law will come forward in the future, that may be the mark of the beast if it's a Sunday worship law. So let me show you something in scripture. You believe the word of God, right? The word of God is true.

Now check this out. Of course. This is good for you.

Good for you. This is what Romans 14 says. This is Paul the Apostle. Now I'm going to read from the beginning of the chapter, we're going to go to the verse five, now accept the one who's weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat. And the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats for God has accepted him. Verse four, who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls and he will stand and for the Lord is able to make him stand. Verse five, one person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day observes it for the Lord. Now, if we're supposed to keep the Sabbath on Saturday, why is it that Paul says one person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike, each person must be fully convinced in his own mind? You see, the SD, when I asked this... That would be free will.

Yes, that's free will. That would be free will, but in those passages they're also talking about Sabbath and Sabbaths, which are the Jewish holy days, and the feasts of, you know, the 65 feasts or whatever they have a year. So, to my understanding, they're saying, those verses read as in, you know, if this new Christian wants to still hold Passover, you know, let him. If that's what he wants to do and he feels like that's right in his heart, let him do that because he's still worshiping God in that manner. That's not what the verse says. That's not what it says.

It says one person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. You must be convinced in your own mind. Here's the question I ask SDA. I asked them this. Are we obligated, we should do worship on Saturday?

They say yes. Why does Paul say you have to be convinced in your own mind about what day to worship God on? If we're supposed to worship on Saturday, why doesn't he say so right here? Why does he speak to the contrary? And they can't answer it.

It's a question. I'll check it out, but I understand those verses to be the holidays, not the... Because the Sabbath has many different meanings, right? It's not just the Holy Sabbath.

It can, yes. That's where that is the Greek to English translation. I need to tell you something else, okay? You tell you something else.

When people get converted and then they get into a group and then what happens is psychologically they are very convinced the group is right and the group is right, the group is right. Now, this is something we have to be careful of. Now, I'm not going to say this right now. I've been doing this radio for 20 years.

I've been doing radio for a long time and I'll say it again. I will debate any SDA official on these topics of Saturday worship from scripture. I offer a formal challenge right now to the best representative on the Seventh-day Adventist theology. Let's do a formal debate.

Now, I'm serious. I just now did it. I've been doing this among other debate challenges for 20 years. I've not had a single SDA take me up on it, a single official.

In fact, I don't mean disrespectful, but for the bald guy, the slender guy, I don't know if he's still around, SDA representative, he does a lot of these amazing facts and things like that. Well, I met him at a religious broadcasting network and I challenged him politely, respectfully, to debate these issues. He didn't want to do it.

Now, here's the thing. Why is it that they don't want to debate? Why is it they don't want to have their views cross-examined publicly?

Why is it? Because the Bible says, give an answer to everyone who would ask you, 1 Peter 3.15, with gentleness and with respect, were to do that. I'm formally offering this debate challenge right now, but I don't expect anybody to take me up on it. Not just some guy, but an SDA pastor, for example, and treat him respectfully. But I can ask him that. And I do that. And for example, here's something else to think about. Now, this is what Paul the Apostle says in Colossians 2 16. Therefore, let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink, on respect to a festival, which is yearly, a new moon, which is monthly, or a Sabbath day, which is weekly. Things are a mere shadow. No one's to judge you regarding these. Now, here's a question. In the SDA church, are they teaching that you will be judged by those things? That's just a question you have to ask them.

When the scripture says, don't do it, are they doing it? That's just a question. But here's something else that the SDA teach. And I could show, if you don't mind staying on, I'll show you problems, humongous problems.

I'll show you even worse problems. Now, they teach, LNG White and the great controversy, page 422 and 485, our sins will ultimately be placed on Satan. That's a very dangerous bad doctrine. Jesus bore our sin in his body on the cross, 1 Peter 2 24. And Colossians 2 14 says he canceled the sin debt at the cross. But yet, LNG White says, to be placed on Satan? That's not in scripture. And that's what she taught.

That essentially is a denial of sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ. This is a serious thing. I'm definitely going to call back. I do have a Bible study I need to get into right now. So I listen to you a couple times a week, so I will be calling back in the future. I would be glad to call in.

Thanks for answering the questions. Okay, I'd be glad to call in on the phone, speaker phone number. I'd be glad to call in on the phone, speaker phone, and talk to them anytime you want.

You just email me. All right, sounds like a plan. All right, man. Talk to you later. Okay, God bless. Have a good night. Okay, you too.

Hey, there's so much more I could talk about, but I'll talk about annihilationism and its problems in SDA next. And 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. Everybody, welcome back to the show. I'm going to talk about annihilationism, soul sleep, and some serious problems with it. And I mean serious problems with it. So if you want to continue to listen, it might be interesting.

And this is related to the Seventh-day Adventist and some annihilationist groups and things like that. There's some serious problems, some serious issues. So, and by the way, we're just reminding you that, let me know what's in here.

That, let's see, sorry. This is a matching funds drive for this month. If you want to help us out, we'd really appreciate that.

All you got to do is go to karm.org forward slash donate, and all the information needs right there. So this is the kind of stuff I've studied over the years. And here's an example of how to deal with this thing called annihilationism or the issue of soul sleep more specifically. Now, soul sleep is something that the Seventh-day Adventists teach and some other groups do as well, Jehovah's Witnesses, for example. Why is this a problem?

Does it really make a difference? Because the soul sleep is generically stated to be that when you die, you cease to exist or more predominantly, when you die, you cease to have consciousness and activity. You're still around alive, but you're just not aware. And then the next time you're aware is when you are brought to life, that's in quotes life, in order to face judgment.

Now, the reason this is dangerous is very simple. And I have to teach a little bit of theology in order to explain it first. You see, the soul, what we are.

Now, let's just say, and here's some questions of dealing with this. Let's just say that a person dies in this soul sleep position. When I talk to the soul sleep advocates, I say, can you tell me what soul sleep is? And they'll say, well, the dead don't know anything, Ecclesiastes says. They quote the Old Testament a lot.

They don't know anything. They're waiting to wake up. So it's soul sleep.

I says, great. What is it though? What is soul sleep? Is it non-existence or is it existence with no conscious activity? How do they know what it is?

It's a serious question. But yet they'll tell me, oh, it's soul sleep. Well, what is soul sleep? Is there any activity going on in the soul, soul asleep?

If there's no activity, then how is the soul alive? And these are difficult questions to answer because you don't know. I mean, but these are questions that need to be asked. And this is important. I'll explain why it's so important.

But I ask them the basics. If the soul's asleep and it's not conscious, but isn't unconsciousness something that's for a physical body? Because Paul talked about being separate from the body and being awake in 2 Corinthians 12, verses two through four, whether in the body or out of the body, do not know. But 14 years ago, such a man was caught up in the third heaven and okay.

And he saw things and he heard things. And Jesus says in the account of Lazarus and a rich man in Luke 16, 19 through 32, they're both conscious after death. And I say, so the Bible seems to support consciousness after death, but you say no consciousness, even though consciousness is a physical thing. And, but now you're saying it's related to the soul, which is immaterial. Are you sure that, well, the Bible says the dead know nothing.

Yeah. And that's written in Ecclesiastes, which says that everything under the sun as they appear on the human level, but I quote them verses in the New Testament where they're conscious after death. And what they'll do inadvertently is they'll set scripture against scripture. Well, you've told me that, but over here it says this. So instead of looking at it to see what it says, they give me another verse that contradicts what it clearly says. And so they inadvertently set scripture against itself. And I point that out. I say, now you're setting scripture against itself. I said, that's not what we're supposed to do as Christians.

You know, it catches them, you know, I'm not trying to trap them, but I'm just saying, you see the problem here. We need to look at both in their context. We know Ecclesiastes, it says in the beginning, the first few verses, everything under the sun, which is the humanist perspective, what you see, you know, they don't know anything, you know, and they're dead, they don't sleep.

But in the new Testament, consciousness after death is clearly taught. So what do you do? Well, they tend to dismiss the ones that don't support their view.

This is typical of a lot of people, but nevertheless, back to soul sleep. So what is it? Well, they can't really tell me. And I ask them is that this is a critical question.

I'll explain why. Is there any activity of the soul, any energy being expended in the soul during the soul sleep position duration? Well, how are they going to answer that? I mean, it's either the case that there is or there's a case that there's not energy. Why am I asking that particular question?

Am I being just weird? No, I've got a strategy behind this. If there's no activity in the soul, none, then the soul has ceased to exist. And when the soul has ceased to exist, because there's nothing occurring in it, it's not alive anymore, then you don't have continuation. You have a problem with continuity at this point.

You have a problem with it. And I explain how continuity works. And I go through that and I explain it and say, do you see why it's a problem? They go, okay, well, yeah, there's activity.

And I say, okay, well, what's the activity then? They don't know. They don't know. So they are placing a whole bunch on just stuff they just do not know. They're unaware.

They don't know. Okay. Now, see, now, let's just say that when the soul is, the person dies, and because of the physical body, the dead, now the soul is necessarily in a state of sleep, unconsciousness. And it's somehow still alive, but it's not doing anything. Right?

And they'll say, okay. All right. So what you're saying is that's the case, right? Well, now what you're saying is that the physical body is what activates the soul.

Isn't it? Because when you say the body dies, then the soul goes into a state of inactivity. Then you're saying the soul's activity depends on physicalness.

Is that what you're saying? They have never thought of this kind of thing before. And I say, well, that's interesting because, and there's ramifications of this. I won't get into it, but something called property dualism and substance dualism. And there's problems with the property dualistic position.

The property dualistic position, which is what they're implying. I won't get into that right now. I don't have enough time. I'm not going to do too many digressions.

I go down it sometimes, that rabbit hole, and I show them problems. But let's just say that the soul doesn't exist, not exist, but is having no activity, but it's somehow still alive. I say, is that the position you want to work with? Yes. That they say, yes.

Okay. Now let's talk about Jesus. Jesus has two natures, a divine nature and a human nature.

Now this is why all this is so critical. A divine nature and a human nature in the one person. And we call this the communicate, excuse me, the, um, the hypostatic union. And the one person are two natures, a divine nature and a human nature.

It's called the hypostatic union. This is very well known theology centuries old. And Christians teach this. It's not me making up a term or getting some esoteric, hardly ever known term. This is very well known, very common.

Okay. So Jesus has two natures. He's both God and man.

We call it the hypostatic union. There's another doctrine called the communicatio idiomatum or the communication of the properties. What that is stating is that the divine nature has properties. The human nature has properties. See a bowling ball, for example, has properties. It has, uh, a shape, it has three holes. It has color. It has density.

It has size as volume. These are properties that exist because the bowling ball exists. A cat has certain properties. In fact, our, our, uh, our cat named flopper, let's just say one of his properties is a lack of coordination. Cats must be coordinated. Not this guy. Not this guy. And we love him because he's just so uncoordinated.

We call him flopper for a reason. And cats have whiskers. They have certain characteristics and are not, uh, fish characteristics.

Okay. There's differentiation, but no big deal. Well, the reason this is important is because the attributes of both natures of Christ, the divine and the human, the properties of both are ascribed to the single person. That means Jesus could say things like, I'm hungry or I'm thirsty. He's claiming the attributes of, of humanity, but he could also say, I will be with you always, even at the end of the earth or the father and I will come and make our abode in you, but he's claiming the attributes of divinity.

This is important to listen up. This is why it's so critical because it means the person of Christ consists of both natures and the properties of both natures. If the properties of the human nature cease to be communicated to him, then he's no longer Jesus. If soul sleep is true, that means the human nature of Jesus stopped being active during the death when he was before, after his crucifixion and before his resurrection. But if that's the case, that would mean then this human nature had no activity that would be, that means the attributes and the properties of human will, human thought, human desire, human characteristics ceased to be attributed to the person of Christ because there's no activity because they're just not there.

They're asleep. That then violates the very doctrine of who Christ is. And it then invalidates the person of Christ's, uh, hypostatic union and also, uh, potentially could invalidate the crucifixion potentially.

I could connect the dots, but won't do it now. So this is an important part, important issue because it also deals with the issue of continuity, which I'm going to get into now. So continuity means that you have something that exists and then it continues to exist. Here's a philosophical question. You've seen Star Trek and they have transporters and the person ceases to exist and then is recreated someplace else. Is it the same person or is it a recreation of the same person? Because with, if the first person on the enterprise ceases to exist because everything about him dissolves and is gone, is no more, he has no identity, there's nothing. He doesn't exist anymore. Then something is created in another place with exact memories and the whole thing. Now it goes on because he has exact memories.

He thinks he's, he's the original, but is he? This is a logical question. Let's say I have a chair and it's a specifically designed chair and you know, you take this chair and you destroy it and burn it destroys.

It's gone. Then you build a chair exactly identical to it. I mean exactly identical. Is it the same chair?

Well, it's same in its appearance, but it's not the same one as the first because the first one has ceased and without the continuity between the first and the second, we'd now say they're two separate chairs. The continuity issue is critical because if the person of Christ is to have continuity, then it must be consistently and continually said that the attributes of both natures are ascribed to him, but in soul sleep, it would mean that the attributes of this human nature ceased to be ascribed to the personhood. Therefore, the person of Christ ceases to be, and on his resurrection, it's a new person. The continuity issue is a serious challenge to soul sleep, a serious challenge to the issue of who Christ is. This is logic and these are the questions and the kind of things I ask of people, particularly when I do debates on these kinds of topics and they don't know what to do with it because in my opinion, they've not thought these things through.

They need to. This is why this is so serious and this is why soul sleep is so serious and so dangerous and the SDA and the Jehovah's Witnesses both teach those false doctrines of soul sleep and they're wrong because the Bible doesn't teach it and they're wrong because the danger of what it does to the person of Christ. All right. Oh, there's the music. Hey, I guess that's good timing. So may the Lord bless you and by his grace, we're back on there tomorrow. We hope that you'll continue to listen and if you enjoy the teaching, please consider supporting us. It's a matching funds drive this this month or the summer. Just go to karm.org forward slash donate. God bless everybody. Have a great evening. We have another program powered by the truth network.