Matt Slick Live

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

The Truth Network Podcast is produced by the Truth Network Podcast is produced by the Truth Network Podcast. Ephraim is the second born, and Manasseh is the first born. But you go to Jeremiah 31.9, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first born. Also in 1 Samuel 17, 12-14, David was the son of the Ephraithite of Bethlehem and Judah, whose name was Jesse, and he had eight sons. David was the youngest. In Psalm 89, 22-27, I found David my servant with my holy oil and anointed him. I shall also make him my first born, the highest of the king of the earth. So what the Jehovah's Witnesses fail to do is basically study their Bible. They kind of fail a lot at stuff like that, you know. And so they need to believe what the word of God says, and the first born is a title of preeminence that can be transferred.

Joseph, Jacob and Esau, is another example, and he sold his birthright. So that's all that's going on, and that's what it means, but see, it's easy, okay. Yeah, you know, actually, of course, I accidentally found a CARM article you wrote on this back in 2008, so I guess I'll go ahead and read it now. So yeah, that's interesting. People don't realize, I mean, I'm smiling when I say it, you know, what I study, I write. Like right now, the past few days, I've been studying church fathers and idols and imagery and veneration, because I'm going to be doing some videos, and so I'm just studying them. And then when I'm done, you know, I write articles, and that's what I do. And so there's lots of stuff, and let's see, for example, I released an article recently, it was a date yesterday, a day before, on the word study, on the word until, all right.

So in Matthew 125, for example, Joseph kept her a virgin, kept Mary a virgin until Jesus was born. Well, they'll say, hey, the word until can mean different things in different places, and over in so-and-so place, it means continued status, and I say you're right, it does, over there. And then I tell them, that doesn't work because, anyway, long story short, I just did two or three days of research on a single word, and then released the article today. And so people call me on the radio, well, what do they say about the word until?

Well, believe it or not, it's in reference to terminal conditioning, 40% of the 100 and, how many occurrences, how many occurrences is it, total, 145, that's right. The continual is 20%, location deals 13%, so I can go on and on, but I do this homework, and people go, so what about it? Well, I've written on it, that's what the website's for, you know, so it's there, the whole section on Joseph's, yeah, it's okay. Yeah, I actually joined the school, wonderful resource, I really appreciate the hard work that you put into it, so I'll be busy for a while.

Yeah, there's a lot of hard work in those schools, I should talk about them, point people to them, but yep, uh-huh, that's right, so. All right, well, talk to you tomorrow, my friend, God bless you. All right, man, God bless, all right. Hey, folks, if you want to give me a call, it's easy, all you got to do is dial 877-207-2276, let's get to LP from Florida. LP, welcome, you're on the air. Hey, what's up, Matt Slick? Oh, you know, just doing radio, that's what's up, just hanging in there.

Yeah, I hear you. So my question is, I just recently heard about the Ethiopian Bible, and that it had 88 books in it. I just wanted to know if you read those extra books, and if you knew anything about them, if you can explain them, and if it's even worth the read. Not really, they're not, it has a book of Enoch, Baruch, Ezra, some stuff, and so they're just additional books that the Ethiopian church says is true and are legit. These are written before the closing of the canon, or before Jesus was around.

So let me go to some scriptures here, alright, oh come on, I just hit a button, it reloads. So what I'm going to do is go to, let's see, it's Luke, okay, Luke 11, is it 51, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, it's Jesus who was killed between the altar. So the blood of Abel is Genesis, the blood of Zechariah's chronicles, in the, at the time of Christ, the arrangement of the Old Testament books was different than the arrangement that we have. They're the same books, they're the same ones, same text, but they combine like kings and chronicles and things like that, and so their total book was 22, but they're the same number of words as our Old Testament, they're just, the books are arranged a little bit differently and broken up. Okay, so, in their arrangement, the first book was Genesis, and the last book was chronicles. So it's like saying from Genesis to chronicles, it's like us saying from Genesis to Malachi. We go, oh, I get what you're saying, the first and last book of the Bible, of the Old Testament, that's the idea. So Jesus says from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah. So that's one thing, and the reason this is important is because he doesn't include the apocryphal books in that. You could also go to Luke 24, 44. These are my words, which I spoke, Jesus speaking again, when I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things that were written about me and the law of Moses, the prophets and the Psalms, would be fulfilled. That was understood to be the arrangement of those 22 books, not the apocryphal books. So there, Christ is saying that things were written about him in the law of the prophets and the Psalms. And there's problems with the apocryphal books. Let me get to it, Apocrypha, problems, and so, excuse me, there are errors in the Apocrypha.

Let's see, I can go through and read a couple of those. In Tobit, it condones the use of magic, and it'll say, take out the entrails of the fish, lay up his heart and his gall, the liver for thee, for these are necessary for useful medicines. When he had done so, he put flesh and salted it, et cetera. And Tobias the angel said to him, beseech you, tell me what remedies are these good for? And he said, for a little piece of the heart, put it on coals, and the smoke would drive away evil spirits. And then in Tobit 4.11, for alms delivers from all sin and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness, alms is deliverance giving money. And in 2 Maccabees 12.43, and making a gathering, he sent 12,000 drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead. Well, that's not biblical.

It says in Judas 1.5, says Nebuchadnezzar, in the twelfth year of his reign Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Assyrians, who reigned Nineveh, well he wasn't, he calls Nebuchadnezzar the king of Assyria, when he was the king of the Babylonians. It goes on. Okay, so, those books are not scripture, all right? All right, thank you. You're welcome. God bless, buddy.

Okay. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned, we'll be right back. All right, everybody, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, the number is 8772072276, let's get to Andrew from Maryland.

Andrew, welcome, you're on the air. Hey, man, thanks a lot, how are you doing today, sir? Doing all right, hanging in there, been doing some exciting research in the church fathers to witness to EO and RC later, so for me that's a good day.

That's how I'm doing. So, did you already figure out the Jeremiah 31 New Covenant stuff, or you putting a pause on that? Yeah, well, I kind of let it slide a little, because I get interested in so many different things, and so many needs, and so I could go into the Jeremiah 31 thing, though, because we guys, we talked about it a while back, but it was interesting. Oh, no, no, I'm excited to hear what you have to say about it, you know, when you've touched up on it a little bit, you know, I like good stuff.

Hey, I just had a quick question about Romans 5.13, a federal headship, all that good stuff, it was specifically on how it connects to verse 14, obviously this all comes together in verse 18, you know, how Adam represents his people and Christ represents his, and I just kind of had a question about, for until the law sin was in the world, so saying that sin was in the world even prior to the giving of the Torah, you know, it's stating fact, but sin is not imputed when there is no law, I just kind of had like a little bit of a, maybe it's a New American standard, I was just having trouble understanding this aspect of it, if you want I can give a shot at it, and you can correct me, or you can just kind of roll with it. Hey, you're the guest, what do you want to do? You pick. Well, it's your show, so. Well, that's okay, you're not a heretic, so you want to go through, you've got some ideas, let's see, I can mock you mercilessly afterwards, or you can mock me, either one. You have my permission to mock me mercilessly.

Okay, well, you know, my wife does it, so it's okay, I guess I'm used to it too. Yeah, yeah, I mean, you've got to take it out on somebody, yeah, yeah. But I was thinking that, so Paul is kind of giving like a check here, but less than any one thinks that mankind is innocent, and yet also receives the penalty of Adam, that he dies, let me correct you by saying sin is not imputed when there is no law, he's reaffirming what Romans 3.23 says, which is, you know, we are all guilty, and we all die, I don't know why, I've suddenly lost the verse off the top of my head, but you know, that kind of thing, so he's reaffirming that, in case you were ever thinking that man is innocent, you know, he was guilty because the law written on his heart, is that kind of generally what it's about? Well, it could be, we're guilty for that reason also, but we're also guilty because, Adam represented us, we're also guilty because our ignorance doesn't excuse us from sin, that's in 2 Corinthians 4.4, but, so let's look at it in context, verse 12, therefore just as through one man's sin entered into the world, so remember, Adam and Eve were in the garden, Eve sinned first, but sin entered the world through Adam, not through her.

And so death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned. And verse 14, for until the law, sin is in the world, was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law, this is a very important verse, because it's also reflected I think in Romans 6.15, let me see if I got that right or not, no it's not in, 4.15, I need to find it, if I can't find it I'll just stop looking around, yeah, that's right, 4.15, for the law brings about wrath, but when there is no law, also there also is no violation. If the law's not there, there isn't any sin. That's what that thing is, he's saying in 4.15, well next chapter in 5.13, until the law sin was in the world. So it's saying up until that time, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Well the law was given to Adam, don't eat of the fruit, Genesis 2.17, he ate of the fruit and he represented us, 1 Corinthians 15.22, and then we were made sinners by his sin, that's Romans 5.19, I can go into that if you want, so that's what that is.

So sin was made real by Adam breaking the law of God, and other laws that came in. So that's what's going on, until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law, so if the law is canceled, there is no sin. And I tie this in with a very important verse in theology, biblical theology, Colossians 2.14, where Jesus, having canceled out the certificate of debt, consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us, he has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. So he canceled out the certificate of debt. The words, the three words in English, certificate of debt, is the single Greek word, kerografon, and it's a composition of two words, ker and grafei, handwriting of ordinance is what the King James says, which is fine.

But what is the certificate of debt? If it's the law, it consists of decrees against us, if the law is then canceled by Christ at the cross, then nobody can go to hell because sin is not imputed, when there is no law, it's done, it's dead. But if it's the sin debt that was canceled at the cross, then there's other ramifications that go along with that. So the issue here, back to Romans 5.13, for until the law sin was in the world but sin is not imputed when there is no law, deals with the issue of federal headship, and you're right because it hints, because the next verse, nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses. He's talking about before the law formally was given. But death reigned from Adam on because there was a law, there was more than one law. And that law was begun in Genesis 2.17, don't eat of the tree, the knowledge of good and evil, if you do eat it, you're going to die.

And it was other laws that were given. And so it says, so nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who was a type of him who was to come. So there are people who hadn't sinned the same way as Adam did in direct rebellion, but they're guilty nonetheless. Because the... Intentionality, right?

Intentionality is part of it. Because if we intentionally do something that's wrong, even though we think it's wrong but it's not wrong, then we've sinned. We've gone against our conscience. However, ignorance of the sin doesn't excuse us. You go to 1 Corinthians 4, for I am conscious of nothing against myself.

Paul says, I don't know anything I've done wrong, yet I am not by this acquitted. My ignorance doesn't mean I'm okay. That's what he's saying there.

So there's a lot there, there's a good theology here that's skimming over the surface a little bit. Okay? Yeah. Absolutely. No, I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Okay. I'll just have to review this later and think a little bit more deeply about it, but I think you've answered my question.

I'm just trying to catch up on it, you know? Yeah. No problem. No problem. All right.

We have a good night, Matt. Okay. Go ahead.

Go ahead. No, no. Just curious.

You got it. No, no. There's other stuff going on while you're studying it and other thoughts that may have come in. You know, just curious. Oh, well, no, no problem at all.

So I'm doing a Bible study, you know, I felt led to do that for a group of co-workers and, you know, they're relatively young Christians, and one of the things that we discussed last night was Colossians 2.14. I brought that up intentionally, and... Hold on, hold on, hold on. We've got a break.

I want to hear what you have to say. We've got a break, so hold on. Of course. Get back to you after the break, okay? Of course. Hey, folks, be right back after these messages.

I want to know what he did. It sounds interesting. Well, 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. If you want to give me a call, the number is 877-207-2276, Andrew. You still there, buddy?

Yes, sir, absolutely. And I'm sorry for running off on you. You know, initially, I just didn't want to take up too much of your time. That's all.

Well, you've got nobody else waiting, so it's no big deal. All right. Well, to answer your question, you know, if I'm doing a Bible study with a lot of coworkers, you know, like, you know, about four or five, and, you know, these are relatively young Christians, and I want to be sure of what I'm talking about when I introduce concepts like federal headship and stuff like that, and this first specifically was just giving me some trouble behind the scenes, and I just wanted to make sure that I read some commentary, talked to you about it, you know, that kind of thing, so.

Okay. Just so you know, I have also on CARM, under the Bible section, I have Bible studies, and I've gone through the book of Romans, and I have all my notes there. The notes aren't super extensive.

They're mainly outline style for me to be able to, reminders for me to go in as I teach Bible studies to go through and stuff, do stuff like that, but there's some notes there, and I'm 13 and 14. You can take a look at it if you like, if not, no big deal, but it sounds to me like you did a good job. The thing we ought to understand about sin is that it's breaking the law of God, because without the law, there is no sin, Romans 5.13, it clearly tells us that, and also Romans 4.15, so people died because there is a law, and that's it, and that's as simple as that, and Paul's making that case, except he said the law is the Mosaic law, and that was revealed by God to Moses, but that doesn't mean that then people are going to die because of that, or they already were dying, so the law had to be extended beforehand in the first mention of such law. In Genesis 2.17, you're going to die. When you go to Colossians 2.14, you cancel the sin debt. There's logic problems for certain people with that verse. Like I said, if it's the karaografon certificate of debt is the law that we break, that's canceled. There's another problem, as I've already gone over a little bit, without the law, there is no sin, and this is kind of a half step to one side to go to Romans 7.4, where it says that if we have died with Christ, we've died to the law, which is an interesting concept, because you either die to the law in Christ, or you die with the law in Adam. So if you die with the law in Adam, it stays upon you, it'll judge you, but if you die to the law in Christ, and that's the symbolism that it's used for the Christians, then the law has no jurisdiction over us, and we're okay. And so Colossians 2.14 is like this, where it says he canceled the certificate of debt, and the two main understandings we can have of that is it's the law that was canceled, but if he canceled it, then we have no sin, clearly, that's what Romans 4.15, Romans 5.13 would say. So it makes more sense to say, no, he canceled the sin debt. And the reason I say it's a sin debt is because we know that sin is breaking the law of God, 1 John 3.4. And also, in the prayer, our Father, heart, and heaven, hallowed be thy name, in Matthew 6.12, Jesus says, and forgive us our debts, and the parallel in Luke 11.4, forgive us our sins. So Jesus is equating sin with legal debt. And on the cross, he bore our sin, 1 Peter 2.24, and he canceled the sin debt at the cross, but he could only have canceled it for certain people. And here's another thing that's really important.

A lot of people make this mistake, I'm getting a little preachy here, but this is important. When the high priest would go into the Holy of Holies, back in the Old Testament at times, to offer a propitiatory sacrifice, he'd do it on Yom Kippur, he would offer the sacrifice, he'd go behind the veil and sprinkle the blood on the mercy seat. This is a propitiation. It turned away the wrath of God. That's what a propitiatory sacrifice is, it's a sacrifice that removes wrath.

It doesn't make it potentially removed, depending on the action of somebody else. This is critical, absolutely critical, absolutely critical, because Jesus is our propitiatory sacrifice, 1 John 2.2 and 4.10. So as the high priest would go in and offer the sin sacrifice, the people of Israel had their sins propitiated. The wrath of God was removed from Israel for that year, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Well, Jesus is likewise our propitiatory sacrifice. It did not make the canceling of the syndent possible. It cancelled it.

There's a huge difference between making it possible and it being done. So sex opera operata in Latin, by the doing it is done, by the actual sacrifice of Christ, it was actually done. That means the wrath of God is actually removed in the sacrifice of Christ. Now the logic of this, well then for whom is it removed?

That's the question. Jesus says lay back down for the sheep, John 10.11 and John 10.26 he says you're not my sheep. It seems to be he laid his life down as sacrifice only for the sheep, for the people, not for the unbelievers, not for the goats.

It seems to be the case that way and it makes sense to say that. So when we understand the propitiatory sacrifice, we also have to understand this critical issue. A lot of Protestant churches, and it's happening in the false churches of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, but a lot of Protestant churches teach an error. And I exaggerate, and you probably heard me say this over the radio, but it's a good teaching point here, is that a lot of people are taught that the sacrifice of Christ is applied to you only when you decide to believe. That that's when it becomes effective to you. When you do something, the sacrifice of Christ becomes effective, becomes powerful. And that's a false teaching.

It's taught in so many churches. The efficiency and the efficacy, that means the, the efficacy means it's actually accomplished and finished and done. The efficacy of his sacrifice is not dependent on our acceptance, it's dependent on the shed blood and death of Christ.

That's it. And what we do when we believe is we are then justified. We have a righteousness that's not our own, Philippians 3, 9, that's granted to us by faith, the faith that God grants to us itself, Philippians 1, 29. So he removes the wrath of God in the sacrifice for the elect. And then the elect, when God grants that they believe, Philippians 1, 29, and grants that they come to Christ, John 6, 55, that's when they're justified. This is the only way I can make sense of all the Scriptures, is to go with that arrangement and explanation.

Okay? Well, that was a beautiful explanation. I agree with you wholeheartedly, and it's also interesting in John chapter 10, you know, the reason why you don't believe me is because you're not my sheep. What Jesus is not saying is, you're not my sheep because you're not believing. It's not the same statement. The causation is different. That's right. That's right.

I totally agree with you. And to follow along in that sentiment, it says, Jesus says in John 6, 37, I'm going to read it to you. I've got it memorized, but I'll make sure. John 6, 37, it says, all that the Father gives me will come to me. It does not say all who come to me, the Father, will then give them to you. The theology that I teach people, it really shakes them up, and I show scripture after scripture after scripture after scripture. I've debated this, taught this, gone through this hundreds of times over the years and have learned how to make it fit together. I go, oh, I get it now, because if something didn't fit, I had to change my theology. Well, how does that work? I've got to figure this out.

I've got to figure this out. I didn't make the verses fit into what I wanted. I made what I wanted fit into the verses.

I mean, it's submitted to God's word. Now, I had to change what I want and change what I think and what I feel. And that's the way to do it. All right?

Absolutely. Well, thank you very much for your time and explaining all that. Thank you.

You're welcome. Good question. Great question, man. Keep up the good work teaching those guys. All right? Good for you, buddy. All right. Have a good night, sir.

You too, man. God bless. Yeah, that's theology, and a lot of people do not like this theology.

They don't like it. Well, okay then. Let's get to Robert from Ohio. Robert, welcome. You're on the air. Hello. Hello. How you doing, man? What's up? Can you hear me? Yes, I can. I hear you fine. Great.

Sometimes people can't hear me on this phone very well, so I ask. I've always had a hard feeling with this particular story in the Bible, and it's the story where Christ goes to the temple, and he sees the merchants. I'm not sure of the actual terminology on all of it, and he becomes angry, and apparently throws the tables around, and he's not happy, just to put it that way, as far as I know.

But the story around that has always been conflicting to me, because I don't understand. That particular story, was Christ mad, or was he proving a point, was it a story, was it something that... We've got to break. We've got to break. ... he was human?

I mean, what is the math on a bag? We've got to break, so hold on. We'll get back to it. Okay. Yes, he was angry.

Yes, he was. Anger is not automatically... We'll be right back, and I'll show you about that in the Bible. Hey, folks, please stay tuned. We'll be right back talking about this important issue. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276.

Here's Matt Slick. All right, everybody. Welcome back to the show. Let's get back on with Robert. All right, Robert, you still there? Yes, I am. All right.

Now, so you want to know, I want to review this just a little bit. So the issue in Matthew 21 of Jesus cleansing the temple, driving away the people, he made a whip of cords, and a cord of whips, a whip of cords, that's right, overturned the temple tables, got upset with him, and they ran. Was he angry? Sure.

He was angry. Sure. Okay. You know, a lot of times things were stories that were, or parables, that sort of thing in Scripture. So sometimes I'm not always sure if I know the difference, sometimes hearing that, and you know, hearing stories, or reading.

So I was just wondering, is there more than just that story in that particular Scripture, is there other things in the Bible that refer to that, or speak of that, or that it may have happened, or what to do in that particular situation? Well, you're asking different questions, so I'm not sure what to do. So the account occurs in different gospels, Matthew 21, Luke 19, and John 21, Mark 11, and Luke 19. Okay.

Okay. And then John 2 talks about making a whip and things like that. So yeah, all four gospels talked about it, and it means Jesus got mad, got upset, he was angry.

People think, well, Jesus would never get angry. Are they all fairly the same, sir? Well, yeah. Yeah.

Okay. I mean, in Matthew 21, 12, he entered the temple, drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables and the money changers in the seats of those who were selling doves. All right, so now let me go to, let's see, Mark 11, 15. They came to Jerusalem, he entered the temple, began to drive out those who were buying and selling in the temple, overturned the tables and seats of those who were selling the doves.

Now I'll go to Luke. And Luke 19, 45, Jesus entered the temple, began to drive out those who were selling. And then we go to the last one, let's go to John 2, 13, the Passover of the Jews went to Jerusalem, he found the temple, those who were selling oxen, sheep and doves, and the money changers, the seat of their table, and he made his scourge of cords and drove them out of the temple with the sheep and the oxen.

Ooh, that means he was probably hitting everybody and everything. Yeah, I believe that's the one that I've remembered, that particular... John 2. Yeah.

Yeah. So let me ask you, does it bother you that Jesus would do something like that? Well, I guess it, I guess just, I've never looked at, you know, the way that I've understood it. I have a hard time with ever thinking of Jesus being mad. I mean, I know even when he was crucified, he still forgave people. Like it never shows that he's actually acting out and saying, stop doing this, don't, you know, and I understand why, but like that particular scripture, he was angry, but yet when you would think most men, women would be most angry is knowing that they're going to be, you know, put to death in such a horrible way.

Well, hold on, you're mixing all kinds of topics here, okay? What we know is, for example, God gets angry, and for example, 1 Chronicles 13, 10, the anger of the Lord burred against Uzzah, so he, God, struck him down because he put out his hand and the ark had touched. Or Psalm 106, 40, therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against his people and he abhorred his inheritance. And I can go on, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zephaniah, so God gets angry. He actually gets angry, and Jesus did too, and he got angry.

Now the Bible says, where is it, where is that verse? It says, be angry yet do not sin, let me find it, where does it say, I just had it a little bit ago, let me see if I can find it again. Be angry and do not sin, that is found in, I just had it, Ephesians 4.26, that's right. So this says, oh come on, I mistyped it, Ephesians 4.26, be angry and do not sin, do not let the sun go down in your anger, and that's Ephesians, so it's okay to be angry. You should be angry. You should be angry at unrighteousness, be angry at the issue of murder and the false teachings of cults. We should be upset about those things.

We should not just be passive. Jesus was upset with the false teachings and the false stuff, but what he was upset about in the temple, more specifically, was that they had turned the place of worship into a place of money, profit, and exchange. So the place of sacrifice had become a den of thieves, because the traditions of man had gradually worked so that they had justified doing what was sinful in the house of God and made merchandise of the kindness and the greatness of the work of God, the very place of the presence of God. This is righteous indignation, righteous anger that Jesus expressed, because those people who were supposed to know what they were doing were doing that which was false and working against God. It reminds me of the Catholic and East Orthodox churches, because they've turned the sacredness of God into commerce. What I mean by commerce is not by money, but that they've turned the grace of God into something that has to be earned by participation in ceremonies, so that the modern-day Pharisees they stand in the temple of God, the church of God, and they bring burdens and traditions upon people so that those people don't have direct access to God. They have to go through their priests and their ceremonies.

This is the way of false teachers. In the temple here, it's not an exact one-for-one, but there's similarity. In order to get to the priest, you had to buy the proper oxen, sheep, and does, because they had the authority to tell you what the good ones were.

They had the authority to decide what you could and could not do, what was acceptable. That's the same kind of thing that occurs on the EO and the RC. Okay.

Well, I guess the other thing is there are five, two questions real quick, and then I can bump off and listen to you afterwards, if you don't mind. They're quick. They're based on the same thing. Is there other scriptures where Jesus was mad about something and showed it? And the other thing is, in that time, and I know a lot of people read scripture or read, and they don't understand it as well because they don't know the law, the people, how things were done at that time. And they don't understand the history of the area, and that's me being one of them. So if a man at any time, during that time when Christ did that, maybe it was after 30, I'm sure he was, I'm not sure if his age was 30, 31, 32 years old, I imagine, but if anybody walked into Temple at that time and drove everybody out, threw stuff around, and I would imagine that people didn't know who, not everybody knew who he was when he did this, wouldn't they have gotten in trouble? I mean, wouldn't they have gotten in trouble with the law? The Romans generally would not mix with the Jews. They let them have their own ways to a certain level. So they would often stay out of it. We're not going to get into this fight. That's an in-house fight.

You guys take care of it, that kind of thing. But there were certain limits. So Jesus went into the Temple because it wasn't the place for the Romans. So he went into where the sacred people are supposed to be, the officials with their priesthood authority went.

Now just so you know, there's another place, and I'm going to go to Mark chapter 3. This is starting at verse 1, we're going to get to verse 5, I want you to see the context. He entered again into a synagogue, and a man was there whose hand was withered. They were watching him to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath so that they might accuse him. He said to the man with the withered hand, get up and come forward, and he said to them, is it lawful? This is the Jews who wanted to trick him and accuse him, right? He said to these people, these wicked people, is it lawful to do good or do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill? But they kept silent. Verse 5, after looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, he said to the man, stretch out your hand and stretch it out, and he was restored.

Jesus actually looked at them with anger. That's Mark 3-5. Okay. Okay, sir.

It was. Yeah, well, I appreciate it, and I just want to leave you with a comment that I, first time I've heard you, first time I called, and I appreciate, pardon me? Today is the first day you heard me?

Yes. Yes, I was working, and I was going through the channels, and I heard something you said earlier, and I just continued to listen and called, because I had that question, so I'd never heard your radio show before, so I apologize for that. No big deal.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I'm just letting you know, and this is, you know, I was born and raised a Catholic, and I'm just letting you know that. I don't know what church you tend or serve, I'm not sure, but I just wanted to let you know that. Okay, that's fine. I was born and raised a Catholic, and I do, I'm not, you know, angry about any of the stuff you said about that, but I understand it, though.

So we all have a place. I tell you what, I tell you what, I've written, I have an outline in Microsoft Word on Catholicism, an outline, 251 pages of material, I've been studying Catholicism for maybe 20 years, and I know a lot about it, and I'm going to tell you, I'm just going to say it flat out, you'll hear about it on the radio anyway when I'm talking, it's not Christian, it's a false church, it's a false religion, it has a false gospel. I probably could do some pretty decent debating with you, but that's not me, but it's a beautiful church to me, 57 years involved in it, and I'm not going to stand there saying that anybody else is, I don't even know about anybody else's faith and stuff like that, it's just, you know, hearing things and all that stuff, and I just, like I said, I'm good with it, I mean, I love people, my church, I have a great time there, I have my doubts, there's not a hundred people on the same church that all believe the same thing, Sal. Yeah, we have 15 seconds left on the show, so hold on, okay, really fast, call back tomorrow, I will list out some of the serious problems in the Catholic church from their own documents, you might be shocked to know what they actually teach, it's really bad.

You might be surprised what I know. Alright buddy, we've got to go though, there's the end of the show, God bless, okay, and thanks for listening. Yep, you too. Alright, bye. Hey folks, hope you enjoyed the show, it was great, I enjoyed doing radio, it was a lot of fun, may the Lord bless you, by his grace, we'll be back on air tomorrow, and we'll talk to you then, have a good one.