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 karm .org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick Live for answers.

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, your listener, Matt Slick Live. I hope you're all going to have a good time. Oh, I forgot to do the rumble thing right. I messed up on that.

Okay, I'm going to see if I can fix that. And so there you go, and the Lord bless you for listening. I hope you're all going to have a good time, and by God's grace, we'll just have to see where I was going to go today.

All right.

Now, if you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877 -207 -2276. I want to hear from you. Give me a call, and you can also email me. That's easy to do. Just email me at, let's see, info at karm .org, info at karm .org.

And sorry about that, and all you got to do is put in the, let's see, put in the subject line, radio question or radio comment, and if you do that, it should work out. Mui Godo, Mui Godo, that's Advanced Theology.

All right, so there you go.

All right.

Now, I want to hear from you. Like I said, give me a call. So last night, last night, I was on doing some, I'm going to be right back, guys, in StreamYard. I said something. I'll be right back. And so I was working on a discussion I had with a bunch of, let's just say, people who are traditionally minded and who are very difficult to work with.

And me, I always enjoy this kind of stuff. I enjoy the discussions that I can have. I enjoy the repartee. So what I've noticed is that a lot of times, people, what they want to do is simply get the last word about everything and find any little bitty thing that they can in order to bolster their opinion or try and make me look bad.

And last night, I was having a discussion with a guy, and he was talking about the nature of free will. And I said, well, let's talk about this and that. And he kept just hammering on one thing. I said, look, dude, come on.

Look, there's five times I've answered your question. Why don't you just go on to your point that you have, the question you have? I want to know. And he wouldn't do it. And I said, come on. And it was interesting.

I get irritated. I said, no, come on, come on. Just get to your point. I want to know what your point is. And he finally started to and then said, but you're free. I just went on to something else. It does happen like that.

So it's not a big deal. It's just how it was, you know, it's just how it was. And so, oops, no, it's not that.

Look at that.

I got this thing going here. So if, well, anyway, I can do that. There we go. Oh, man, I see what I did wrong on that. There we go. Okay, so I'm getting rid of that. And then hopefully that'll work. And hopefully it'll be in there.

And there we go. So there we go.

All right.

I want to hear from you. Give me a call. We got one caller coming in. And hopefully, things will work out pretty quickly here. Let's see. If you want to give me a call, 877 -207 -2276. Give me a call.

You can also email me, like I said, at info at CARM .org. Info at CARM .org. And just, okay, there we go. So there we go.

All right.

And in the subject line, put in a radio comment, radio question.

All right.

Let's, well, we'll get to them in a second. Oh, I got to tell you that I will be in a debate in Ogden, Utah, at the end of the month. I'm going to give you the information where it's going to be. Now, to find the information, it's real easy to do.

All you have to do is go to CARM .org, C-A-R-M dot O-R-G, and do forward slash debates. And you'll find there, it says upcoming debates, and then there's a link, debate on 5 -31 -2024. You click on that link, and there it is.

So, it'll be on Friday, May 31st. It'll be from 4 to 6 p .m. in Ogden, Utah, at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, at the Wildcat Theater. So that's what's going to happen. It'll be there at Weber State.

And I've got to fix a typo there, so I've got that taken care of. And I put a map in there, three maps, so you can see it if you bring up your phone, but also with the address and everything like that.

And if you have questions, you want more information, please just email, or excuse me, you can call Russ East at 801 -645 -7433. I'll be debating a Mormon, David Robinson, and we'll be debating, does the Bible teach salvation by faith or by works?

And, of course, the true and correct answer is by faith, not by works. All false religions add works to salvation. And I'll say it, and I'll defend my position from Scripture, and I know the position that they're going to use.

I know how it works. I'm very familiar with their arguments. So there you go.

All right.

So let me know if it's working. Does Rumble work now? I don't think it's working now. I'll have to fix it during the break. We'll see what happens. Let's get to Christopher from North Carolina. Christopher, welcome.

You're on the air.

The Wrath of God, the Cross, and Isaiah 53

Hey, Matt. Awesome to ask another question from you. I was going to ask yesterday, but I had to get off because that lady you were talking to, like, took up the whole show. But, yeah, anyway, so I'll try to make this as concise as possible.

Kind of want to preface and explain. So since I became a believer, I always was taught, preached at all this about, you know, Jesus took upon himself the wrath of God for our sins. But recently I was actually sitting with a friend, and he's like, yeah, Scripture doesn't say that.

I'm like, wait, what do you mean? And, you know, he said he got this from M .T. Wright. I was like, okay. And I looked it up, and I can't find a Scripture that explicitly says Jesus took the wrath of God upon himself.

Now, my question to you is, I don't even know how to word this question. I guess, in viewing Scripture, do you believe that's what Scripture teaches? And if so, what Scriptures back up that doctrine?

Well, the first thing we have to do is define our terms. What does it mean to bear the wrath of God? Now, if we say wrath is damnation, then no, Jesus did not do that because he wasn't damned. If we say wrath is judgment upon sin, well, that's too abstract because sin isn't judged.

The sinner is judged. Sin is something a sinner does. So the wrath of God would be upon individuals. And if the wrath of God is such that they go to hell, then that's the judgment. That's the wrath. The Bible talks about that.

We're pointed not to wrath but salvation. And some people think that verse out of context says pre-tribulation and all that stuff. It's not. It's about damnation and stuff. Anyway, so if we say did some form of punishment come upon Christ for our sins, that's different.

Because the Bible says in Isaiah 53 that our griefs he himself bore and our sorrows he carried. That's Isaiah 53, verse 4. And then it says in verse 10, but the Lord was pleased to crush him, putting him to grief, if he would render himself as a guilt offering.

So what we see here is that there is a sense in which a certain kind of punishment did occur, and he bore some of that to some degree in his body. There was something, because the wages of sin is death, and he died.

So there's debate on this, and we really can't say to what extent it was. I don't like to say he bore the wrath of God. What do you mean by wrath? And that's the issue. And so I like to say let's find out.

You see what I'm saying?

Yeah, yeah, that makes sense, because I thought about even the Passover lamb and how it's not really highlighting punishment of the animal to put over the door for the angel of death to come through. It was more so highlighting the sacrificial blood that when the angel of death comes over, anybody who has the blood over their doorstep, the angel will pass over.

And the reason I bring that up is because it's a foreshadowing of the blood of Christ and we're covered by the blood of Christ. But I just thought it was interesting. I wanted your take on it, because I'm researching it right now, trying to go deeper into more theology, and I didn't know if you had any resources.

Or even if you've written about it, that would be awesome.

Yeah, I've written 6 ,000 articles, so I don't know if I have or haven't. So here's the thing. A lot of the heretical charismatic people, I believe in the charismatic gifts, but not like these wackos.

But they'll often say that Jesus bore the wrath of God. He went to hell, paid for the sins there in hell, was punished in hell. That's just false doctrine. That's false doctrine. So the issue is what occurred on the cross.

And I'm going to be very careful about this, because I don't know exactly how it went on the cross. And this is critical information here. I can tell you that Jesus bore our sin in his body on the cross, 1 Peter 2 .24.

I can tell you that he bore our grief, and he was struck and he was beaten for our iniquities, as Isaiah 53 says. And that's where we would have to look and say, well, to what extent did any punishment come to him based on us?

Because surely our griefs he himself bore and our sorrows he carried, Isaiah 53 .4. He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Well, that's just by the unbelievers. And then it goes on, but the Lord was pleased to crush him, putting him to grief if he would render himself as a guilt offering.

So that's Isaiah 53 .10. So that's where we would say, okay, what happened here? And then discuss it and be careful at the same time. You see what I'm saying?

Yeah.

Yeah, and one last thing to add to that, there's a scripture where it says he condemned sin in the flesh. Because I have come from a charismatic church. I don't claim charism. Charismatic, I do believe in the gifts of spirit and stuff, whatever.

But anyway, that is one thing that they do teach, that he took upon the wrath of God, but he condemned sin in the flesh. I think, do you think it's possible that in Isaiah, it's talking about how, not exalting the fact that God is punishing Jesus, but kind of giving an explanation of how it would go about the shedding of Jesus' blood?

Not saying like, hey, this is it. If that makes sense. I don't know if my question made sense or not.

Well, yeah, it's difficult for you to ask because it's difficult to understand because the scriptures aren't super clear. And so I get it. And you're doing fine. But I would just say that when it says in Isaiah 53 .10 that, and you were quoting he condemned sin in the flesh, that's Romans 8 .3, but when it talks about this in Isaiah 53 .10, that's where it is.

He's an offering. And it looks like the offering stands in the place of judgment. And that there's a judgment that comes upon the animal that was killed, which is the way it is in his death, which is a type of judgment that's upon.

I would say there's a type of judgment upon Christ who became sin, 2 Corinthians 5 .21, and bore sin, 1 Peter 2 .24, and then death and wrath, not obviously wrath, but death occurred to him as he was beaten and stricken.

So was that from God? No, it was from man. So this is just not easy.

Okay?

It's just not easy.

Yeah, awesome.

Thanks.

All right, buddy.

Appreciate the info.

All right, man.

God bless.

Okay, hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned.

It's Matt Slick Live! Taking your calls at 877 -207 -2276. Here's Matt Slick.

God’s Moral Judgment and the Death of Infants in the Old Testament

All right, everybody, welcome back to the show. I think I got the Rumble thing going. I rushed through it during the break, so refresh and do all your stuff. All right, let's get on the air with John from Georgia.

John, welcome. You're on the air.

Hey, Matt, how are you doing today?

Oh, doing okay. Hanging in there, man, hanging in there. A little bit more hanging than in there, but I'm hanging in there.

Good to hear it, good to hear it. Hey, I'll keep it brief as I can. I am an atheist.

You're an atheist, you said? I'm sorry, you broke up a little. You said you're an atheist?

My question is kind of twofold for you. Speaking of morality, if you use the whole, you know, like as an atheist, I go to the Bible and I say God is evil and unjust. There's a lot of Christians that say, well, what do you mean by evil?

As an atheist, you have no outside standard to judge him. And if you do hold to that, my standard is I'm judging God by his own standard. So I guess the question is how do you?

We're breaking up again.

What?

You're in and then you're completely out.

Okay.

So what was your question?

Okay.

Sorry, hold on one second. Okay, can you hear me?

Yes, that's better.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Basically, my question is when God commands these things in the Old Testament, like he tells Israel to kill children and babies and slavery and all kinds of stuff that atheists would say is wrong, and y 'all might come back and say, well, y 'all have no outside standard to judge God.

I'm saying I'm judging him by his own standard. In the God worldview, Christian worldview, is it wrong to kill babies? And if the answer is yes, then how do you square that God commanded that evil?

It's not wrong for God to do it because the Bible says in Christian theology, if you want to do what's called an internal critique, within Christian theology, Adam sinned. He represented everybody. And then because of his representation, all people inherited a sin nature.

They are therefore guilty. This is Romans 5 .18, Romans 5 .19, 1 Corinthians 15 .22. So all children are by nature under the wrath of God. God's mercy is that he sends people to heaven. So in the Christian economy, to execute babies is simply to execute judgment upon them.

There's nothing wrong with it for what God is doing. He's the lawgiver. And so therefore, they're not, well, let's just say they have a sin nature. And then we have the imputation of Adam sin is called original sin.

So that's why we'd say, no, it's not a problem. Furthermore, when he orders the killing of entire nations, it's not like five minutes. They got a five-minute warning. Okay, guys, go kill them. Israelites will kill everybody just because.

It's never like that. God sends people into the nation like the Canaanites and warns them. You stop this. You stop it. You stop what you're doing. What they were doing was all kinds of fornication, all kinds of adultery, sexual immorality, all kinds of stuff.

And they were taking newborn babies, and they were burning them alive at the altar of Moloch. And the babies would scream, and they would raise their music to drown out the babies screaming. This went on for many, many, many, many years.

And God told them, stop. He sent people in, stop, stop. They wouldn't do it. So God said to Israel, go wipe them all out. In the wiping of them all out, it's a judgment upon them. And as far as the children go, if we were to make the case that babies go to heaven when they die, then by delivering them into his hand, he's saving them, and they go to eternal salvation.

If they had grown up to become evil, full evil, they would probably go to hell. So you see, from the Christian perspective, we have answers for this kind of stuff.

Okay?

Yeah.

I appreciate the response. And if I can, let's give one more response to your response. Do you think there's any kind of contradictory for God to command, this commandment about kill, but then turn around and like you just said, he commanded his people to kill babies?

Or would you say, well, God can override himself?

No, he's not overriding anything. The Bible actually says don't, the issue is murder. Murder is the unlawful taking of life. So if someone breaks into your home and is going to hurt someone you love or a wife, you know, whatever, and you, in the defense of your family, unfortunately kill somebody, you're innocent.

It's okay. We don't want that to happen, of course, but you're not wrong for that. If, however, you were to just shoot somebody in the head because you didn't like their haircut, well, now that's a problem, and then you'll be judged.

So all murder is killing, but not all killing is murder. So when God says don't murder, he's saying there are certain rules you have for self-defense, but you can't just go in and arbitrarily kill somebody.

And that's what he's saying to people. So when he executes people, they've all sinned against him, and therefore he has the right to execute them. It can never be murder for God because under his own law, he judges the sinner, and he judges them and executes them, and it's just righteousness.

But for us, it doesn't apply because the sins aren't against us, so we have to go through the legal system that God has ordained through governments and things like that.

Okay?

Okay, so you're saying when God's not murdering anybody because we're all guilty before him, even infants?

Even infants. This is out of Romans 5 .19. Through the transgression of the one, the many were made sinners. Now, whether you like the doctrine or not isn't the issue now. It's called federal headship.

If the male represents the descendants, Adam represented mankind. When he fell, we fell. When he sinned, his sin became imputed to us in our sin nature. And so therefore, we're all guilty, and he can execute whom he desires.

Hey, I appreciate the response. I mean, and hey, I'd love to show it. This is just an example of how two opposite people can have a great conversation. Hey, man, thank you. You have a good day, man.

Well, can you hold on a sec so I can try and set you up and get you to see something? If you want. If not, that's okay. Oh, I guess we lost him. All right, because I had what I thought was going to go in.

That's okay. Hey, let's get to Elijah from Pennsylvania. Welcome. You are on the air. Go ahead.

Michael the Archangel, Jude 1:9, and the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2

Hey, Matt.

So I have a question today because this is kind of difficult for me to try to figure out myself. So I know that Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists both believe that Michael and Jesus are the Archangel Michael.

But the difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists on this issue is that the Jehovah's Witnesses take this way too far. And in the Seventh-day Adventist, they just keep it in the area that Michael is just, you know, the name for the angel of the Lord, which is the incarnate Christ.

But yesterday I was watching a debate on standing for truth. And somebody wrote a super chat in saying that saying that Michael and Jesus are the same person. And I understand what he's getting us from.

And if you could answer these scriptures for me, that would be great. So in Jude 1 9, it says Michael was debating with Satan over the body of Moses. And this is Michael said, the Lord rebuked you. And I know many scholars think it's referring to the assumption of Moses.

But some people actually think it's referring to Zechariah 3, verses 1 and 2. And in verse 1, it says it's the angel of the Lord. But in verse 2, it identifies the angel of the Lord as the Lord himself.

And the Lord says, the Lord rebukes you.

Hold on. You're giving me a lot of stuff here from different verses quickly. So plus we have a break. So what I want you to do after the break is just give me a question. And we'll see if we can tackle it.

Okay.

We'll look at the verses we got to. Okay, buddy.

Okay.

Hey, folks. Be right back after these messages. We have two open lines. So if you want to give me a call, 877 -207 -2276.

It's Matt Slick live. Taking your calls at 877 -207 -2276. Here's Matt Slick.

All right, everybody. Welcome back. We're having some fun in the chat there at Rumble. So I'm going to do the newsletter tonight for Karm. And I was saying, hey, how many are signed up for it? And what would you like to see in it?

And I'm thinking about adding some stuff into the newsletter, like theological terms and summations of articles and things like that. And I put in there, I said, oh, I could add pictures of my wife washing dishes and making me sandwiches while I relax with my feet up.

And so anyway, having fun. Laura wrote back, yeah, with a knife in her hand. So anyway, we're just having fun. All right, brick sandwiches, says Joanne. All right, if you want to participate in our stupid chat, and a lot of times a good chat too, just go to rumble .com forward slash Matt Slick live.

And you can join us there. And also, I just want to remind you that I'll be in a debate on Friday, the last Monday, last Monday, last Friday of this month. I'll be down in Ogden, Utah, which is about an hour north of, 40 minutes north or so of Salt Lake City.

And I'll be at Weber State University at the Wildcat Theater from 4 to 6 p .m. is when the debate's scheduled. I wish it was a little bit later so people could get there for, you know, a lot of people are just getting off work.

But that's just what it is. And if you have any questions or comments, you want a phone number and all the information, all you have to do is go to CARM .org forward slash debates, D-E-B-A-T-E-S, debates.

And then you'll see upcoming debates. And just click that link. Information's right there. And everything you need will be right there. All right, let's get back on with Elijah from Pennsylvania.

Welcome.

Okay, buddy, go for it.

Michael, Daniel 12, and the Identity of the Restrainer

Yeah, so my question between June 1 -9 and Zechariah 3 -1 -2. First question is, do you believe that Jude is referring to Zechariah 3 here? And my second question is, if you believe that, okay.

Because it says there in Zechariah 3, the Lord showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord and the Satan standing at his right hand accused him. The Lord said to Satan, the Lord rebuke you, Satan.

Okay, so that's that. But in Jude 1 -9 or Jude 9,. But Michael the archangel when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses,. Different topics.

Okay?

Oh, okay, okay. Okay, I see. Right, right. Because Moses is mentioned in this chapter. Right, right.

Right, okay. So I can talk about the Michael and Jesus relationship in SDA, also with the JWs and what the differences are. And I can tell you what, the JW one can't work. The SDA one can, but they have things wrong.

Okay, so it's up to you. What do you want?

I'm more interested in tackling the SDA one because I already know that the JW one is very easy to dismantle.

Yeah, it is. The SDAs, what they're going to say, for those who don't know, is that Michael the archangel is the pre-incarnate Christ. They're not saying that Michael is a created angel being. They're saying it's just the form of Christ in the Old Testament and that's how he's appearing.

So that's what their view is. So technically, it doesn't make them heretics on that doctrine because they're still holding to the pre-incarnate nature of Christ. Generally, they go to Daniel 12 .1. Now, at that time, Michael, the great prince, who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise.

There will be a time of distress such as never occurred since it was a nation until that time that your people and everyone who's found written in the book will be rescued. This is generally the verse that they go to.

And I'm surprised because it doesn't say anything about Jesus being Michael the archangel. So, in that sense, the angel just being messenger. So I ask them, show me from Scripture where that is the case.

And they can never show it. It's just something they conclude and just say, but it's not there. It's just not there.

Okay?

Yeah.

Yeah, yeah. I understand that. And I know there's different interpretations when it comes to Michael and Daniel 12 .1. One of the interpretations that I'm leaning towards is this. I know you have a different interpretation because you're all Millennialists, but my current interpretation is that Daniel 12 .1 is a prophecy about Revelation 12 when Michael will rise up and fight Satan in the heavenly realm, and then he'll cast him down.

And then once he casts him down, after that, that's the rise of the Antichrist. That's my interpretation. But what do you think about that interpretation? And have you ever heard of that interpretation before?

So you're saying that Daniel 12 .2 is about the rise of the Antichrist. Is that what you're saying?

No, no. I'm saying that Daniel 12 .1 is referring to Revelation 12 .7 -9, and I believe that immediately after that, in Chapter 13 of Revelation, that's when the Antichrist arises, soon after that, because I believe that in 2 Thessalonians, when it says that the person is taken out of the way, I can't remember what it's called.

The one who restrains will be removed. Yeah, 2 Thessalonians 2, yes.

Yeah, so my interpretation of that that I share with others that I know that share this is that I believe that the person that's taken out of the way in that verse is not the Holy Spirit, but it's Michael, the archangel.

And I believe that once he gets taken out of the way, he goes to fight Satan and his angels and the heavenly leaders, and they kick him back down. And once Michael is out of the way, he can no longer restrain the Antichrist.

So after he's taken out of the way, that's why the Antichrist arises, because Michael is no longer restraining him.

Okay, I see what you're saying now. I wouldn't go that far, personally, but I see why you're saying it, because there's an issue of Michael wrestling with the devil, so to speak. So there's that there.

So I'm just working through this. So I wouldn't say what your view is of this article. I wouldn't say that. I'd have to think about it in light of that. I've always understood it to be the Holy Spirit that's removed.

Not removed, but steps aside. You know what restrains him now so that in his time he will be revealed as the Antichrist. That's 2 Thessalonians 2. Now, just to review, in Jude 9, it can't be pre-incarnate Christ, because it says, The Lord rebuke you.

And Jesus, the Lord, the pre-incarnate Christ, doesn't need to have a rebuke addressed by someone other than himself, because he's God. So I don't believe that that verse, I know you don't agree. I mean, you agree, but I'm not saying you do believe that Michael is the angel there.

But, yeah, I'd have to think about that. Is it within the realm of exegesis? Maybe. I think it's a possibility. I wouldn't go too far, because I think what you might be doing is, I'm just thinking out loud, is giving a little bit too much credit to an angel to battle Satan.

But on the other hand, if they're of the same class, let's say archangel, then it might be an equality issue. That might be an interesting thing to explore. But anyway, it's interesting. I haven't heard of that before, so that's different.

I'll have to think about it.

Yeah, it's an interpretation that I learned through a person named Ryan Pedersen. I'm not sure you ever heard of him before, but he's written a few books on angelology in the Bible. And Donnie from Standing for Truth, he also doesn't believe that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, but he doesn't believe that the Restrainer is Michael.

He believes that the Restrainer is the Antichrist. And I just found that strange. I saw him trying to explain his position, but I just don't agree that the Restrainer is the Antichrist. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Yeah, I agree with you, it wouldn't make sense. We'll talk to Donnie about that. But yeah, it's interesting. It's an interesting view, you know. I don't see, the first thing I'm thinking is, does it cause any heresy that is a serious problem?

And I don't see that. I think it's just, well, it could be Michael the archangel. I think it's within exegetical possibility. I have to look at some more stuff to see if it's consistent. But I don't see it, if that's what you believe.

Okay, I just, if I believe it's the Holy Spirit and you believe it's Michael, okay, neither one is heretical, against Scripture, the clear teaching. So I think it's interesting to think about that.

Okay?

Yeah, and plus, I don't see a problem with some Christians believing it's the Holy Spirit and some believing it's Michael because the text doesn't actually tell us who the Restrainer actually is, though.

Yeah, Michael's the warrior angel and Gabriel's the messenger angel,.

Just so you know.

So it would be consistent if it was Michael. All right, buddy, I've got to go. There's a break, all right?

Appreciate it.

All right, have a good one.

Okay, God bless. Hey, folks, we'll be right back after these messages, talking to Jan from North Carolina about the Bible and dinosaurs. We'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned.

Dinosaurs, the Flood, and the Book of Job

It's Matt Slick Live! Taking your calls at 877 -207 -2276. Here's Matt Slick.

All right, and welcome back to the show. Hey, let's get to Jan from North Carolina. Jan, welcome. You're on the air.

Hey, how are you? Can you hear me?