Matt Slick Live: July 29, 2024

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. Hey everybody, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick, your host on Matt Slick Live.

I hope you had a good weekend and maybe we'll talk about the Olympics a little bit and the blasphemy of opening ceremony and some other stuff and the decay of the world.

People are talking about it more and more. If you want to talk about it, it's easy, just give me a call at 877 -207 -2276.

Today's date is July 29th, 2024. Just to let you know,

I will not be live the entire week of the 4th, so I'll be on this week and I'm going to Arizona next week.

I'll be there on the 5th and 6th and 7th and 8th range. I've got some stuff

I'll be doing and I'll be down there. I'll be going into Phoenix and Flagstaff and that kind of stuff and maybe even up in Salt Lake a little bit.

But I'm taking a week of doing some stuff. And so, there you go, it kind of came up out of the blue.

It's all good. No big deal. All right. All right. Now, hey look, if you want to give me a call, 877 -207 -2276 and you can also give me an email.

Just send an email to info at karm .org. Info at karm .org.

And put in the subject line, radio comment, radio question, and either one of those and we can get to them on the air sometimes.

All right. Let's get to Juanita from Michigan. Welcome. You're on the air.

Hello, Matt. Hello. I'm the non -Trinitarian and I have a question.

I've been trying to figure out some reason why in John 1 -1, the third clause there, why the

Greek syntax was changed from, and God was the word to, and the word was

God. Why was that inverted like that? Probably because it's the nominative in English.

So let's see. So God was the word, right? In the literal

Greek. Let me check. Correct. There we go. Let's see.

Okay. So to it. No, not there. And God was the word. The word was with God and the word was

God. I think it's because in English it sounds better. Because both, it's called the nominative.

Both are the nominative, the word word and the word God. And so when it says, and God was the word, which

I have no problem with, that's fine. But they just translate it as the word was

God. Because I think the topic is the word was with God and then the word was

God. Because in the previous clause B, the, I guess it's called the predicate nominative,

I'm trying to remember, is the word. So they can't transfer that over to the third clause.

It is. Yeah. It's a predicate nominative. And I thought maybe you were going to.

Did you say the reason was it in English? It sounds better. Was that one of the reasons it was changed?

It might be, but I don't know. But I think it's because Logos in Prostantheon is what the, let's see, look at it.

And in Logos, in the beginning was the word Logos. And the

Logos, the word was actually, it's interesting, it was toward or with the

God. And God was the word. So I'd have to talk to a

Greek scholar to see why exactly. Right. Right. Yeah. I can't find,

I've been, I've been searching and I can't find any reason why. It seems like most people come up with this, what is it, the

Caldwell rule or something, which has nothing to do, you know, the, it's a predicate nominative sentence.

And so you don't have, could we kind of maybe do some research on that?

And maybe I could call you back next week and see what you've come up with. Because I can't find any reason other than bias in the translation, you know, that would have changed that.

Well, I won't be on your live next week. I'll be off, running out of state.

Right. Okay. So what do you do? Because like, it's really, go ahead. Let's just go with what the

Greek literally says, which it says, and God was the word. So the word was with God and God was the word.

So, so if the word is with God and God is the word, isn't that, don't you think it's interesting construction?

Yeah, it is. And I don't, it kind of lines up with, you know, the rest of scripture.

It just seems like being a non -Trinitarian, I'm suspicious of why it was inverted like that.

And I can find no reason why, other than, you know, other than there was bias there.

So when you figure that out, I see, I have some more information for you. The definite article, the, is before the word in both cases, but not in the word

God. So, uh, yeah. So we have, uh, in and the word was with God.

And then it says, and, uh, the word was God. That's why it's doing that because the word is a subject of both.

And so it's keeping the flow. Yeah. Well, and I, uh, if you,

I thought maybe you'd know, you know, the article doesn't establish the subject of the sentence in Greek, it's the word endings.

They both end in, uh, O S. So there it's a predicate nominative sentence.

The article has nothing to do with establishing the subject of the sentence.

You can have a subject, uh, without the noun there where the definite article takes the place of it and it's, uh, it's form can then, uh, take his place.

So it can happen. All right. But, uh, so it says the word halagas in prostantheon, uh, so it just says the word was with, uh, the

God. And then it changes, which is interesting. And the word was, uh, was

God. So the, this, the nominative of both cases with the definite article is there, but not with the word

God. So it's, that's gotta be why. So let me ask you, let me ask you, let's just say, let's just go back.

Let's just go with it as God was the word. So what, what would that do for you? Well, in, uh, in creation,

God spoke it, God, you know, and it's through die through the word that the worlds were created, not by the word through the world.

So it kind of gives you a more complete picture or an ad to the complete picture of what happened at creation.

God said there was a, there was a word, there was a, um, you know, what, what is the word, you know?

Uh, it's like the old verse 14, which is the word became flesh and the word became flesh.

So God, so God did not become flesh, the word, his word became flesh.

So what the word was before the incarnation, you know, Jesus didn't exist till he was born of Mary.

So there was something, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, focus, focus. The word became flesh. So the word was

God and God was the word. Okay. It's fine. And then the word became flesh. So you're saying the word, what is the word?

The word of God, it's got word of God, whatever, whatever that was.

We don't know. Right. We don't understand or having aren't privy to what the word was before the incarnation.

I mean, we can, is the word divine if it was, if God was the word, does that make the, no, the word wouldn't be defined.

I mean, what's your definition of divine? Uh, well, I mean, it depends on the word wasn't the

God. It says the word was with God and yet God was that word.

God was that word. Yeah. God. So how does the, how does the thing that is

God be with God? Uh, whatever, what, what, uh, form the word was before the incarnation.

I don't know. You don't know. God hasn't revealed to us, but no, no, that's not the issue.

It's not the form. It's with the word was with God and the word was

God or God was the word. So the thing is with God, but it is

God. How does that work when you, when you, um, like I say, we don't know what form, when you, when you speak, remember the old, uh, uh, uh, thing you're might be old enough to remember if a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?

No. You know what? That's yeah. The answer is no. And I, I agree with you.

Um, it, it's a vibration. A word is nothing more than a vibration. If there isn't an ear and all the little mechanisms to interpret the vibration, uh, you know, it, it, it doesn't make you're getting, okay,

I'm no, no. Right. Exactly. What do you think happened at that instant?

That nanosecond of creation, there was physics going on. Okay. When something, when time and space began, it was physics that happened.

Okay. So yeah, you're exactly right. We're getting down to physics. Okay. When God spoke, there was a vibration.

There was, there was, he spoke. Okay. And I, I, I, I, um, you can't have vibration without a, a medium.

Oh, well, you can, what makes you think there was no medium? God brought things into existence, uh, that there was nothing there.

Right. But it says in, it says in Genesis that the world was void and without form and the spirit moved upon the face of the waters.

So there was something here. I don't, don't ask me. That's after, that's after God created.

So let me, I've got some questions for you. I've got some questions for you. Who's your Savior? My Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ died for me and his precious blood.

Okay. So Jesus is your Savior and he's not God. Yeah. Jesus is the word of God made flesh.

How is Jesus, who's not God, how's he your Savior? How does that work?

That's, that was part of God's plan that, that, uh, when, when, when, when

Abraham went up, when Abraham was going up with his son, uh, to make the sacrifice and he was going to, you know, and the son said, where, where is the sacrifice?

And God will provide the sacrifice. God will provide the land. God provided, that's part of his story.

He provided the land, the sacrifice to do the job of salvation for me and you and everybody that might be listening.

You're not answering my question. You're, you're, you're going off. You're going off. I'm asking, you have a creature being your

Savior, right? A creature, just a complete creature, right? A created thing, right?

All right. Well, no, no, no. Jesus wasn't created. I never said Jesus was created.

Well, wait a minute. So the word, the word became flesh, but the word is not divine.

We're talking about Jesus. We got a break coming up. Jesus. Okay. Here, think about this.

Was the word eternal before the word became flesh? So we'll answer, see if you can answer that and we'll get back.

Okay, hold on. 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, and welcome back to the show. Just want to remind you that we have a website, CARM .org.

That's what funds this ministry and the radio show. If you are interested in checking it out,

CARM .org. It's almost 29 years old and 163 million visitors.

Thousands of articles. You can check it out. CARM .org. C -A -R -M dot

O -R -G. Let's get back to Juanita. Are you still there? I am.

Okay, so let me repeat the question here. So is the word, that's the word that was with God.

Was that word eternal before it became flesh? What it says, the previous clause was that in the beginning was the word.

It doesn't give me any indication that it was from eternity. No, I do not believe that.

And in addition to that, it tells me, Scripture tells me. The answer is no. Scripture tells me where the word came from.

Well, I'm just asking a simple question. I don't need an explanation. Yeah. Is it eternal? Is either the case is eternal or not?

It is not eternal. So if it's not eternal, then God created the word, right? No, no, no.

No, you can't say that. The word wasn't created. The word is God's only begotten, and it's not begotten from Mary at His birth.

Consider this. What Scripture says, and I think it's John. Jesus tells us that He came forth, ek.

Ek is the Greek word for out of, out of the interior of.

Jesus is the word of God, and He came forth out of.

Oh, so that He's divine. Out of the interior. No, no, that doesn't make Him divine.

Wait a minute. So if something comes out of the very nature of God, and it's not divine?

Well, it depends on what your definition of divine is. When you say divine, what, are angels divine?

God is divine. Okay. God alone is divine. We're not talking about angels. We're talking.

If you're going to. Okay. We're not talking about angels. We're talking about the word. Okay, but I wanted to.

I'm trying to get at your definition of divine. We've got to make sure we're talking on the same page.

If you're saying that only God is divine, then I would have to stick with my original statement.

No, Jesus is not divine. Okay, so God alone is divine, and the word proceeded out of God.

Right? Right. And was it alive before? Was it self -conscious before?

I said before, I don't know what form, if it was flesh.

We're not privy to the understanding of what the word was.

Was it conscious before it became incarnate or not conscious? I told you,

I have no idea. God has not shared with any of us what the word was before his incarnation.

Then, you've got to do some serious thinking here. If the word existed, then it has a nature.

Whatever that nature is. And if you say that the nature then became conscious, then you're saying its nature was became conscious.

That's a violation of continuity. You can't have that. You can't have non -consciousness exist and then become consciousness.

Because the properties emanate from the essence of something. So the initial essence, whatever it is, has to have consciousness or does not.

And if it does not, it never will. Because that's its nature. So if you say it wasn't conscious, it's a problem.

You see the problem? Because now you have the non -conscious becoming conscious. That's logically impossible.

It doesn't work. What was it before that you...

Well, I don't want to get off on a tangent. No, no, no. This is important. I'm trying to show you why you're wrong. Yes, yes.

I'm trying to show you why you're wrong. Let me give you an example. Let me give you an example of something. You have a bowling ball.

It's not conscious. Its properties are such that it doesn't have it and cannot have it.

And the bowling ball became flesh and dwelt among us. And we watched him and he talked and everything.

No. Whoa! Your analogy... I'm trying to show you something. You can't use... Juanita. I'm showing you your logic is flawed.

Your position is wrong. Your analogy is flawed. I'm trying to help you. I'm trying to show you by analogy the nature of a property that cannot change.

I'm just trying to give you an analogy because you're not thinking this through. I'm just using an analogy.

We're talking about God. Whatever the word was... We're talking about God. Yes. Whatever the word was, it was either the case that it was conscious, self -aware, or it was not the case.

If it was not the case and it became self -aware, then there's a change in its essence. That's a problem for you.

Well, we... If, on the other hand... Let me show you the problem with you. If, on the other hand, you say it was conscious, now you have a consciousness that comes out of God's divinity that preexisted the

Incarnation, and then I'm going to ask you, what was its nature, divine or not nature? If you say it's not divine, then how do you have a consciousness that exists outside of God, which means you're going to have to say it's created, but you said it wasn't created, so you've got a problem either way.

When Moses was going through the desert and the cloud by day and the fire by night, or when the voice spoke out of the burning bush, or all of these,

I don't know, some people call it God manifestations. You know, I don't know what those things were.

None of us knows how God manifests, how Jesus Christ is the bridge by its preexistence.

Juanita, you're ignoring the problem. Yes, Matt. I've raised the problem. I'm not. Yes, you are.

I'm not ignoring it. Yes, you are. I do this with atheists. No, you're trying to, you're trying to explain, you're trying to ask for an explanation of something that is still in the mirror darkly.

No, you don't understand. No, Juanita, that's not it. I'm trying to show you something. Listen for a second.

I'll show you. It's the case. It's not shared with us. Do you know? By faith we have to understand.

Juanita, you're getting pinned, and now you're trying to overtalk a lot. No. No. No.

You're not letting me talk. Logic says the word was either self -aware before it became flesh or it was not self -aware before it became flesh.

Is that correct? May I answer that without your interruption?

Which is it? Okay. Is it logical that something was created from nothing?

Can we logically explain anything about God? Can you logically tell me how the world was created?

Can you logically explain it to me, Matt? Juanita, Juanita, we're talking about the nature of the word.

It's either the case or the word. We're talking about God here. I'll answer you about the nature of the word if you'll logically tell me how the world was created.

It's fair. You're being foolish. You're not logical. No, I'm not being foolish. You're not thinking critically.

Yes, you are. Now you're not answering the question. You can't rely on logic. Juanita, you're doing the same thing the atheists do.

You do the same thing the atheists do when I pin them. You get stuck and you start demanding an answer to a question that's not related.

Okay, we're done. This is what happens. I had to drop her because she just won't talk now.

She won't listen. She won't have a dialogue. This is what happens a lot when I deal with atheists and with people.

I pin them. I'm going to explain what the logic problem was with her. She didn't want to go into it.

But I've had this kind of conversations, same formula, different variable, countless times.

I'll talk to atheists, for example, and I'll show them logically why they have a problem and then start doing the exact same thing, speaking incessantly, constantly, and then raising a different issue and then demanding

I answer a different issue. Otherwise, they're not going to answer. It's because they're stuck. When we get back,

I'll explain what the problem was in more detail, and then we'll get to the next longest waiting, which is Rudolph.

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, everybody. Welcome back to the show. Hey, let me give you a slower explanation of what the logical impossibility that she was providing or proposing for herself, the previous caller there.

So it's either the case or it's not the case. Now, this is a disjunctive syllogism issue.

You only have two options. It's either the case that the word before incarnation was self -aware or personhood, or it was not the case that it was self -aware, hence no personhood.

There's no third option. It's either one or the other. It's either the case that whatever the word was before the incarnation, it was self -aware or it was not the case that it was self -aware.

It was either person or not person. There's no third option. Whenever you have only two options and you remove one, you disregard or you prove that one of them is false, then the other one by default is true.

It's called a disjunctive syllogism. So if you can show, for example, that it was not possible that the word was one or the other, then it must be possible that it was the other.

It's really simple. Okay, now, so if it's the case that the word was not conscious, not person, and then became flesh, then you have a change in its nature because it's either the case that the word, whatever the word was because the word became flesh, if someone wants to say the word changed, well, then it's not the word anymore.

It's like saying, the Jehovah's Witnesses say, Michael the archangel became a man. He stopped being an angel and became a human.

Well, that's impossible. And the reason it's impossible is because the nature of something has properties, has things related to what it is.

So a bowling ball is a good example of something. It's not self -aware.

It does not have that quality of it. If it became self -aware, it's no longer a bowling ball because bowling balls by definition are not self -aware.

This is just an exercise on a very base level of teaching what it means to have an ontos, an essence, and the properties that relate from the essence.

And if the essence changes, the properties change, it's no longer what it was.

So an angel to become a man, for example, means the angel stops existing and then becomes a man because the properties, the nature and the properties of an angel are different than the nature and the properties of a man.

So it's impossible for an angel to have its essence tied to the nature of an angel.

That's what it is. And then if it stops being an angel, it doesn't exist anymore because that's what an angel is.

And its personhood is tied to its nature, the angelic nature. So if it stops being an angel, its personhood stops.

It doesn't get transferred to another form because it just doesn't work.

Properties relate to the essence. And the characteristics relate to the essence. If the essence changes, the properties change, and you no longer have what it was originally.

It's gone. So this basic form of logic, it's just basic stuff.

If the word was impersonal and became flesh and became personal, then

Juanita would have a huge problem because then we have the problem of continuity where whatever the word was changed its nature to become self -aware.

That's a problem. You can't have that unless she wants to say that the word and the human flesh were in union.

Then we're getting towards a hypothetic union. If she says, on the other hand, that the word was personal before it became flesh, now she's got another problem because if the word was

God or God was the word and the word became flesh and it was personal, then she's going to have to deal with two gods and the issues related to that.

This is why it's a problem. I think she saw it, which is why she started filibustering because she didn't want to face it. Another technique that I've noticed the atheists do is that when

I get them to this place of seeing the problem, they then give a bad question and say, I'm not going to answer your question until you answer mine.

If I do, I've done this on experiments, if I do answer their question, they use it as a springboard to attack something else because they want to stay away from what

I was raising. It's a technique and I'm very familiar with it. Anyway, that's all

I have to say. So much heresy, so little time. Rudolph from Raleigh, North Carolina.

Welcome here on the air. Yes, sir. Guess who's back, brother? Hey, man, how you doing, buddy?

Yeah, all right, fine. I just want to say... Uh -oh, we lost you.

No, no, you gave the best example of the Armenian faith or belief system versus the

Calvinist system by saying that God's nature is good and our nature is bad.

That was so good. I loved it. Thank you. That was a very good explanation of God's nature and our nature.

We can't do good because of our nature. That's right. My question is, should a

Christian continue to listen to another Christian who quotes an uninspired text like the book of Jastor or Enoch?

Well, you can read them. Just don't consider them inspired. That's all. Nothing wrong with reading those things, like reading the

Quran. It's not inspired of God. I read it and check it out because it's a book.

That's all. Okay, well, this guy actually mentioned a chapter in Jastor.

You can just say in the book of Jastor like it does in our Bible. I know when

Joshua asked the Lord to stop the Son of Man. He mentioned it like in the book of Jastor.

But he actually mentioned the actual chapter. That's a little different.

Yeah, the book of Jastor is in Joshua 10 .13. But there are at least 21 books mentioned in the

Bible that are not in the Bible, that are not Scripture. Did you know that? No, I didn't.

Sure. The book of the wars of the Lord, Numbers 21 .14. The Chronicles of David, 1

Chronicles 27 .24. The book of the kings of Israel and Judah. The book of the kings of Israel.

The words of the king of Israel. The Chronicles of Samuel the seer. The Chronicles of Nathan the prophet.

The book of Gad. The book of the prophet Edo. The book of Jehu. The book of life.

There are other books mentioned. Okay? People don't know that. So if they just So if they

So if they mention it but I don't know.

It doesn't mean that they're inspired. Just because they're mentioned.

Okay? Alright. Because If they

If they bring it up it's okay. So yeah.

In Titus 1 .12 Paul says, A prophet of their own said

Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons. This testimony is true. So okay.

So Paul quoted a pagan philosopher. A pagan prophet.

It doesn't mean he was true. It was a true prophet of God. Just like Mohammed.

He was a false prophet all the way. He could have said something that was true and someone could reference it.

It's true what he said. It doesn't mean he's inspired of God any more than when I say something is true.

It doesn't mean I'm inspired of God. Okay? Okay. So if you know it and you bring it up should we continue to listen to that person who took that book?

Depends. If they quote it as authoritative then they're wrong.

They can quote it as saying, hey here's something that's interesting. Just like in Acts 17 .28 when Paul quotes

Erastus for we are all his children. He's witnessing to the pagans. Okay.

Yeah. And in 1 Corinthians 15 .33 it says bad company corrupts good morals.

And that was a current saying forming a verse in Menander, the comic poet who probably took it from Euripides.

Okay? Okay. Thank you very much for the answer.

God bless you. I hope your wife is doing better. She needs prayers.

But thanks. Appreciate it. Yes sir. Take care. Alright. God bless. Bye. That was pretty good.

Let's get to Ebenezer. Hope his last name's not Scrooge. How you doing? From California. Yeah I'm good.

I just had a question. Are you familiar with the Anunnaki? The Canaanite gods?

Yeah. So I heard somewhere they said that when

Isaiah was talking about Lucifer he wasn't talking about the devil that he was referring to the

Canaanite gods and that Elohim is not talking about the

God of the Bible. Oh. Okay. So the problem with this kind of thinking is that the word

Elohim has a lot of usages in a lot of different contexts. And we've got a break coming up so tell you what, when we get back to the break

I'll explain more, okay? Alright buddy? Hey folks, we have a good question and we'll get to that right after the break.

If you want to give me a call the number is 877 -207 -2276.

We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live taking your calls at 877 -207 -2276

Here's Matt Slick. Alright everyone, welcome back to the show. Let's get back on with Ebenezer.

You well? I mean, you still there? Yeah, I'm here. Alright man.

So, let me make sure I understand your question. The word Elohim multiple gods and things like that.

Are you concerned about that? And stuff, for what? Yeah, yeah. Like they, you know, a person said that, well it's a two part question.

Um Multiple, like it's the Canaanite God Um And um, there was multiple

Elohims. That was the first part, first question. Yeah, there are. In that sense.

So the word Elohim occurs 2 ,599 times.

Now you can go to Exodus 20, which is the listing of the Ten Commandments, you know. And it says, then

Elohim God spoke. These words saying, I am the Lord, I am

Yahweh, your Elohim. Okay? Who brought you out of the land of Egypt. You shall serve no other gods, no other

Elohim. What? Wait a minute, what? He says in verse 5, for the

Lord your God for Yahweh your Elohim and they jealous God. So I guess there's lots of gods, right?

That's what the implication is. I'll answer you here, but check out. Then the sons of Israel, this is

Judges 10 .9 Then the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of Yahweh.

They served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the Elohim, the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the sons of Ammon, the gods of the

Philistines. Now what I'm going to do now is

Galatians 4 However at that time when you did not know

God, you were slaves of those which by nature are no gods. But now that you've come to know

God or rather to be known by God. So Paul in Galatians 4 .8

recognizes that there are other gods that are not by nature truly gods.

Let's go to Isaiah 43. This is God speaking. I think God would know what was going on, alright?

And he says in Galatians 43 .10 You are my witnesses declares

Yahweh That's the name of Elohim, of the Jews, right?

Yahweh. He says, and my servant whom I have chosen so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he.

Before me there was no Elohim formed. There will be none after me. No God formed.

Wait a minute. If there's other gods for real then all those other gods have to be eternal just like him because he said there's none formed before him and none after.

Well if there's other gods it means then they have to always be eternal like God. But there's problems.

Just working with logic. We'll narrow the field down a little bit. Isaiah 43 44 .3

Let's see. 43 .10 44 .6 For thus says

Yahweh the king of Israel and his redeemer Yahweh of hosts. I am the first and I am the last and there is no

Elohim, no God besides me. He says there aren't any. And in verse 8 he says is there any other rock?

Is there any other God besides me? Is there any other rock I know of none? That's Isaiah 44 .8

He said he doesn't even know of any others. So when the Bible talks about other gods it's just like you and I saying hey there's one true

God but the Mormons have a God but we're using the exact same word but the

Mormon God is not the real God. The Jehovah's Witness God is not the real God. The God of Islam is not the real

God. But there's one God of the Bible. The same word is used in different contexts. That's all that's going on it's the same thing.

In the Bible. Okay? Okay? Yeah, yeah. Also, what about the

Anunnaki? The Anunnaki? The Anunnaki the

Nephilim and other stuff they're not gods and there's discussions about what the

Anunnaki is or are. And some say half -breed like the Nephilim and some even say aliens, reptilian aliens and things like this.

But basically they were out of false deities and false gods and things like that. Okay? Okay.

Also because Catholics use logic to prove that Mary is the mother of God I guess they use it in that terminology what answer how will

I how can I you know, answer? How do

I answer to that? Well, sure what I do I'm trying to find the verse

I have my notes in my Bible let's see I could do it this way let me open up my file on Catholicism it'll take a few seconds to open up so when they say she's the mother of God, there's some problems one is the

Bible never says that. It's their logic. So what I'll often do is use that logic against them it's very simple.

Okay? So watch this. Let's see let's see my file is open now so I'm going to go to it

I wonder if I could do it this way. I should do it that way no, it didn't work so I've got a bunch of results here.

Let's see get to Mary and then I'll do that I've got a big file it's 229 pages alright, so and the reason

I'm stalling a little bit is I want you to hear what

I did my research on and I found some stuff that's really interesting. Okay, here we go finally got it.

Alright, so if Mary's the mother of God then Joseph is the stepfather of God.

James Joseph, Judas and Simon are the cousins of God John the Baptist was also the cousin of God.

Eli was the great -grandfather of God as was Jacob. Method was the great -grandfather of God as was

Method. And Levi was the great -great -grandfather of God as was Eleazar. So why is it the

Catholics only exalt Mary as the mother of God yet ignore the father of God, the cousins of God, the sisters of God, and the grandfathers of God, the great -grandfathers of God Why stop with Mary?

That's one of the questions I ask them. Why would they do that? Oh yeah, so if you're saying pretty much if they should be acknowledging the whole lineage,

I guess, right? Yeah, the reason they do this with Mary is because they're idolaters.

They want her to be the mother of God but it's not the mother of God it's never said that she's the mother of God.

There is a statement, the mother of my Lord and Elizabeth gives that.

I'm trying to find it right now I've got let's see father, mother, she says that it's got to be in Luke but I'll find it later.

I'd like to have things memorized so I don't have everything memorized. So she calls Mary the mother of my

Lord Okay, well we can call her that call him that and call her that because she's the mother of the

Lord. Now what does that mean? You see the Lord is Jesus Christ incarnate the sovereign one but God is a trinity.

The word that became flesh is not the trinity but the word and he is our

Lord because of what he did and who he is in that context so when they say she's the mother of God it brings confusion and it also exalts

Mary to the level of a functioning goddess when they do stuff like this. So what

I'll say to them is I don't call her the mother of God well is Jesus good? Yes but the trinity is also

God so is she the mother of the trinity? and I'll ask them that and they get stuck because they're not thinking clearly and I say the reason you want to call her the mother of God is so you can pray to her and you can adore her and you can commit your idolatrous practices with her and I tell them that.

I say you guys are idolaters oh they don't like it but I tell them. I say it over and over and over they are okay also because that's the same thing

I would tell them but I guess they wouldn't receive they wouldn't receive

I guess it's a brainwashing thing with them very good and tell them that tell them you're brainwashed yeah but I want to be able to penetrate to them so they can get it but it's like always they end up shutting me off let me offer you something and brother what you just said just warmed my heart it's the exact same thing

I want to do with them reach them exactly yeah because you can say truth and they don't listen man

I just love that you said that here try this I say to them

I can prove to you you're more loyal to your church than Jesus and they say no that's not true

I say I can prove it I say is Jesus God yes does he have all authority in heaven and earth yes does he say come to me

I'll give you rest yes it's okay to pray to Jesus because he says ask me anything in my name and I will do it yes does he forgive sins yes okay if you were to ask

Jesus not Mary not anybody else the person of Christ you were to ask him to forgive you of all of your sins will he forgive you of all of your sins ask that question of them because they get different answers well he set up the church we've got to go to the priest that proves to me that they're more loyal to their church and if they say yes you'll be forgiven if you're really sincere you see

God is the one who gives faith he grants it Philippians 1 .29 that faith is in Christ John 6 .29

so you're sincere because God's working on you and if you are sincere will he forgive you if they say no you can rip them up on that one you're saying

Jesus won't forgive you if you go to him and ask he says ask me anything in my name I will do it you call him a liar and if they say well yes you can go to him but what he wants you to do is do that in the priest and in the sacraments

I say see you can't go just to Jesus you have to go to your church you're more loyal to your church than Jesus because Jesus has come to me he didn't say go to a priest okay okay also one can you give me that verse that you just gave me about ask anything in my name

John 14 John 14 14 John 14 14 hold on let me write that down I have one more question before I get off you got 30 seconds go ahead alright 14 okay also also there's one one because that question there because it was kind of sort of had to do with the

Elohim thing but kind of not because he was regarding to the

Bible never the Isaiah tell you what you call back tomorrow

I'll research it tonight and write an article okay thank you

God bless sorry Jermaine on eternal salvation

I know you waited a long time I really wanted to talk to you about that and Elijah regarding Jeremiah 8 8 sorry about that too call back tomorrow you guys