Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
All right, welcome back.
Let's crowd in place.
We got going here right now so if you got any questions or comments about stuff, we're willing to entertain them
now and Just let you know.
We're not going to have any more of these till January so we take the rest of the month off just
FYI.
And so if you got comments or questions, let me know.
I'm trying to look on the karma videos here to see if we can get some of those.
So I guess some of the feed coming back up.
I can't find any seconds.
I can hopefully get in there.
Did you put the link up on karma or anything or is just in the current videos?
For that, okay, okay.
Oh.
Here we go.
Mark met Matt.
Q &A.
I got it.
Okay, so now okay good got a question.
All right.
Oh
Okay.
Someone's got a question on here, but yeah, it's all right.
I see a question.
We don't go ahead and do that.
Or you went go ahead and ask the question.
I'm not seeing you on here.
First minute 321 address that to refute baptismal regeneration.
First Peter 321 says baptism now saves you not the removal of dirt from the flesh but an appeal of a clean conscience before God
and.
But what it says is corresponding to that baptism now saves you.
The issue is corresponding to what and what you have to look at is what comes before it
and so in verse 20.
Talk about the spirits in prison who once were disobedient.
When the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah.
During the construction of the ark in which a few that is eight persons were brought safely through the water.
Corresponding to that baptism now saves you.
So corresponding to what we had to look at verse 20 what saved Noah?
Was it the water or was it the ark and it was the ark because the water was a means of destruction.
The ark was a means of salvation.
So corresponding to that baptism now saves you unless you want to say that water.
Baptism is the thing that saves you the same way the ark did but that wouldn't make sense.
Because what he says here is not the removal of dirt from the flesh but an appeals an issue of faith.
Noah and his family entered the ark by faith and as they entered that ark by faith God then closed the door
behind them and they were brought for safety through the destruction of the ungodly in The flood
and so.
That's what's going on there.
So it's not an issue of water actually saving you baptism actually saving you but it's the issue
of Appeals of God in conscience.
So there you go.
Let's see.
What else we got.
Got any questions?
We don't have Tony evil watching right now.
I think it's too close to the holidays, etc.
And yeah, that's all right.
We don't have any questions.
We'll just bail early and that's it.
We're done Facebook nothing's happening on Facebook either, right?
Yeah, I can't get my Facebook here to work right now.
It's super slow so.
That's all right.
Oh Charlie's on.
Hey Charlie Michael Levy.
Yeah.
If the ugly filter is kicking in Takes the whole thing out.
That's right.
All right, man.
What do you go?
No, you're right.
They are misconstruing a lot of things and those who hate the sovereignty of God and his righteous
Sovereign ability to do with his creation as he desires will resist it and we'll try and find any
means.
That's mine any means that they can in order to To fight against God
so they'll bring all kinds of accusations against reform theology.
You know, I was emailing a guy today.
He says reform theology is basically evil and I said, okay.
It's evil.
Let me ask do you agree with this part?
And I actually I just asked him I said that we're touched by sin and all that we are and we can only be saved by God's grace
and his work through us and in us and He accused me of being deceptive by trying to
change a topic.
So, well, sorry, but that's what we teach and you say it's evil.
But it's what we teach is this evil, you know, and so there are just people who just don't care.
They hear something they think something and it doesn't matter what you say.
You're just evil and You know what?
It's more and more.
I meet people like that.
It's going whatever delete.
Yes, I got things to do.
Because I've argued with them before there's a woman named Heidi who's basically a stalker and
She has pursued me over the years here and there and now she goes to different names and stuff like that and
just no real congruent ability to think critically and The same kind of a
thing if you ask specific questions, they just turn into cues.
You know a lot of people like that.
It's just sad, you know, and they think they're so great.
They think they have all this information and then when you don't respond to every detail exactly the way they want you to then they Victory
and the people like that are just a Problem and so that's what you're you're
encountering that kind of mentality.
It's just kind of useless to talk to them.
So more and more it's delete.
Right
Right.
Calvinism is it's not narcissism narcissism teaches yet a special knowledge or to be saved now we teach.
You know and in narcissism God can't become flesh.
But that's not what you teach so, you know, it's just people just reaching for straws and and feeling their own hatred
bigotry and ignorance and.
That's it.
And as far as I'm concerned I like to say to people anyone who argues against Calvinism proves that the total depravity is true.
You don't like that, you know, you're wrong say you prove it again shut up.
Yeah, so you prove it again.
It's resisting the truth of God.
No.
They only take a swing at me you're totally depraved.
Do I think Jesus is Melchizedek, I don't know if he is or is not because
There's not enough information in the Old Testament to say that it is or is not.
Some people believe he is some people who believe he's not Melchizedek.
You know without mother without father.
Well, even Jesus had a mother and a father.
And so it's just usually what I've understood.
It's just a title of greatness.
But it's just given to a great person who may have been a representation.
Or a type of Christ in that sense that is used by Paul the Apostle, that's what I think.
All right, two things cannot be both true and untrue at the same time.
Evolution mindless random and design personal intelligence cannot be both true.
Therefore theistic evolution is an oxymoron.
Well, it's kind of but what they're saying Matt.
How do you respond to folks accusing you of being worldly philosophy of using worldly philosophy?
My example was using logical priority and regeneration.
Matt, how do you respond to people accusing me of using worldly philosophy?
Say yeah.
All philosophy stems out of God's Existence God's truths
God's revelation and no philosophical system can exist unless it is sitting on the
lap of God himself and Even Paul the Apostle quoted pagan philosophers Erastus
Epimenides Menander and Said certain things they said was true.
So just because something is philosophical doesn't mean it's not true and everybody uses philosophy to some degree.
So there's nothing wrong with that.
It just means it must be submitted to scripture.
That's all.
Yeah, sometimes you got to do that.
To what extent is person made a new creation,
I don't know how to answer that one to what extent.
Second 14 is 521 no 517.
To what extent I would just say we're dropped by God.
There's a change that goes on in us, but I don't know what to what extent the change occurs.
God doesn't tell us so I can't answer that one.
The glorification is future.
Yeah short of glorification that's for sure anybody else.
Well mark 1038 Jesus
said you do not know what you're asking.
Are you able to drink the cup that I drank to be baptized in the baptism with which I were baptized?
The immersion the total commitment to an identification with What Christ is going through?
That's baptism is a different kind of baptism.
A lot of people say you say that baptism always means immersion.
Not necessarily.
It's one of the verses you can go to demonstrate that that's the case.
Because it doesn't mean they were immersed in troubles.
What does it mean to be immersed in troubles?
It's just a metaphor to it's a figure of speech not literal.
So baptism does not always mean that but in this context is talking about persecution
and death and Dying to self not talking about the issue of water baptism as a right and as
an op as a an ordinance set up by God next.
Ah.
So why did a bird okay?
Abraham believed but he was looking ahead to the gospel and he had already believed that in him all the
nations will be blessed as Genesis 12 3 says and Paul quotes that in Galatians 3 8 calling it
the gospel.
So Paul Abraham believed that Jesus said John 8 20 8 56.
He says Abraham rejoiced to see my day and he saw it and was glad.
So the day that he was talking about was a crucifixion of Christ.
So Abraham and Isaac took three days to get to the hill.
Jesus was in the grave three days and they were both offered to the same hill.
Abraham I mean Isaac took wood upon his back to the hill.
Jesus carried wood upon his back to the hill.
Crown of thorns a ram cotton.
I think of the thorns, etc.
The parallel was there.
So we know that we can conclude that Abraham knew more than what the text simply says
but Justification by faith.
The issue here is faith.
Faith is only as good as who you put it in.
Put your faith in me as your Savior.
You're in a lot of trouble you put your faith in Christ.
You're good.
But since Christ had not yet come Then they were responsible for the amount of knowledge that they had at that time and are
justified by faith in the true living God.
At that time and at that place.
So that's how God had arranged at that point.
They're trusting in God and his provision.
And that's what we do we look back to Christ look to God and his provision and we have a more full understanding of it whereas
they did not.
That's the only difference really another question.
How do Jews deal
with their religion right now.
They don't have a temple they don't have the sacrifice.
There's other verses in the Bible, I don't have them memorized where.
There are sacrifices and cleansing that can occur without there's sacrifice.
No, there's cleansings that can occur in a way.
The wording is without literally a blood sacrifice and I was quoted that
by a Jew to me once and it was Happen so long ago.
They don't have a high priest they don't have stuff so what they'll generally do is say well.
We don't need that right now, and they have the various excuses now.
I have a friend who knows this stuff and he could tell you those varying lists of excuses that you have.
But I so rarely come across they don't have to worry about it that often.
But they do have their ways of of excusing the necessity of blood atonement and the temples.
You know and there's some verses in the Bible and some stuff in a long time.
They talk about how things could be forgiven without those sacrifices in a different way by being
sincere being contrite.
Because ultimately without that you can't have forgiveness.
Because we had to have the forgiveness of Christ.
The Jewish perspective.
I don't know how they would answer that one probably inconsistently because the Leviticus 1711
says without the shedding of blood is no forgiveness of sins.
Because the Temple Mount is under occupation that's some kind of an out.
Yeah, because they can't build a temple there because it's under occupation and so that kind of gives them some kind of
excuse way until they can Rebuild the temple on the temple now, so
there's some kind of forgiveness there or out because of that.
Right yeah, they're they've given all kinds of different excuses.
There's excuses all they are.
That's what it seems like.
He doesn't believe the Trinity anymore.
It seems like.
Yeah, it's a it's a problem.
No, they're still in the Bible,.
I think.
He did not like the book of James he called it an epistle of straw.
He originally.
Right so he didn't like it because of what it says James to but if you put it in context, there's no
problem, right?
Why is he invisible because he's everywhere.
If he was everywhere and we could see him we would be bumping into him everywhere.
He's invisible because that's how he's that's how he is.
He's invisible, but it's real, but he's real.
All right, I guess.
So I do not affirm the doctrine of the
preacher relational rapture.
I do not believe it's biblical.
But some people believe it that's okay doesn't mean they're not saved.
I just don't believe it's true.
I Don't affirm preacher relation rapture stuff easy.
Escapism kind of thing we're going through it and I've already done a study here on on that.
Went through stuff on the board.
I thought was pretty convincing.
So.
That's you sir, they start saying there's two comings.
That's how they do it.
Yeah, and then they also try to say well he's not setting foot on the ground in the first one, right.
That's how he's didn't really really churn, but it didn't touch down.
Yeah, I agree they are reaching for straws, yep.
Oh Titus 3
Titus 3 5 he say this.
Oh, yeah, not the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness.
But according to his mercy by the washing of regeneration and we're doing with the Holy Spirit.
What is washing of regeneration mean?
This is water what regenerates us the washing of regeneration or his regeneration something that God does
to us and he washes us clean in the process and the latter one makes more sense because
salvation and our cleansing justification are all Simultaneous and so it would make sense to say that
that's the case the washing of regeneration not the not the issue of getting baptized
in water and that's what makes us saved and What
it actually says.
Let me check the Greek Look at my interlinear folks.
I'm really rusty on this stuff.
Come on.
There we go Washing they're interesting.
From Lutron not baptizo Lutron interesting.
And it means a basin or laver for washing the washing itself for
its possible Relative Relativity to baptism in Ephesians 526 you
baptize mom.
It is used metaphorically the Word of God as the instrument of spiritual cleansing Titus 3 5.
I've actually heard this before about the issue there.
And so some think that the that the water is a spiritual Washing the word excuse me.
The word is a spiritual washing and they go to John which I don't agree with.
Some guys do this, I don't agree with it, but John 3 3 through 5
That you must verse 5 Truly truly I say to you unless one is born of water and the spirit of God and inherit the kingdom of
God and some Have said that the water there is reference to the Word of God.
I Don't I don't buy that one.
Anyway, there's some of the arguments that are there washing of regeneration the Word of God the
The Word of God which cleanses us which I think makes sense in Titus 3 5.
But also the washing of regeneration, so I think regeneration itself has a Cleansing
kind of work involved with it.
I don't know exactly that's a great verse though, and I use that Should have gone to have it
memorized, but I use it in reference to Roman Catholics Who like to say that their works play a
part in salvation and obtaining salvation say no you say that's not on the basis of
Anything we've done in righteousness.
And that also works against the idea of God looking to the future in any way shape or form or considering what
we are in order to save us and Things like that so that verse also refutes that issue as well.
Next you just did.
And
John 3 water.
Yeah, I think the water is referring to the womb.
The breaking of the water in the womb.
That's my position.
It's not the popular position either.
Most people don't agree with that there are those who do the reason I say that Jesus says you got to be born again
verse 4.
How can a man be born when he's old he not enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born again?
And be born can he so Nicodemus is thinking about the water of the womb or the womb here
Jesus said truly truly city unless one is born of water and the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
So I think water there means the human birth and this is my opinion you guys disagree.
That's fine.
Most scholars that I've read don't agree with that position.
But I think it does but truly truly city unless one is born of water and the spirit He cannot enter the kingdom of God that which
is born of the flesh is flesh.
That was born of the spirit of spirit when he says flesh is flesh and spirit of spirit.
Water and the spirit.
I think flesh and water I think to go together.
I think it is talking about natural birth and spiritual birth.
That's what I think it is.
That's just me.
I'm wrong.
That's what that's my position.
You know, maybe they got some big arguments against it, but my position that's what I think.
What do you guys think you agree?
Which when you're born in the flesh you're circumcised in flesh.
When you're born in the spirit, then you get baptized.
Because they're related.
Yes clashes to 11 and 12.
Now what's important is if Jamie agrees if Jamie agrees with the position then it's okay.
All right, that's good.
You had a big stick.
All right, Fritz committing adultery and your heart is not the same as actually committing adultery.
Jesus is using this as a way to even thoughts are evil.
No, no, it's trust me it's not.
We'd all be divorced, you know one way or another
I would say dispensationalism is covenant is is theological evolution
because you evolve in your knowledge and practice through time and improve and
become more adapted for theological discourse.
But then there are a lot more mutations thoughtful and heretical mutations in
dispensationalism than there are in Calvinism, too, so.
Okay
I didn't know I used Aristotle platonic stuff to do that.
I just stick with Scripture.
They can say it.
Yeah, it's like so what you know Plato and Aristotle had some ideas and and we think some of the things that they thought
oh.
You can't trust it.
No, it's not true.
You know, I just look at whenever I teach a doctor to the Trinity you guys have seen me do it before.
I'm sorry with this Bible says one God Father's God, that's the Holy Spirit's God.
His son is God.
Each have a will we both of the verses one God three persons.
It's just simple Logic that's it.
That's what the Trinity is.
On cause cause like we can't have that because Plato thought that.
Yeah, I've got some research about some in I haven't released it yet but I got one last part of what I want to
do before I release the information on on Annihilationism, but
sometimes the I think it's in that section of studies.
I found out I did an article.
I probably could find it Here but there's some really interesting
relationships between All kinds of Christian thought and Jewish thought
as relates to paganism.
That's not to say that everything is pagan.
It's just that even the pagans thought about hell even the pagans thought about Continuation
and even some pagans thought about annihilation something.
You know all kind of people had all kinds of ideas about all kinds of stuff and what the critics of you know.
A varying theological perspective will do very often is simply pick one part.
You know Aristotle might have said this many things and say pick up this see this is similar to Christianity.
Therefore you got from him.
Well, you know.
They just don't think through these things and then they make these false comparisons or these overdone
comparisons.
And it's ridiculous.
Let's see I'm gonna find that.
Man, I got a lot of work in there.
Sheesh.
One at a time.
Okay, let's do generational sin.
Not sure what they mean by that.
But sin can certainly affect your children and the children's children.
So if they mean generational sin by that then yes, there's a level of truth to that.
But not sure what they mean by it.
So it's hard to really kind of get into to answer Genesis our first second
Corinthians 12 to Jesus was Paul said he was he knows a man 14 years ago whether in the body or
out of the body do not know but such a man was cut up to the third heaven and It looks like what
was going on there was.
He was had an out -of -body experience.
No, that sounds you know, he shouldn't use those terms, but Excuse me,
it looks like he had an NDE a near -death experience and I have no problem with those.
They happen all over the world.
And since it seems what happened right there and to be absent for the bodies be home with the Lord second Corinthians 5 8 and second
Corinthians 12 to Whether in the body or out of the body I do not know that right there tells you
that he could be in or out of the body.
He doesn't even know in the body or out of the body.
But what are you gonna do with that?
That's what it says.
And so it seems to be that there's a condition with which we can exist without our physical bodies that's
because our souls continue on in existence and as far as a temple in heaven, some
people think that the the the temple is
a symbol of the structure of heaven and I don't know if that's the case, but that's
just an argument that they've presented and
You know, I don't know I've really never studied that issue to really decide if it's it's true the Revelation talks
about some of that stuff.
It does.
Not in the same sense of the New Testament.
Yeah, yeah, I've heard that it's kind of a purifying thing some Jews thought it was a purifying place a holding place.
And then different degrees of punishment in holding place.
Some say it was not that bad.
Some say it was really bad and.
But it's not really a whole bunch talked about.
And Ecclesiastes talks about the dead not knowing anything, but then that's written from the perspective of under the Sun.
Not a theological perspective about continuation after death so in seminary we
talked about this and other kinds of things and where the Jews had an incomplete understanding.
Theologically as compared to the Revelation of the New Testament and so their theories were varied and not as deep
So they had some what some Jews thought complete annihilation where some actually did think it was a conscious
Torment of some sort and in all kinds of varying degrees, but between them.
But I don't recall ever there being a majority view that was held by Orthodox
Judaism.
But even though it may be I just don't know Judaism is not something I've gotten into very much.
Yes.
That's a good question.
Don't know now the divine nature can't divest itself of the properties of
omniscience and so.
But then the human nature we understand from our own experience.
We grow in awareness.
And so how do those two relate?
I don't know.
I don't even have one.
I'm seriously.
Yeah, I don't even have a have one.
Yeah, it just doesn't.
Yeah, and in Bible this doesn't say anything so I don't know.
What's that.
Okay, I'm sorry try that again.
Because there's a relationship between the structure of heaven and the temple right like I said.
Some say some seem to imply that or Revelation seems to imply something like that, but then
again, it's so symbolic.
We don't know if that's the case.
But I wouldn't have any problem with heaven actually having a structure because if we're gonna be there.
We have physical structures and location then we're gonna be in places.
It would seem logically necessary that if we're gonna be in places.
Literally in some place.
There's gonna be some sort of a structure.
Not that it has to be a building of the elevators.
But you know, maybe some area where we congregate or I don't see any problem with that.
I don't know if that's actually the case.
But what are we gonna do in heaven if there's no space no distance no location.
Where are we?
You know what the
universe certainly does yeah.
That's true just being present.
God.
Yep.
We're gonna have physical bodies my wife's really gonna like it
because her body's falling apart, but She you know, it's we're gonna be without
sickness.
I'm hoping that we could just Will ourselves to be simply there.
I'm there.
That's what I want to do that.
I thought you're saying your life's your wife is really gonna like it because you won't technically be married.
That'll be true.
She's really gonna like heaven because we won't be married anymore.
But she's the more alien movies probably I go visit them out there the galaxy.
Yeah but yeah, but you know my wife her health is inching
down and she's just gonna love the idea of not having to have aches and pains and arthritis and.
Everything and as with the case of all of us, you know, and it'll be great.
So I'm looking forward to it.
Incidentally, I did find something.
I was curious the pagan idea of Aristotle and we have these similarities.
We'll check this out.
One two, three, four five six things I found it was just doing some research that have pagan
equivalence.
Annihilation of the soul.
A Pagan king lost seven sons just as Job did.
God does battle.
Mountain of God son of God coming in the clouds.
Bodily resurrection.
These are also found in pagan philosophies and pagan.
So bodily resurrection is found.
Apocalypse of Moses states at the end of the age.
Yeah, it's unbiblical yeah.
Even have a half -son half -man, which is like a half with a version of
the all -god all -man Christ and the Norse and.
It.
Actually it makes me wonder if you go far enough back towards Noah if at some point those
Evolved in heresies out of true faith could be.
There were there were true types of pictures in there.
Yep
Yep, I agree.
We did by done then.
It's me a P.
Yeah ministerial apologetic us Christianas, right.
Well, I can't I don't know about.
You know, it's just as equal.
I would just say that Paul what I'd say in those verses about those verses is that Paul
equates them to what level.
Are they equated?
I don't know but he draws the comparison.
He says and in him you were circumcised with the circumcision made without hands.
In the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.
Having been buried with him in baptism in which you were also raised up with him through faith in the working of God who raised Him from the dead
so Paul Relates them together.
Now if I would say the word equate is it exactly equal?
I wouldn't say exactly in every way.
But he'd certainly does something with them and he relates them and so he does so that's why I do.
Exactly how it works.
I don't know but that's what I hold to.
That that's why I say that's my position.
Is that a New Testament baptism is equivalent or a replacement of Old Testament circumcision.
That's just my personal opinion.
Matthew 18
Shall have been bound is the key right it shall have been it's not your binding.
That means that it becomes having been bound in the past.
But you're binding it is a recognition that it already has been the case in heaven.
Shall have been will have been it's a future perfect.
Will have been and that's that's the thing I've read so that before the Catholics like to use that to say that what they
bind Means that it did that your sins are forgiven and bound and things like that.
No, it will have been it already is the case.
So the only explanation I understand that makes sense of that is to say that it's dealing with.
The reality of God's binding this is already in place and what we are doing is pronouncing and
recognizing what God has done.
And that's the authority that we have.
Give a simple way of explaining how Jesus became sin.
But only yeah, he became since it were days 5 21 he became sin in the sense that
I what I believe it means is That since sin is a legal debt and legal debts are transferable
then Jesus bore our sin first Peter 2 24 and that our sins were
Transferred to him our legal sin debt was transferred to him and that he became sin in that sense and that his
account.
Boom sin, he became that and that's how I see it.
And it only works if you look at the substitutionary legal substitutionary atoning work.
And then it also logically requires limited atonement.
Because if he actually bore our sins and canceled them on the cross go as Colossians 2 14 says canceled.
The cancellation does not depend upon your belief the cancellation is dependent upon the blood of Christ.
Which says it was canceled at the cross not when you believe.
Therefore it requires Limited atonement in that Jesus only bore the sins of the elect.
We would say that the legal account of what he he He has
is that he became sin in a legal sense, but not ontologically.
I don't know an essence sense.
Could not it now be changing the nature of God basically.
That's interesting because what would the baptismal regeneration to say that Jesus was getting baptized for to
get saved.
I'm gonna ask him that to see what they would say because they said to fulfill all righteousness it might
generally what they'll say is as an example.
Not an example, he said it wasn't an example.
He says it was to fulfill all righteousness.
That's what he said Matthew 3 15.
I believe the verse is so since it wasn't just an example.
But a fulfillment of the Old Testament requirements.
Then what was it he was fulfilling and doing at the time and it looks like he was entering into the priesthood after the order of
Melchizedek.
And I got the article on the car about that.
That's what it looks like to me.
Don't worry Charlie.
I won't ask Matt anything.
I hope you don't mind that.
I listen.
It almost seems you don't want me here.
You're entering of you wanting me to go to the website.
Wow.
What's your what's your question then.
A little higher Winnie.
Eternal life in the sense of us being redeemed occurs at the point of regeneration.
That's the answer.
At the point of God regenerating us.
That's when we have eternal life.
When God saves us when God regenerates us.
Baptism doesn't doesn't manifest that.
Baptism is not the thing that regenerates us.
That's right, sometimes we miss people to
the past question.
Why does Rome come to the erroneous position in John 6 that unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no
life in you.
That the partaking of the Eucharist saves us.
When Jesus was talking about the election.
The reason Rome believes that stuff is because a Roman Catholic Church is apostate.
And out of John 6 it's literal and they just believe it because they don't believe the truth about who God is and they have too
Pagan ideas and false doctrines.
What.
They're totally depraved and it's a false church.
So that's why it's what they believe it because they're not trusting just the Word of God and they take that particular thing.
And in Their sacerdotal system where grace is administered and infused through a person by participating in the
sacraments They then necessary and which keeps control over the people.
They didn't necessarily must say that it's the actual body and blood so that they can have it as a means of
grace.
I wish more grace is infused into you to keep you more saved and the Catholic Church controls that so
therefore.
That's why they're gonna hold of that.
They have to defend it.
Why don't you go to the streets anymore and make videos like the old times?
We've been talking about going down to BSU at the beginning of the year.
You, me and Cameron.
We were Doing some video stuff.
We might be doing more stuff like that.
I said you'd do a bunch of live videos.
I still have my student ID.
Maybe that would get us into things.
Well I was thinking about going down to BSU and having a sign or have something.
I want to do a series of things like get 30 people and say This is a
video on Is there a God?
What do you say?
And just have the video requirement.
Do you let us use this for all public use?
Blah blah blah.
If they say yes, we interview them.
If they say no, okay we're done.
And you go to the next person.
And just say we're not here to trap you.
And have a series of questions.
These are the questions we want to ask.
We want to have your answers.
But you say you're a good person.
Like what Ray does.
I heard that.
So I was thinking about doing that.
Producing some videos.
That'd be good.
And then you and BSU do a comparison.
Whoa.
That would be good.
You need to come out of your cop outfit.
So you know.
With an AK and everything.
You know, SWAT.
Oh that'd be fun.
I bet NNU's worse.
Oh I bet it is too.
I saw some NNU girls once.
I forgot what the situation was.
Anyway we're talking.
Oh you go to NNU.
Oh we're in the theology major.
And I said really?
Oh okay.
I said can I just ask you some theology questions?
Is Jesus a man right now?
Dead silence.
Uh I know a guy That runs their computer systems.
He just left a different job.
He was helping us with some of the Mormon stuff.
So he runs their stuff.
He was talking about a time when the theology department Was meeting.
And they had another guy that knew Hebrew.
And they were all like I don't know.
Some of the subject was the beginning of the text.
Well obviously we all believe evolution.
So let's just move on.
The Hebrew guy's like well I know Hebrew.
And he's like that doesn't work.
Not at all.
I'm an expert in Hebrew.
You guys are wrong.
That's what the text says.
Who is it?
Mike Riddle The apologist who specializes In evolution.
He was telling me A few months ago that he's gone to Several seminaries
Several Christian universities To try and get them to carry A creation science
Tract as well.
He said he has no problem Getting the science department on board.
The people who specialize in science Are like oh yeah the science is there This is plausible This is teachable.
He goes to the theology department.
And that's when they shut down.
Some seminaries are bad.
Some are good still.
There are still some good ones out there.
But yeah I like the idea of doing that.
Get some serious interview stuff.
I'd love to do that.
One of their guys.
We need to squeak and close.
We're not just rambling.
Okay we're done.
Hey guys we'll see you next year.
We're just rambling now.
It's kind of casual because it's the end of the year and holidays.
God bless everybody.
We'll see ya.