Matt Slick Live: January 27, 2025

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. Welcome to the show.

It's me, Matt Slick. Here's Matt Slick Live. Today's date is, let's see, January 27th, 2025. And if you want to give me a call, all you have to do is dial 877 -207 -2276. And I want to hear from you. If you want, you can also give me a call or ask for an email at info at karm .org, info at karm .org, karm .org, and put in a subject line, radio comment, radio question.

So it's now official. I'll be out in Dallas, the board of directors and myself out in Dallas for the week of the 25th, 6th range. We're going to go to the NRB convention. We'll be free in the evenings, and we're going to see what's going to happen then.

Just getting a heads up. You never know what might happen, people who are out there. And so there's that. Let's see. Let's see. Let's see. So I haven't done a newsletter in like three weeks. I keep postponing, not postponing, just for a gap, I'm so busy.

And we are working hard on a lot of things, man, a lot of stuff, a lot of stuff. All right. Hey, why don't you give me a call, 877 -207 -2276. Oh, and here's some, you know how life just gives you a little something?

So get this. So I did a load of clothes today. I put all my clothes, I mean, I wait a last surviving shirt to wear, and then everything else goes in. What I do is I put everything in the wash on cold, and then I put it in the dryer on.

Nuke.

I just go dry with nuke level. And then whatever survives, that's what I wear. I don't even worry about it. So I just put it in there. So I put everything in the washer today, and it's full, 95 of my stuff is in there, and the washer breaks.

So now it's sitting there. I have to get a hose and siphon everything out, got to get a new washer. So it can't happen with just washing a few things. No, it's got to be everything. So I'm smiling. It's not an issue to deal with.

You know what that's like out there, right? Radio land?

Yeah.

You go, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, well, no big deal. Hey, let's get to Rudolph from Raleigh, North Carolina. Rudolph, welcome. You're on the air.

Yes, sir. Is the ESV an okay Bible to read?

Oh, yeah. ESV is a very good Bible. I would recommend it.

Sure. Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

I trust it. ESV is done very well. And no Bible's perfect. I tend to judge Bibles by Romans 5 .18. I want to see what they do with that. And it's not as good as it needs to be in that particular verse, but it does really good and well in other areas.

So yeah, it's a good Bible. Definitely get it.

What about the, okay, what about the New King James?

Yeah.

See, the New King James is better than the King James because it takes away the these and thous. We don't talk like that. And it has reference to better manuscripts, even older manuscripts than the King James was translated from.

So it'll be updated. And it's fine. What I recommend is that people get, when they want to do serious Bible studies, get three translations. I prefer the NASB because it's more wooden and literal. The ESV and the NIV are similar.

You can get either one or both and you'll be fine. And then get the King James and even the New King James is fine. And so, but you know, get three. I say three is good. You open them up and you read the verses and you compare.

And if you want to study and say, well, wait a minute, why is, why is that verse different over here? And then that causes you to study and you learn. And that's, that's what I recommend that people want to do that.

So three Bibles is great. The ESV is good. The NASB is good. The King, New King James is good. NIV is good. They're not perfect, but I would recommend it.

Thank you very much. I hope you're, you watch it and it gets you okay.

I'm going to have to, I'm going to call, I got to call a friend up and say, you need a truck.

Okay.

You'll get a dryer tonight or something like that. I got, I got buds with trucks.

Okay. Yeah.

That's what it is.

That's life.

God bless brother.

Okay.

God bless brother. Take care.

Bye bye.

God bless. Okay.

Bye bye.

All right.

All right.

All right.

Let's get to none other than Alberto from Georgia. Alberto, welcome. You're on the air.

Well, good evening, Matt Slick. My question is, uh, why do so many Christians believe that the God of the Muslims Allah is the same as the Christian God Yahweh. Because he's, they believe he's monotheistic.

So they think automatically he's the same God as the Christian God. Or the, why do they.

Believe it?

Yeah.

They believe it because they're not as educated as they need to be in, uh, the theology. Differences between, uh, the God of Islam and the God of Christianity. So the God of Islam is not three persons where the God of Christianity is three persons.

And uh, that's right. There's a fundamental difference. So they're not the same at all.

Okay.

So, so, so just on that alone or, or just, uh, really, basically I believe that God Allah doesn't even exist. It's just something that's made up.

Yeah.

He doesn't exist. There is no Unitarian God out there and that's a Unitarian God and the God of Islam doesn't exist. It's Muhammad made him up. He's actually derived out of the moon God, which is why the symbol of Islam is the crescent.

Moon.

And so, uh, in the, uh, when the Kaaba is the place of worship, it had 360 idols in.

It.

And this is a time of Muhammad in Saudi Arabia area. So they had 360 idols. Now what's interesting is that 360 degrees in a circle and a lot of scholars think that this is because the year was 360 days, not 365 and it's something astronomical.

Around, around the early 700s, 701 to 703, four or five BC that there was an astronomical event that altered some stuff. There's some interesting evidence for that, but nevertheless, so, uh, he went in and said that all of them are false except for this one Allah and Arabic word for God and it was the moon one.

And, um, so that's the true God and then defined it in an Aryan kind of sense. Aryanism is that God is one person and that Jesus is a created thing. There's variations of that, but that's what they teach about Jesus, that he's not divine.

And, um, so they deny the incarnation. They deny the crucifixion of Christ. They deny justification by faith alone. They deny the true God, they deny the true gospel. So all who hold to official Muslim theology and believe it knowingly are in a state of damnation and will continue to be in that state even after they die.

So this is why they need the gospel.

All right.

I was watching this video, you know, on James Kaddish, he invited Dr. Jay Smith, he's the expert on the, you know, on the Islam. He was saying that how they discover some coins and they found, you know, that they had, uh, uh, one of the person's head on it was carrying a cross and his career, uh, staff or something across also.

So that proves that all that area was all Christians. It was not, there was never no Muslim influence at all in that area, that southern part of.

That area.

So a lot of the Muslims want to hide that truth. They don't want people to know the truth about that on the program. I was watching the James Kaddish on his channel. I don't know if you heard of him, James Kaddish.

He was talking about Dr. Jay Smith.

Yeah.

Well, he invited Dr. Jay Smith. He was talking about all that on his channel.

All right.

Thank you, Matt Slick.

All right, man. Sounds good, buddy.

All right. God bless. You too. Okay.

All right. Now, if you want to give me a call, we have two open lines, 877 -207 -2276. Let's get to Matt from North Carolina.

Matt, welcome. You're on the air.

Hey, Matt. How you doing, man?

Doing all right. Doing all right. Talking to another Matt. So it's the Matt attack right now. It's good stuff.

Yeah, that's funny. I've got questions about like modern day preachers and they believe that Jesus turned his back on the son, but then there's a scripture in Isaiah 53 where it pleased the Lord to bruise him.

Yes.

Could you clear that issue up with me or could you clear that issue?

Yeah.

It's a faulty thing for people to say, God, the father turned his back on Jesus. What does it mean to turn his back on him? To say something like that, you can't define what it means. So if you ask him, what does it mean?

He no longer was divine. He didn't like Jesus anymore. Didn't want anything to do with Jesus anymore. Turned his back on him, rejected him. What does it mean? And they don't answer the question. They just say this kind of a thing and they're not really thinking it through.

So I never use that kind of terminology. I just say that when he said, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? He was quoting Psalm 22 verse one, which is written a thousand years BC. And in that Psalm lists a depiction of the crucifixion, which was written there before the Phoenicians invented crucifixion around 600 BC, the Romans borrowed it.

So the Romans didn't invent it. So it's 400 years before crucifixion was even invented. Psalm 22 was written, which is a messianic Psalm. And it starts off with, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

And it deals in part also with Jesus becoming sin. He bore sin in his body on the cross, 1 Peter 2 .24. And it became sin, 1 Corinthians 5 .17. So the thing is that what happened there, we don't know.

We just don't know. And so we should not say anything happened if we don't know what happened, lest we speak heresy.

Okay.

Okay.

I got a second question.

Sure.

This is off topic, but, you know, in 1 Corinthians chapter 14, it's talking about speaking in tongues and all.

Yes.

You know, it says earlier on in the chapter, it says, don't let nobody speak with the tongue unless it's the interpreter. But at the end of the chapter, it says, don't forbid anyone, don't stop anyone from speaking in tongues and covet the prophesy.

Could you clear that up for me as well?

Yes. Because there's things that would be done in order in the church when the charismatic gifts are utilized, used, experienced, and two or three to speak in tongues at the most and then with interpretation, otherwise remain silent, and that's it.

And so I've been in churches where they're all speaking at once, or all singing in tongues at once. It's unbiblical. And I called, I actually called one pastor out on it, very politely, very respectfully.

You know, why do you do that if the Bible says this and that? And we had a discussion about it.

So that's it.

That's how it's supposed to be done.

So, okay. Okay.

That works for me. I don't have any problems with anybody's gifts.

Even as a Calvinist, I have, I believe in the continuation of the gifts, I do. So it's cost me a lot in my time, it's cost me a lot.

Yep.

All right, man. I thank you. Thank you for turning up those two issues. Thanks, man.

All right, brother. God bless.

All right. All right.

We've got a break coming up here. So we've got Carl from Ohio next, but I'm going to wait a little after the break because the music is going to start any minute here, any second. There it is. And someone sent me an article, which we need to talk about, out of Iraq.

Was that the music? I heard the music. Was that the music? No, I'm not sure what's happening. I thought I heard it. There it is. There it is. I hear it now. All right. Hey, hey, hey. There we go. 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. Everybody, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, we have two open lines, 877 -207 -2276. Let's get to Carl from Ohio.

Carl, welcome.

You're on the air.

Can you hear me, Mr. Slick?

Yes, I can.

I hear you.

Okay, I was talking to a friend of mine, and I believe in free speech, and we are opposed on most everything. She actually forgot what the word tolerance means. I had to explain to her what tolerance means because when you agree with her, she would say, I mean, tolerance, like, no, you're intolerant.

But anyway, I forget where it was, either communist China or wherever, where they were not allowed to have so many girls or so many boys that they would have to abort. I forget which gender it was, but now they're filling a void, you know, right, you know, so you know, when man tries to play God, you know, things trickle down in heaven.

So and I'm not, I'm not venerating Donald Trump, he's just a man. And you know what Daniel 221 says in Daniel 417, you know, God puts people in those places. But anyway, so she's talking about him sending people back to the countries they came from.

Now, we know that there were protocols for becoming an American citizen. I believe in that. And she said, well, there goes the workforce. And I wanted to tell her so bad, but she would have got offended and probably stopped talking.

To me.

No, we actually killed our workforce, okay, through abortion, because she's a big abortion right person. And those kids would have had kids, they would have been more than enough people to work. But actually, we murdered our workforce.

And I just want to call and make that statement. If I would have told her that she would have been so offended, but it's really true.

You know, so one of the ways to get around offending someone is to ask questions.

And tell me about it.

Okay. Okay.

Yeah.

So I'll say, are you saying that it's a good thing for people to illegal enter it illegally enter our country? Is that I'm just asking, is that good? You approve of that? Are you approve of them breaking the law?

And then they don't like being asked those kind of questions, because they will know they won't. They don't approve of it, but it's okay to do it. So they're hypocritical. Or yes, it's okay to break the law.

It is. So no matter what happens, they're going to lose. That's why you ask a question like that, and leave it up to them to see what they're going.

To do.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah. Okay.

Well, what if someone, you know, illegally broke into your house and sets up camp in one of your spare rooms?

Is that okay?

Well, no, it's not okay. Well, then, but yet you say it's okay for the country to do it, right? For them to break into the country. And we know that a lot of murderers, a lot of really bad people have done this.

Let me tell you something. When I was in Escondido, which is Spanish for hidden, hidden valley, hidden in San Diego County, and I speak enough Spanish to work in a hospital and register people. And I remember one time I stood up and counted how many people were in the emergency room.

I think it was exactly 30 at the time, and 27 of them were Hispanic. And I just speak Spanish regularly, all the time. And a lot of times they had been in the country many years, were pregnant, didn't even speak English.

I mean, eight years.

And I remember one woman, eight years, didn't speak any English, and was just having babies. Now, that's an abuse of the system. Now, I understand that. They want to get a better life.

I get it.

Just come in legally.

I get it, too.

And so we don't turn them in. We're not going to turn them in. They're illegal. We're not going to do that. They need to help. They need help. In fact, I was at Walmart a few days ago, and there was a gentleman at the thing.

He couldn't speak English. And I almost stepped in to help him translate. But there's HIPAA stuff, and there's medical stuff.

You've got to be careful.

But at any rate, he was having to use a phone to get medicine. I'm not going to turn them in. I'm not going to do something like that. I'm trying to make a better life. But people need to do things properly.

Yeah. That's all.

Now, what do you think about me telling her, because she would have been highly offended because she's so pro-abortion that if there is a shortage of people, we actually kind of killed them. Since Roe v. Wade, if you start adding up all the babies who were killed and they would have had babies, I'm like, well, we really had the people here.

We would have had them here. But we kind of killed them all.

Here's a roundabout question you can ask him. When does the life in the womb have value? When does it have value? Because women will say it has value when I decide it has value. They say, if I decide it's going to live, then I'm deciding whether it lives and dies.

I'm deciding if it has value or not.

That's fascinating.

Even though the kid has his own DNA, has his own blood type, you know, the mom's just kind of has some of the mom characteristics. She's kind of like an incubator because the kid is an individual. Like, here's the most fascinating thing to me.

Okay, it's like out of sight, out of mind. You know, we have an Abby Johnson. When she saw that ultrasound abortion, she's like, I can't do this. She saw how brutal it was. And that's such a machine.

Yes.

When the woman just tore the kid apart. If people could see that, if my friend could actually see how brutal that is, and she said the kid actually tried to get away. Because, you know, we were born with that sense of self-preservation.

Oh, yeah.

The kid actually tried to move away. If people could see it, these pro-abortionists, I think they would know how gross it is, you know.

How evil it is.

And then I say, okay, you can kill your kid in the womb, but as soon as the mother birthed the kid, if she just starts stabbing the kid right out of the womb, she would be considered a murderer.

That's fascinating.

But one minute earlier, it's okay to kill the kid. Oh, the stupidity. This is what happens. It's part of the cult mind. You justify what you want because you justify what you want. What's what I want?

The baby has life. When I decide it has life, I can kill it. But when it's outside the womb, then it's a baby. As in, somehow, just being born changes its nature from non-human to human. Somehow, the birth canal changes the inner working and nature of a baby being born.

Because you can't see the crime when it's hidden.

That's right. I would have a national public debate with the top pro-abortionist person in a public debate. I would have a debate. Is abortion morally acceptable? Something like that. Is it biblically acceptable?

They wouldn't want to debate that. Is it morally acceptable? That would be a good generic topic. Oh, man, I would cross-exam. I would ask some difficult questions. Which I've done with pro-abortion before.

I know how to be irritating, my wife says. She says I'm quite irritating and obnoxious. I try not to be.

But you irritate someone into the truth. That's what you do. You're not irritating to her. Oh, you're irritating to the truth.

You are.

Well, that's what I do. And with my wife, I try and irritate her into believing everything that I do because I'm always right. She rubs her forehead a lot. It's another medical issue that she's developed recently.

So I don't even have more issues to deal with.

Well, thanks for listening to me. I appreciate it. And thanks for your recommendations on how to question her. I appreciate it.

All right, Mac. Sounds good, buddy. God bless.

Have a good day.

You, too.

All right.

All right. Now, let's get over here to Lyde. L-Y-D-E from North Carolina.

You're on the air.

Yes. Yes.

Hey, Mac.

Hi.

This is my. Can you hear me?

Yes, I can.

I hear you. Fine.

Mac.

Okay. This is my question. Okay. This is this pastor. Explain the father and the son of the Holy Ghost to me this way. The infant, Mac, you a father. You also a dad. I mean, a husband. And you also a minister.

Is that considered one person? God is one person. And he has the representation of the father and the son of the Holy Ghost?

We got a break.

And what he's giving is modalism or Sabellianism. And it's not a trinity.

So, hold on.

We'll get back from the break.

Okay.

Hey, folks. We'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned.

We'll be right back.

It's Matt Slick Live! Taking your calls at 877 -207 -2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, buddy. Welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, it is really easy. Just dial 877 -207 -2276. Let's get back on with...

How do you pronounce your name? The way it's spelled here is different.

Lad.

Lad? Okay.

Lad.

That's open. I'm sure you've never heard any of those before.

Not the L-I-E, but L-Y-D-E.

And it's a pleasure to talk to you. But this is my question, Matt. And I want to hang up so I can hear your whole explanation.

Stay on. Stay on.

It's okay.

Okay.

This is the question. I've heard so many different ways about explaining the father, the son, and the Holy Ghost. And I'm going to give you an example that was easy for me to follow, but I don't know if it's biblical.

And it's safe to answer the question. Like I said earlier, you being Matt, you're a husband, you're also a father, and you're also a minister.

Yeah.

That's wrong. So you're one person with three different roles. Because when you're with your wife, you're not a minister. When you're with your congregation, you're not a husband. And when you're with your children, you're their daddy.

So my question is, can you explain to me what the biblical concept of the father, the son, and the Holy Ghost based on the example I just gave you? And please have your way according to the word of God.

Because like I said, these are ministers. They have explained it, but it was so difficult. So I'm going to hang up while you give me your biblical concept.

All right.

Thank you so much.

Sure. Okay. Yeah.

You should never say that it's one person with three offices and three roles. That's modalism, civilianism. It's a heresy. God is not one person with three roles. And when people say that, they don't realize, not intentionally, but they're actually speaking a heretical, false view that's been condemned throughout history in Christian churches.

So we don't say that one, it's like a man is a father, a husband, and a minister. It's one person. No, God is three persons. So that fails right there. That is an inappropriate analogy. And if you're a minister or elder out there listening to this, don't use that.

Okay?

It's just not good. Here's a better one.

Okay?

Time is past, present, and future. They're not identical to each other, but they're distinct from each other. The past is not the exact same thing as the present, which is not the exact same thing as the future.

So they all exist. Now, we could get into some philosophy here. Do they all exist simultaneously? Some say, yes, there's A theory, B theory of time. Not going to get into all that stuff. The idea is that time exists, past, present, and future.

To God, it's all there at once.

All right?

And they have distinction. And they're simultaneous with distinction. And that's just the analogy. The past and the present and the future are all, by nature, time. But they're distinct from each other.

The past is not the same thing as the future. Or it's not the same thing as the present. They're not the same thing, but they're all the same nature. And we recognize distinction when we recognize their relationship to each other.

And we recognize distinction in a relationship to us. That's the best analogy that I would offer anybody to use on the Trinity. And you do not, do not teach. Don't. Stop it. Please don't. Do not do it.

Don't say, God is like a dad, a man who's a dad, a husband, and a minister. Or a mechanic. Or whatever it is you want to put in there. The one person is three things. And at different times. Or maybe even seven.

No, no, no. Don't do that. You will lay the foundation for them to possibly accept modal monarchism. Oneness theology, which is non-Christian.

Okay?

All right, everybody. I hope that helps. Now, let's get to Glenn from Richmond, Virginia. Glenn, welcome. You're on the air.

How are you doing, Matt? Can you hear me?

Yes, I can.

I'm hanging in there.

More hanging than in there.

But I'm hanging in there. What do you got, buddy?

All right. I have a question about Isaiah 53. Because I heard a guy called in about Isaiah 53. And my question is, who is the suffering servant in Isaiah 53?

Well, let's go through it and take a look.

All right?

Because a lot of times the Jews will say it's the nation of Israel.

Okay?

And they have to say that. Because otherwise it points to Jesus and they can't do that.

Right?

So let's just go and start at verse 1.

Okay?

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For he grew up before him like a tender shoot and like a root out of parched ground. He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to him.

Other people think it's either Jesus or Israel. Run them both through your mind and listen. Which one makes more sense? It's Jesus or the nation of Israel.

Okay?

He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And like one from whom men hid their face, he was despised. We did not esteem him. Does that sound like Israel? Because it calls him a man.

Now people say, well, that's Israel because it's a poetic way of saying it's Israel.

Okay.

Surely he, or excuse me, surely our griefs he himself bore and our sorrows he carried. Yet we have ourselves esteemed him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was pierced through for our transgressions.

He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastening of our well-being fell upon him. And by his scourging, we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray. Each one has turned to his own way. But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on him.

He was oppressed and he was afflicted. Yet he did not open his mouth like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, like a sheep that is silent before its shearers. So he did not open his mouth. By oppression and judgment, he was taken away.

And as for his generation who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due. His grave was assigned with wicked men. Yet he was rich in his death because he had done no violence.

Nor was there any deceit found in his mouth. But the Lord was pleased to crush him, putting him to grief. If he would render himself as a guilt offering, he will see his offspring. He will prolong his days and the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in his hands.

And it goes on. Is that a nation or is that a person? Obviously it's a person.

So when you say his offspring, you said that he will see his offspring.