Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
You guys taking off?
What?
Okay, questions?
Hope that helped on the doctrine of the.
Trinity.
So some of the, you said some of the comments, people said they learned already, right?
That's good.
See I like that, you know, the doctrine of the Trinity is really an important doctrine and I've been thinking about it from
so many different ways and I could have gone over more stuff but I thought that's a good level for one hour.
I could have gone a little more depth in some other aspects and and some stuff but good enough,
you know, good enough to to put it all kind of in place.
All right, so got any questions?
Got any questions online?
Got questions here?
What's up, buddy?
You ready?
So with Easter coming up, we all understand, yeah, we all understand the importance of the death.
Could you go into the resurrection?
Resurrection, yes.
I'll be preaching on that upstairs Sunday at 4 o 'clock on the resurrection.
Why is the resurrection important?
The resurrection is important because it fulfills prophecies, either Psalm 2 or Psalm 8.
I forgot where.
I'll know it by Sunday, I gotta learn.
But He will not let your holy one to see decay.
So what's going on is that the resurrection is the proof of the acceptance
of the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ.
Because Jesus had to live a sinless life and be a perfect sacrifice and he was and he died.
And the proof that it was acceptable was he was risen from the dead.
And that's why the resurrection is so important.
Also, it represents our future resurrection because in 1 Corinthians 15, 35 through 45, it
talks about the future resurrection, the resurrection of all of us.
Because Jesus rose from the dead because he's the firstborn, the firstfruits, I think it's
Colossians 1, 15, 16, 17 range, maybe 18 or 19, been
a while.
Then we will follow after him.
So the resurrection is the stamp of approval and the guarantee that what
Jesus did on the cross was acceptable and good.
And so therefore we can trust that the future will hold for us what
it held for Christ at his resurrection.
Incidentally, that the communion supper you hold in your hands,
the bread and the wine represent the broken body of the sacrifice, which is the covenantal signs of the promise given to
us to be able to know that the sacrifice was offered.
All right, so that resurrection is a demonstration of the acceptance of that very sacrifice.
That's why it's important.
Without it, we're dead.
1 Corinthians 15, 14 and 17, if Christ be not raised, our faith is in vain.
That means the sacrifice wasn't good enough.
Okay, next.
Are you online?
Are they done?
No, no questions?
Okay, Matt, could you talk a little bit more on the presence of the Trinity in the
Old Testament?
Oh, I want to get to a specific name of a person who you may know fairly well.
We'll go with that.
Who thinks that the Trinity didn't really exist in the Old Testament, but somehow
showed up in the New Testament.
It's in the Old Testament, too, because we have in Genesis 1 verses 1 through 5,
roughly, the Spirit of God was there with the Word that was spoken and God was there.
So there's three right there.
We see Genesis
17, 1 and 18, 1, three angels appear to Abram,
and a lot of theologians see that as being a representation of the Trinity there.
We know the Holy Spirit creates in Job 33, 4.
This is off memory here, trying to show verses.
Oh, let us make man in our image, Genesis 1, 26.
The us is plural, of course, and if you go to Isaiah 44, 24, you'll see where God says
he makes all things alone by himself.
There's a plurality there.
If you go to Genesis 19, 24, the Lord, Yahweh, rained fire and brimstone
from, or on Sodom and Gomorrah, like Jehovah rained fire and brimstone
upon Sodom and Gomorrah from Jehovah out of heaven.
So Yahweh rained fire and brimstone from Yahweh out of heaven.
There's a hint of a plurality there as well.
You can go to Amos 4, 10 and 11, where I'll paraphrase it because I don't have it all memorized.
God says, I stood your young men by the sword.
I caused a stench to rise up in your nostrils.
You have not returned to me, declares Yahweh.
I overthrew you as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
We see in Zechariah 12, 10, God is speaking, they will look upon me whom they have pierced,
and will mourn for him as one mourns for an only son.
And then I think there's also Isaiah 48, 16, let's see if I'm right,
which says this, come near to me, listen to this, from the first I
have not spoken in secret, from the time it took place, I was there, and now the Lord God has sent me and his spirit.
So there's these hints in the Old Testament of the plurality of God.
Now when I was in seminary, our Hebrew professor, Mark Futado, great guy,
he mentioned that there were different factions within
Hebraic thought, and one of them, at the very least one of them, affirmed the idea that God
himself was a plurality.
You can go to the Shema, here O Israel, the Lord our God is one.
And the word one is echad, not yachid.
From what I understand, echad means a composite unity, where yachid means just a singularity of unity, just
one.
So an echad is like a cluster of grapes, kind of a composite.
So God is that.
So there's a lot of that hinted at in the Old Testament.
And then you could go to, of course, Exodus 6, 2 and 3.
God spoke further to Moses and said, I am God Almighty.
The Lord, God spoke further to Moses and said, I am God Almighty.
I'm Jehovah, that's right.
And I appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty.
So he appears as God Almighty, but Jesus says that no one's ever seen the Father.
But they were seeing God Almighty, but not the Father.
So who were they seeing?
The pre -incarnate Christ.
Then you go into the garden, you know, who were they seeing?
Exodus 24, 9 to 11, Moses, Aaron, Natab, and Abihu, and 70 of the elders of Israel went up and they saw the God of Israel.
And under his feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself.
Yet he did not stretch out his hands against the son of the nobles of Israel.
They beheld God, and they drank.
So we see that God is seen there in other places, like Exodus number 12, 6 through 8.
But we know from the New Testament, God the Father can't be seen.
John 6, 46, 1 Timothy 6, 16.
So we can see, as we start blending into the New Testament, we can start seeing that the theophanies of the Old
Testament are really Christophanies.
Okay?
Sure.
Follow -up question?
Go ahead.
Did the Jews of the Old Testament believe in a triune God?
The Jews of the Old Testament believed in one God.
The Jews of the Old Testament believed in many gods.
The Jews of the Old Testament may have believed in a triune God, a plurality of gods in essence, and things like that.
They believe in different things.
So when you say the Jews, which Jews, which time, which place?
Because there's a scattering of theological beliefs among the Jews for a long time.
So, you know, it's like staying on the tennis court.
Hey, you at the racket!
Which one?
You got to be more specific.
Specifically, like, the nation of Israel that was believing in Yahweh.
Well, if they believe in Yahweh, then, see, now you're asking a tough question.
Did the Jews who believed in Yahweh believe in a triune God?
Every Jew?
Do I know all the hearts of all the Jews?
What do they believe?
I can't answer the question, obviously.
But what you're generally getting at, is there room in that, probably within history, that some of them believe in a
plurality of the Godhead in some way?
Probably.
Doesn't mean it's the case.
But there's definitely a hint of the plurality of God in the Old Testament.
So it would make sense that a lot of them might have suspected that God was plural in his essence, to some degree.
Now how far that went, who knows?
Okay, we got some more questions coming.
The what? Stinking Atheist?
The Stinking Atheist?
Oh, the Seeking Atheist,.
Rockwell.
He's a Sikh?
I thought he was an Atheist.
Okay, sorry.
He's on, listening.
Hey, how you doing, Rockwell?
He wants to know, do you need to believe in the Trinity to be saved?
I'm still pretty confused.
Maybe this will take, this will.
Make sense in time.
I would say, what you need to believe in, is Jesus and him crucified, God in flesh.
Let the other stuff come, as it does.
Trust in Jesus.
You don't have to understand the Trinity, the hypostatic union, communicatio idiomatum.
Don't have to understand imputation, all these things.
It comes down to this.
Are you a sinner?
Have you done wrong?
Yeah.
Judgment's coming.
Because otherwise, what you do wouldn't be wrong.
And so, judgment's coming, and in order to escape it, God's provided a way to the person of Jesus.
Once he lives in you, you'll grow, and these things will gradually come to be
part of your faith and your hope.
Okay, and we're praying for you, Rockwell.
A lot of people are praying for you.
All right, I've been praying for you, and a lot of people made comments.
Next.
Next, Richard Target from Facebook, he went to a Catholic
college.
Went to a Catholic college.
The question is, what does it mean to be just?
And if you are, wouldn't that.
Count for something if you weren't saved?
What does it mean to be just?
Would it count for something if you're not saved?
Well, that's the question.
Just in what sense?
Just where?
Just how?
And just before who?
Is it just before God?
If you're just before God, would that count for salvation?
Of course it would, because you'd be just before God.
By the logical necessity, that would have to work.
But the question is, how do you get just before God?
By faith, Romans 5 .1.
Having therefore been justified by faith.
Without the works of the law, Romans 3 .28.
The one who does not work but believes, his faith is reckoned with his righteousness, Romans 4 .5.
So how do we become just?
By faith in Christ.
Does it count for salvation?
No.
That's what it is.
We have a righteousness that's not our own, Philippians 3 .9.
That we achieve or receive by faith.
That's it.
So that, there you go.
Another question?
Anybody in here want a question?
Oh man, some people do.
Okay, I was kind of having a tough time coming out how to write this question, but how can we show, when
you drew on the chalkboard today, a God predestining people before even time
began, how can you show a specific verse to the Mormons who believe that they have spirit babies, you know,
who were created before existence?
Wait, wait, wait, you lost me.
The thing about showing them.
Biblically about God choosing before is Ephesians 1 .4 and 5.
Okay, that's.
The answer to that one, but the spirit babies thing doesn't work?
Exactly.
The Book of.
Deuterectomy says there's no spirit babies born.
You could actually try and go to 1 Corinthians 15, thank you, 46.
That's right.
The spiritual is not first, but the natural, then the spiritual.
And it's in the context of talking about resurrection and things like that, and our bodies.
You can talk about it in that context.
Jeremiah 1 .5?
Jeremiah 1 .3, 1 .5.
Before you were in the womb, I knew you.
Now, thanks a lot, Rob.
Now I got to explain it.
All right, God only knows believers, he doesn't know unbelievers.
Mark, I mean, Matthew 7, 22 and 23.
Many will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, do we not prophesy in your name, in your name cast out demons, in your name perform many miracles.
Get away from me, I never knew you.
All right, so God only knows
believers.
Gnoskos.
He only knows believers.
You can go to, for example, you can go here, John 10,
27, 28.
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and I give eternal life to them.
I know them.
You can go to Galatians 4, I believe it's 8 and 9.
When you did not know God, you serve by nature those which are not God.
But now that you've come to know God, or rather are known by God, now you serve the true and living God.
So you see, he says that, and you go here, Matthew 7,
22 and 23, I never knew you.
So God only knows believers.
Jeremiah 1, 5.
Before you're in your womb, I knew you.
What he's talking about is prognosko,
prognosko.
All right, pro, pro, pro, prognosko.
Anyway, prognosko, to know beforehand.
Now, when you go to Romans 8, 28
to 29, you'll see those whom he foreknew he also predestined.
Right?
So those whom he foreknew, all right,
foreknew he
also predestined.
The foreknown ones are also the predestined ones.
They're the same group.
It does not say, of those he looked into the future to see what they would do under different counterfactual
situations, of them some he predestined.
It says those whom he foreknew he also predestined.
That's what it says.
He didn't see what they were gonna do.
All right?
So Jeremiah 1, 5.
Before you're in the womb, I knew you.
He's talking about a salvation relationship.
Of course, you can't have a relationship with someone doesn't exist yet, but he's talking about the foreknowledge of God in the sense of
knowing in a salvific way.
That's what's going on.
Now, how do you learn this stuff?
Easy.
You take this thing, it's a really cool thing.
I'm gonna tell you, it's a great tool.
You want to learn stuff like that?
What I'd recommend you do, seriously, is get one of these.
It's called a Holly Bibble.
Some people, some people call it a Holy Bible.
And then what I would recommend is that you do this with it.
Watch this.
Ready?
This is good.
And you do things like this.
And those who inhabit the cities of Israel will go out and make fires and weapons and burn them, both shields and
buckles, arrows, clubs, war spears, for seven years, make fires with them.
Seven years.
Why seven years?
I'm gonna look up every instance of seven years in the Bible and see what happens.
Maybe you'll learn something, maybe you won't.
Then another thing you could do is this.
As you're going out to Jerusalem, he took twelve disciples.
Twelve.
Hey, I just read seven.
Must be cosmic coincidence.
And you start researching.
And you can use your tools, you can use things, you start seeing how things appear, and you start noticing patterns.
So you'll notice, as I already erased it, God does not say he knows an unbeliever, except one place where Jesus says, I
forgot where it is in the Gospels, I know you, you're of your father the devil.
So he does, he qualifies a statement right there.
He's saying I know you.
What he means by that statement is that you are of the devil.
He's not knowing them in a salvation sense.
That's what Jeremiah 1 .5 is getting at.
How do you know that?
That's a good pun.
By reading.
Studying.
Make it good.
What's that?
All right.
Eric Penick on YouTube.
Eric on YouTube.
He wants to know.
Oh my gosh, I got to go back to the original.
Oh, it was building up.
Here it is, here's the builder.
He wants you to devote some time, maybe even a whole Bible study on the religious cult,.
Iglesia Ni Cristo.
Iglesia Ni Cristo, out of Philippines.
Yeah, I have a bunch of information on Iglesia Ni Cristo, and a friend of
mine's wife is Filipino, who's associated with somebody about that.
He studied a lot.
I've got documents, I just haven't had time to put it together.
But I do need to do something on Iglesia Ni Cristo.
Now here's something that's interesting.
When I was in the Philippines, about two and a half, three years ago, and we saw the
devastation the devastation that was in the lower
part of the Philippines.
It was one of the worst hurricanes ever to hit any place.
And we saw, I can't even describe what we saw.
It's just a washing machine of turmoil, of trash, and bulldozed, scraped
streets with stuff thrown on the side so that you could live.
And where the people lived, literally, was, we were driving in the
van and the road would end to the right of Estat Far, and then
just that far further was where the kids were playing in their front yard.
And then 10 to 15 feet was their home that they had built
out of the garbage they'd assembled, and the rest of it was debris, as far as you could see.
Why am I bringing this up?
Because when you went to the Iglesia Ni Cristo churches, fences, everything was perfect, everything was
pristine, everything was pure, everything was nice.
And they're known to be violent.
Now, would I go to the Philippines and debate them?
Yeah, I'd fly all the way to the Philippines and do a single debate with them.
And I would, but I'd want bodyguards.
I'm not kidding.
Because one Iglesia Ni Cristo guy lost a debate, and
his opponent was beat up.
So they're not very nice.
And there's some other stuff going on over there, too, with other cults that are invading here as well.
Bad stuff.
Deny the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, and I forgot the name of the guy who's the...
Anyway, it's been a long time since I tried to study them.
Filipino cult.
All right, anybody else got another question?
Okay, you're working it?
Okay, question?
Yeah?
Are there more in line?
Okay, yes?
All right, Matt, do the Jehovah's Witnesses, I call them the J -Dubs, I don't know what you should just call them, teach that Jesus was
Michael the Archangel or that the pre -incarnate Christ was Michael the Archangel?
The Seventh -day Adventists teach the pre -incarnate Christ was called Michael.
And so that's what they teach.
However, the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that he's Michael the Archangel who
became a man.
So let me spend a little bit of time.
Angel who became
a man.
Are they the same nature?
This is a different nature than this.
How can this become that?
How can one nature become another nature?
This nature has to cease in order for this nature to be, so
to speak.
But notice something.
This nature has properties
as this nature has properties.
Properties of thought, will,
etc.
But these properties are related to that nature because they emanate out of
that nature.
So if this nature ceases, these cease.
So for an angel to become a man in Jehovah's Witness theology is a logical impossibility.
Now they'll say, well, but Jesus became a man.
We'll get to that.
Because what happens here is in Jesus it's only one nature, man.
In the hypothetic union in Christianity, the incarnation is Jesus is both man
and God.
Two natures.
Here it's one nature.
This ceases and then becomes man and then later becomes an
angel again.
Which means the properties of thought and will in this have to cease in order for here.
Now we have the issue of continuity.
Can it be continuous?
If we have cessation of nature and essence, there's no continuity.
It's a logical problem inside of Jehovah's Witness theology.
Okay, let me erase this so I can be ready when we go to the next one.
What's your next question?
We have a lot of questions, but I'm
going to interject my own little comment.
Mormon Elder Valerie B. Cordone.
A guy?
Yes, he's a Latin.
How are you?
He's not watching.
This is my comment.
Over the last weekend was the LDS General Conference.
During conference, he got up and spoke and he said that
when a Mormon family must decide between letting their children go hungry
or buying groceries or paying tithing, they need to pay their tithing first.
I want that quote.
I want it documented.
Okay.
Wow.
Bill Patterson on Facebook said, oh, never mind.
It was a comment.
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?
Yes, they all did.
Yes.
And John Wilkinson from Facebook said, what is the difference of a trinity, a triad, and triune?
A trinity is one God and three persons.
A triad is a group of three, and triune is often interchangeable with a term
trinity.
So depending on how we use triune, it can mean truly trinitarian or it can mean triad
-ish, depending on nuances, because there's what's called a semantic domain of words.
They have a variety of meanings in different contexts.
But the doctrine of the trinity, biblically, one God, three distinct persons.
Triad can be three gods, as the Jehovah's Witnesses will take
a three -headed God, a triad, and represent it as a trinity.
So they're blowing it there.
But triune is something that I'll use, others have used.
God is triune.
He's a trinity, which seems to be a cognate of the term trinity at that point or a variation of the same term.
Triune, trinity.
Triangular.
Trifecta.
I'm stretching too much.
Alistair Jack on Facebook wants you to go over 1 John 5 -7, where
there are three.
They bear a record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.
Can you talk about why?
It's not in the oldest manuscripts.
It's called the Common Johannium, 1 John 5 -7, and I've not done a textual
analysis of it, just haven't.
But I've read commentaries, and the experts have simply said that it's not found in many of the
oldest manuscripts, and so therefore it's in doubt.
Therefore, I will not use it as a Trinitarian support
verse.
However, someone said, I read someplace that there's another manuscript, an
older one, that has it in it.
But I don't know if that's true or not.
So some people have said some different things, but generally speaking, the oldest manuscripts don't have it,
so therefore.
If they find a single really old manuscript that has it in there, great, go for it.
So it's in doubt.
A YouTube listener said, how would you respond to some Christians who believe
Jesus ceased to exist when he died on the cross because they don't believe that humans have souls?
They don't believe humans have souls and they're not humans.
That's like saying triangles don't have three sides.
Right.
Jesus didn't exist?
Well, then we have the problem of continuity and continuation.
To say that he didn't exist is a problem.
I'm sorry.
Ceased to exist.
Ceased to exist after he died on the cross and then lived again
once he resurrected.
Let me address that.
Ceasing to exist and then rose again.
So we're going to have a state.
So this is state zero.
Now let's call it one.
State one.
And state one is nonexistence.
So what is nonexistence?
Nothing.
Nothing is what rocks think of.
State two.
So state two is existence.
State three is nonexistence again.
Now I'm going to kind of blend a few issues here.
So we have a person who doesn't exist.
But you can't say he's a person if he doesn't exist.
No existence.
You have personhood.
Then you have nonexistence.
Then you have state four or condition or state.
And you have existence again.
So we would say that this state is
identical to this state or equal.
And we can say that they're equal in their states because they're equal in their nothingness.
But you can't have a state of nothingness.
But we would say conceptually these are equal because they're equally nothing.
So we say they're equal.
Now people would say well then that would mean then that two and four here are also equal.
Well they are in one sense and not another.
They're equal in the sense that they are existence.
Existence has existence.
Now when we look at stuff like this one and three are the same and two and four
are the same.
Then we get into the issue of continuity.
So if we have existence then we have nonexistence.
If we have existence we're going to get into the same issue we've had before on the issue of
properties.
So we have existence of a person.
And we have an existence of person here.
This has properties.
And this person has properties.
The properties are relative to this person.
Along with this is identity.
Identity.
Here's a question.
Is this identity the same as that identity?
I haven't joined them together.
I'm going to say this.
This is Bob.
This is Frank.
Are they the same person?
Because I've decided that they're different people here.
And we know that they're different people because they each have their own identity.
And because they each have their own identity they have certain properties related only to their identity.
If their identities are equal exactly then they're the exact same person.
But one of the things about existence is and this gets into some interesting discussions is
continuity.
Are you the same person you were yesterday?
It's a serious question.
There's no way to really prove it.
But what we do is we assume that we are the same person we were yesterday.
A Christian worldview we can back that up because God is the one behind us authoring our souls.
He is eternally consistent and continuous.
We represent him in his image and nature.
We can say we're continuous as well.
But when we get to this issue of Jesus lived then he died and then
if he was only human no divine continuity and he had
no existence then we have the problem here.
We take away the issue here of Bob and Frank.
Can we then demonstrate that these are equal?
That they are identically the same in essence.
Now at this point I'd like to bring in the issue of Star Trek and the transporter because you get
someone who's transported they're dissolved, they have non -existence and then put over another place and
have existence.
I read a science fiction short story a while back where they discussed this issue and everything was working
fine this great new machine was great to transport until they found out at the end of the story that what it was really doing was making exact
copies and then killing the original.
So the copy didn't know anything other than he's a copy he just
feels he knows the same memories as going on before but he wasn't the same one because there was two
at the same time there was no continuity issue there was a duplication and then murder that was in
the science fiction story.
How do we know that if it's just a human if Jesus is just a human and he has no soul then
all he is is molecules
electron it's a nucleus all he is is a conglomeration of these things
that's what he is right there's no continuity there's no soul that continues
there's nothing so the problem here is then how do you know he's the same person you
can't know it there is no continuity there's cessation so if there
is no continuity because there is no human soul there's no continuation
then this person is different than this person by definition because this is ceasing
now this is where we get into state one, state two and state one and state two
because this is previous to that excuse me this is previous
to that this is previous to that sorry and this is previous to that
we would say that these are identical.
If they want to say they are the same person then you say these are identical but then each are preceded by nothing
but nothing isn't anything.
Nothing has no continuity.
Another problem just trying to illustrate why this idea logically speaking
of Jesus not having a soul not being human in his essence and then resurrected how do you know in any
way that it's him you can't.
It's a self refuting kind of a system it doesn't work.
And besides that you can go to go here
2nd Corinthians 5 .8 and you can go to 2nd
Corinthians 12 .2.
I believe it is to be absent from the body to be home with the Lord.
I know a man fourteen years ago whether in the body or out of the body.
I do not know.
But such a man was caught up in the third heaven.
The Bible teaches the soul can exist apart from the body.
Hence they have a soul.
Long answer for that hope that puts that to bed.
And kills it next.
Right now we have viewers from Florida, Idaho, California Texas, Pennsylvania
Washington, Georgia and Hawaii Hawaii.
Okay 8 hope you're all enjoying this.
And chicken.
Michigan.
I heard chicken.
So that's 9 places.
Good.
Where in Hawaii.
I was just there.
Well then where's the other 78.
Okay good.
Alright.
From Panama, New York City and Ontario, Canada also good.
Okay I bumped this one to the top.
Even though it's new but Steina on
Facebook wants to know about unborn babies lost to miscarriage.
Her husband and her just lost the first child to a miscarriage last July and one of their Catholic
relatives suggested the baby might not go straight to heaven but the Bible says I knew you before you were born.
Can you help her.
I can only give you opinions at this point.
So let me ask some questions here.
Does life begin at conception.
And a lot of people say yes.
The answer is no.
Life continues at conception.
The egg and the sperm are already alive.
We don't have life from non -life.
We have a continuation of life.
We have 23 chromosomes.
We do not know how the soul, the spirit that essence of what a human is is formed.
God does not inform us that.
He does not tell us.
But let's just say there's the egg
and it goes through its cleavage it goes through its divisions.
What is its nature.
It has DNA.
DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid.
Okay it has certain it has 46 chromosomes.
It has an essence and it has a nature.
What I could do is talk to people and say what is the essence.
What is the essence here now we have some options.
It's human.
It's not human.
Under this category we could offer possibilities.
It's either the case that it's human in its nature or it's not the case that it's human in its nature.
If it's human in its nature when it dies it'll be with the Lord.
That's what I believe.
And my wife and I have lost three children one
after being born and he died in our arms.
Two miscarriages and so I understand.
And it's just not easy.
It's not easy.
It's not.
And you have the right to grieve and you should grieve.
You've lost a child.
You're carrying a child and you're a mother because that life was in you.
It's human and you're a mom just as though the child had been born
at five years old, ten years old and perishes.
You don't stop being a mom.
You're a mom.
So what's in you when your child's hair is fertilized is the complete essence and
nature of what it is to be human.
But the pro abortionists have to
say it's not human.
They have to say it's not human.
And I ask the question if it's not human, and they'll say that's correct, then what is it?
They can't answer.
Then what is it?
I'm going to tell you what it's not.
What is it?
How do you know it's not human?
You're just assigning this a non -human value so you can kill it.
Now, if any of you have had abortions out there let me tell you something.
I don't talk about this very often.
I got a girl pregnant she had an abortion and I wept that
day.
I won't get into it right now.
But I have been forgiven by the blood of Christ.
In fact when I finally accepted that forgiveness I literally was on a bed with another girl and she was
witnessing to me about it and telling me I had not trusted in Christ enough.
I was holding this guilt to my own self and rightfully I should but Christ took care of it.
I don't like to talk about that very often because I'm exceedingly ashamed of it.
So I'm not just pointing a finger.
I've been through it, I know a very very backslidden state a very selfish state
having said that I know what it means for that to happen.
I rarely think about it because it's such a horrible thing.
I know what it's like to have miscarriages with your wife.
I know what it's like to carry the body of my son to the grave.
I know what it's like.
I know that this is never an easy issue.
But I do know this that in the case of those who've had abortions either if you're
female or male and involved with it, let me tell you that you have the right to go to the throne of
God through the blood of Christ innocent because Jesus took all of that
and wiped it away.
I just want you to know that.
And if I met any of you who've been through those things I would never point a finger at you but I
would try and get you to come to Christ because we all need Jesus.
So back to this.
If it's not here if it's not human, then what is it?
I've had them say this it's a parasite.
I've had them say a parasite.
So I said, okay, so then if I introduce my wife to you right now
she's three months with parasite.
How are you going to introduce your child?
One of the things I'll say is this not human, right?
So then when this thing has divided all over the place
and it's cells and it's forming and doing all this stuff.
I was just reading about this last night as a matter of fact cleavage and something
else anyway, homology and embryology and stuff like this.
If this, let's say one week two weeks old it's still basically this
rough shape they'll say it's not human.
I did this once to an atheist who was defending the position.
I said, okay, is it okay then to take this fertilized egg and transfer it into
the womb of a female dog it's okay, because it's not human, right?
If it's not human, then there's no moral issue related with this, it doesn't make any difference what you're going to do, because it's
not human, so it's okay to do that.
I said this to a guy, and no lie.
One atheist went oh my goodness, I never thought of that.
He said, oh my goodness, you're right.
I said, there you go now if it's not human, then you can do that and there's no
problem with it but we know there's a problem with it for moral reasons, biological reasons.
It's not going to work, why?
Because the DNA doesn't match and there's some other issues food and some other things, placental all this stuff,
it's not going to work.
So how old does this have to be before it's human?
If you were to take a man who was in a car accident and he's got a virus on him and everything and you take away his eyes and his ears
and his arms and his legs and his genitalia, is he still human?
And you find out that this poor guy he can he can communicate
through grunts.
Okay, he doesn't really have much vocal cords.
One for yes two grunts for no turns out this poor guy, sorry he's giving me a bad shape here.
His intestinal tract is imploding so they put him on a machine.
His lungs are now failing, they put him on a machine.
His kidneys are now failing, put him on a machine.
Is he still human?
Yes humanity is not defined by mere biological function.
There's an essence that's different that's independent of mere biological function.
That's what this is about the essence is human.
If they say it's not human, then I say when does it become human?
When does it change from whatever nature it is to a different nature?
From a non -human nature to a human nature?
When does that happen and what is the deciding factor?
You don't know but yet you have no problem killing it.
So by your own logic you don't know when it becomes human but yet you can kill it.
So then they'll tell me oh it becomes human when it can think.
I say well you're thinking but you're not very human at it because you want to kill
babies.
I don't really say that but it makes me mad.
But they'll say generally, sometimes they'll say when they think they can become human that's when they're really human.
And my question is how do you know that?
So someone in a coma, this poor guy now he's in a coma, he's not thinking is he human?
See, they don't have good answers.
So what happens to these babies at this age?
My opinion, they go be with the Lord now I can't prove that from scripture
I could go into the theology of if babies go to hell it's because they weren't elected to go to heaven.
My opinion is they all go to heaven.
Can I back it up from scripture?
No I can't.
Maybe it's because I'm emotionally involved having lost three and
have three and I can't see straight.
I don't know but I just believe they all go to heaven.
Why?
That's just what I believe.
I wouldn't debate it.
I just say it's what I believe.
So I don't know what your name was.
I forgot your name.
But if you lost a child in miscarriage
for a lot of women it can be very difficult and it's okay to grieve and it's okay to suffer that
loss.
It's okay to name that child and claim that child as your own whom you will see in
heaven and you will and
trust God that he allowed it for a reason and don't try and ask too
many questions about it because it doesn't give you answers.
Why did he allow our son to have a birth defect that occurs in 1 in 58 ,000 babies.
1 in 58 ,000 happened to our son and he died in our arms
when my wife gave birth.
Literally I heard his last heartbeat in a stethoscope.
Why did that happen?
I don't know but God allowed it and I trust my Lord.
And that's what you have to do sometimes as difficult as it can be.
If you hold on to it it will eat you up.
Doesn't mean ignore it doesn't mean you can't grieve.
But if you hold on to it then it will eat you up.
Don't be jealous and just trust that he allowed it for a reason and you don't have to know that reason
at least for me that's good enough.
Now I'm not a woman having carried a child.
So I can only go so far in my empathy.
But I can say look to him.
You're going to meet your child again in fact in my novel The Influence
my son who died was named Jacob.
And in the novel Mark the main character loses a son named Jacob.
And in the novel they meet again for that
I wept when I wrote that last chapter anyway.
Next question.
So when they say fetus is not human I think the Greek word
for fetus is Latin.
Small child.
Well it's the connotation.
Now they do say fetus because it's neutral biologically neutral.
That's what they do.
Jews are not real humans or whatever.
Well the pro -abortionists now are saying that it is a human being.
They can't get around that anymore.
The scientists disagree with them but they're saying it's not constitutionally protected in the womb.
Therefore you have the right to abort it all the way until it comes out of the womb.
So now if it's not constitutionally.
Protected in the womb.
Then it's value is based on the constitution.
What about France.
They don't have a constitution like we do.
What about them.
Is humanity defined differently in France and Germany.
Now you have political defining of it and you have utilitarian definition.
Utilitarian definition is it's in the way I need to kill it.
That's what happens.
And that's what's going on with the abortion thing.
It's in the way I'm going to kill it I'm not going to be responsible.
Yeah I know.
I thank my Lord for the blood of Christ.
Cody Robbins asked on both YouTube and Facebook what do you think about those who
teach from the pulpit that Jesus loves you and died for you but be mindful of false converts
or unbelievers in the audience.
Yeah very good.
You can say Jesus died for you.
That's empirically true.
And also be careful of false converts around.
Very good you should do that.
You think that's fine to preach.
Jesus loves you died for you.
Oh you mean in light of limited atonement.
Yes all I think I do is say Jesus died for sinners if you want.
Jesus is your savior.
That's what I do.
But if someone wants to say Jesus died for you you know what.
I'm not going to quibble over that you know.
Stand up.
Sorry.
According to the doctrine of limited atonement.
I mean look you can't say just leave it alone you know.
And Andrew on both Facebook and YouTube.
Can a true Christian be a foolish virgin.
Be a what a foolish virgin as in the parable of the ten virgins the ten
virgins were lost.
Yes and he said can a true Christian be lost.
Is it yes the virgin's parable denying eternal.
Security.
No because they weren't ever saved.
To begin with the demonstration is the covenant.
Israel better get its act together and make sure that it has what's necessary on that day of judgment.
It's a covenantal statement to the whole of Israel not about individuals.
The ten virgins represent ten ten.
It's a number of completeness a number of order and things like that.
They went out to get oil they came back they waited.
That's what Israel is doing.
Was doing them sort of judgment.
They didn't lose their salvation they didn't have it.
It's not about losing salvation.
The gentleman that asked about Iglesia Ni Cristo he asked
what you think of the.
The Lamsa Bible which is what Lamsa Bible.
Chuck it.
Okay I actually have one up in my car.
Do you know anything about the author Lamsa
involved.
I believe I'm not exactly sure I think I know some stuff but I might misrepresent people.
Start quoting me in misrepresentation but stay with the Lamsa Bible.
Yeah unless you want to put it in your cult section of your library.
And aberrant stuff like next to the New World Translation and the Joseph Smith Translation Alteration of the Bible.
Mark Lamprecht says.
What's up Matthew.
My old friend.
Mark.
Who?
Lamprecht.
May I raise a bell.
L A M P R E C T.
I can't remember.
Well you know I hate to say this because I never say oh hey how are you doing when I don't remember.
But I meet so many people over the years in college and seminary in so many places that it's hard to remember.
But then all of a sudden it comes back to me one day oh yeah.
So Mark Lamprecht sure does ring a bell though.
From where?
Have him get some more information.
Second does Seventh -day Adventism teach a different
gospel.
Some do some don't.
I've talked to SDA people who say you're justified by faith alone in Christ alone.
Who's God in flesh.
I've talked to SDA people who said you've got to keep the Sabbath in order to be saved.
That's a false gospel.
So it depends.
Some say yes some say no.
But Ellen G. White it looks like taught a false gospel in what's called the investigative judgment.
The investigative judgment tells us that God will look upon you and your works and things like that on that day of
judgment investigate for your worthiness of heaven and then Satan will be the
sin bearer later on.
Wrong.
I should do a series on cults.
Do emotions first.
Do what?
Emotions.
They're irritating.
Emotions are so irritating they get in the way that was from Matthew Thomas.
By the way.
Matthew Thomas.
Can you explain the difference between a contradiction and a paradox.
Sure a contradiction means something that cannot be.
A paradox is something that can be.
A contradiction is one God is also three gods.
A paradox is one person three persons in one God.
Paradox.
Paradoxes occur when we have facts that don't
contradict each other but are difficult to relate to each other.
A contradiction means that something cannot be.
That's the difference.
So this is a piece of chalk in my hand.
This is also not a piece of chalk in my hand.
That is a contradiction.
Both statements can't be true in the same sense in the same way and so that would be a
contradiction.
So therefore they can't have a truth value.
But a paradox can have things that are difficult to understand we can't explain but are also true.
So there's a paradox from what I understand in quantum physics where a particle in one place and a
particle in another place have a certain distance that energy is acted upon
they do something to one particle.
It's instantaneously done over there.
But it would take time according to the law of relativity and I don't know all this stuff and so it's a paradox.
They don't know how it happens.
It's not supposed to be able to happen but it does.
And so they're not sure how it happens.
They don't have enough information and we can call those paradoxes sometimes look up this word antinomy a
-n -t -i -n -o -m -y antinomy.
Not antimony but antinomy.
Or is it antimony.
Not antinomy.
It's antinomy.
Oh antinomy because of NAMAS law right.
Which is a kind of contradiction paradox but isn't.
Haven't used that word in a long time.
Antinomy that was in the Wizard of Oz antinomy
10 man ants downhill fast.
This is from Rockwell again.
Hey Rockwell.
I know there's probably no answer to this but why would God create something or someone and then distance himself from them by saying I don't know them.
Speaking about unbelievers did the unbeliever do something horrible.
Speaking of unbelievers why would he make unbelievers then distance himself from them.
Did they do something horrible to God that they're not aware of.
Okay you Matt asked him if he's ever lied before.
Oh that was just an example because people have lied and it's just an issue of
demonstrating our unrighteousness and need for a redeemer.
That's all that is.
So why would God create somebody what was that
somebody or something and then distance himself from them by saying I don't
know them.
Well because.
They're bad.
But then you might say well hey he knew they were going to be bad.
So why make them.
Well then I would say this go to Romans 9 9 through 23 Rockwell.
And that really will upset you.
Sorry but it's true.
Why did you make me like this.
The thing molded will not sit in the mold.
Or why did you make me like this.
Does God have the right to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for
dishonorable use.
Yes he does.
God has the right to do these things.
So God created man.
But what he created was Adam.
Now if you go to 1st Corinthians 15 22 in Adam all
die in Christ all shall be made alive.
You can also go to Romans 5 18 which talks about the sin of Adam is
the very sin.
Through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men.
So that's Romans 5 18.
Okay so we have that there we have this doctrine called federal headship where
Adam represented in Adam were all people all people here.
These are all people these are heads everybody everywhere all over.
He represented us.
And so what he did was God created Adam good.
He created Adam good.
But Adam does not have what I call the quality of holiness.
And so Adam fell and we in him fell.
Now does God distance himself from us.
In one sense.
In another sense.
One sense no he's always there Psalm 139 he knows all things he's everywhere all the time.
But another sense in a fellowship sense we have a distance from him.
So I don't know Rockwell if you've got any kids but let's just say that you do he does.
Well I got kids now there's nothing that they can do to make them not be my kids.
Now I have my eldest daughter is wayward right now and we're starting to mend our relationship after a few years.
So I can use her as an example and I love her.
She's a great girl.
And so there's been a distance between us because of let's just say sin
on both parts.
Whatever.
Just you know just real generically nobody's perfect.
So there's been a distance between us.
Did I know that that would happen.
Not that particular thing.
But did I know that by bringing my children into the world there'd be problems and one of the results would be a distance between
us at times.
Because we're not going to agree they're gonna do things that aren't right.
I'm gonna do things that aren't right.
And we're gonna have an effect of a relationship.
Hence the distance due to a breaking of fellowship.
When Adam fell there was a breaking of fellowship.
Ezekiel 18 for the soul that sins will die.
Isaiah 59 to sins cause a separation between you and God.
But we have this thing here called the cross and that's where
Jesus restores the distance.
And I don't know where it's called but I don't know the verse but it's actually a verse that says for all who draw near
to the cross there's actually a verse and so we can draw near to the throne of God through the cross.
We can get back to God in that fellowship now.
1st Corinthians 1 .9 says God is faithful through whom you're called into fellowship with his son Christ Jesus.
Now the wages of sin is death Romans 6 .23.
So death is separation from God.
Isaiah 59 .2.
So that's what that is.
So would God create people knowing there's going to be a distance between them.
Yeah just as we as parents would have children knowing there's gonna be problems problems.
But he wants that relationship with us and he sent his son and if you trust in him the distance
is gone.
Hope that helps.
Come on Rockwell.
Are you a painter by any chance.
That's pretty bad.
Okay this is from Paul Stephen Cody.
This isn't his question but he wanted to know what you thought of the Sam Shamoon James White viewed.
I know a little bit about it but I don't know enough about it to comment.
And I you know I I've met both of them.
Both are very godly men who want to serve God.
I'm not going to get into it right now.
If they want me to help mediate I'd be glad to lend my assistance
but they haven't called on me so they don't think it's necessary to do that.
They have a feud going on.
That's the way it is.
I can call Sam and ask details but I got both of both the phone numbers.
I don't need to call them.
Don't.
It's not my.
Business.
Okay same guy.
Paul Stephen asks question for slick when do you believe the Catholic Church
apostatized and do you believe that the early church fathers who taught the infused righteousness
or slack sacrament such as Augustine.
Were false converts.
When the church apostatized Roman Catholic Church in the year 384.
October 4th at 12 23 p .m.
That's when it happened because through a couple it's all recorded.
There were a couple of priest who's walking down like.
And it went.
And that was it that was the apostasy.
They knew that.
Something's not right now.
And they said hey I have a feeling about tradition.
And then they started.
So what's my point.
I have no idea.
But sometime between the death of Christ and now.
Boy do they go south.
Personally I believe it was by the 500 they were already on their way if they weren't already apostate.
Now the church fathers he said the church fathers who the church fathers didn't always agree with each other and all kinds of stuff.
Huh.
He used Augustine.
So the church fathers did not thank you did not agree with each other in all places and all things.
But when specific person I don't know what Augustine has said.
If Augustine taught infused grace he was wrong.
He's wrong.
Grace is not infused into a person in the Roman Catholic sense.
So that a person becomes more righteous by that infusion of more grace into us.
I don't believe that's what Augustine was teaching.
So I have to research Augustine.
I'm not an Augustine scholar.
I prefer his brother Augustine.
Augustine or Augustine.
That's his brother.
Brothers.
And then they would fight.
Who's the real one.
Tomato tomato.
Silly question.
Yes you can ask a really silly question.
Why did the Arab take a piece of sandpaper with him into the desert.
He needed a map.
That's a silly question.
Silly answer.
Do animals have souls.
And do they go to heaven.
Do animals have souls that go to heaven.
You have to define what a soul is.
Do they have a soul in the same sense as a human.
Obviously not.
Not made in the image of God.
Do they have a life force of some sort.
So if you call that a soul by definition then they would say yes.
If you define a relationship what it is to be in a human type in the image of God then.
Do they go to heaven.
Nothing I know of scripture says they go to heaven.
Do they go to hell.
Nothing I know says they go to heaven or hell.
My opinion is they just nothing.
Whatever it is cats dogs whatever.
Now actually though I have a favorite cat named Punch Face.
His name was Punch Face.
And the reason I do
it because I had my brothers living at home back in the day.
And this guy goes.
We got cats.
We got kittens.
And there's a half breed between those Himalayan flat faced cats which I called them Punch Face.
Cats and a traveling salesman.
And they said you want one.
And I said yeah I want that one.
What are you going to call it Punch Face.
Because it was kind of half Punch Face.
So I called him Punch.
For short.
And he was an awesome cat.
He would fetch tag play tag ambush.
He was awesome.
I could tell you all kinds of stories.
Took him to a cat show.
He won first place in the household cat category.
I used to take my dates home to meet my cat.
Want to go home and meet my cat.
Like I said trust me it's not a line.
And then he was a great cat.
But he was.
And so I remember bringing home dates to go.
You know after third or fourth fifth date.
Whatever you know talking about cats dogs.
And they go.
Your cat is weird.
I like him.
I go.
I know seriously I got all kinds of games I used to play with him.
So I would like to see him in heaven.
It would be cool.
He's a beautiful cat.
I miss him.
Now we had three cats.
Luther Calvin and Finney actually.
Calvin went berserk and Calvin he thinks something
happened to him he got injured.
He kind of went and Finney pees on everything and
Luther is lovable which makes sense.
And we have no.
Kittler is Obadiah.
Obadiah because he has a part.
And he has a part.
He's gray and white and a little mustache so we call him Kittler.
Little short mustache not a full mustache.
Short mustache with a part right there just perfect like Kittler.
And you know we call him Kittler one day.
I got up one night like three o 'clock in the morning had to get something.
I don't know what it was and I was really quiet.
I didn't surprise the cats.
I went downstairs.
There's three cats right.
And Kittler is going.
Meow, meow, meow.
And the other two are like this.
And when I came out of the corner they all went.
So I think something was up.
I do.
Like what was that.
You know.
Rappaport says that cat offends him because he's Jewish.
Laughter laughter laughter.
It went in.
I could go meow, meow, like something's up.
Okay there's a bunch of little ones I'm just going to ask them in order.
John Wilkinson from Facebook wants to ask.
Please describe modalism and other heresies that people replace with the
Modalism is the heresy.
That God takes different modes at different times hence modalism.
So in the Old Testament roughly the mode of the Father in the New Testament time it would be the mode of the
Son and then when he was sent into Heaven he stopped being a man.
Now he's in the mode of the Holy Spirit.
That's modalism.
That's heresy.
Now some people say that's what when the Spinocausal teaches.
And it's not really.
They used to be kind of modalistic but they've modified their doctrines a little bit over the past 40 years from what I understand.
And now they hold to a Father, Son, Holy Spirit conglomeration kind of a thing where there's modes there's forms, there's
stuff kind of a consecutive.
It's a different way manifested.
David Gustafson asks how does one discuss these fallacies or just
fallacies with King James only dogmas.
Oh it takes two people.
It takes two people that discuss King James fallacy with King James only people.
It takes two people.
You know something's coming.
So why does it take two people.
Because what it takes is I'm glad you asked that question.
So your friend, your assistant gets on the back side of them and gets down on his hands and his
knees like that and then you go hey what's that.
And then you just push him right over because it's stupid.
King James only stuff is lame and Romans 5 .18 is one of the
verses I'll go to to demonstrate that it doesn't work.
I'm going to be doing some research.
I got it in my notes, I forgot where but there's some places where the King James literally just mistranslates
stuff out of the Greek and I need to do a whole section on this.
But anyway so one of the things that King James only people will do is say that it, the King James is
actually more inspired in the original Greek than the Greek manuscripts they do
and the German, the Spanish, the Japanese Chinese, Bible should all be translated out of the 1611 King James.
And they'll say yes.
I've had people say that.
I'll say what version do you use.
Do you use the 1611.
No I use the later one, apostate.
You ever seen a 1611 version.
Oh man the S looks like a weird.
F oh it's just like what is it.
And so I just call them apostates.
You're not a real 1611 you're like a 1689er.
Yeah you're an apostate so I needed to put.
Dr. James White has a book The King James Only Controversy and it's worth reading.
I haven't read it but I know it's good.
He's a good guy.
Alistair Jack asks do you know of the works and words of Peter
Dunov the Bulgarian philosopher.
Nope never heard of him.
But I remember Hungarian philosopher Bulgarian.
He must have been a big guy.
Yeah probably.
I guess Albert Einstein followed him and greatly admired him.
Really.
Okay there you go that's good stuff.
Mike Moore wonders sometime I'd like to hear an overview and a study of
salvation in the Old Testament versus New Testament versus regeneration and indwelling
of the spirit as suggested.
Indwelling of the spirit in the Old Testament as suggested in John 3 10.
That would be a long study that would be something I'd have to seriously prep and work through
outlines and stuff like that.
Yeah you'd like to see that.
That's nice.
You'd like to see that.
I would too.
Actually I could do it.
It's just I'm already thinking of things and how I could put things in different places for the answers to that.
But they would justify this in the Old Testament the same way they were in the New.
Ultimately okay.
Sean Fray or Fry.
Would Matt agree that this scripture from Job 3 11 -13
would give sufficient evidence that babies who are dead at birth or in the womb would go to heaven.
Job 3.
11 13.
Why did I not die at birth come forth from the womb and expire.
Why did the knees receive me and why the breasts that I should suck.
For now I would have lain down and been quiet I would have slept then.
I would have been at rest with kings and with counselors of the earth who rebuilt who rebuilt
ruins for themselves.
Or with princes who had gold or filling their houses with silver.
Or like a miscarriage they would be as infants that never saw light.
I don't know if that could be or could not be used.
Because you could interpret the because it's poetry you could interpret it a
little bit different ways.
They were like them kings and princes in the same way that they died.
You would have died.
Does that mean they're with heaven or not.
Interesting though.
I'm gonna check that out.
Job 3 11 -13.
Actually I read through 11 -16.
Job 3 11 -16.
Interesting.
Do you know who.
Jack the Chick was.
Yeah he died last year.
Did you admire him and his stand from his chick tracks or did his.
Was his material too offensive.
I admired him for his stand but I didn't agree with all his approach.
Alright Eric the INC guy.
Oh he says I believe one baptism in scripture refers to the souls.
Oh he's questioning about it.
He wants the sermon the study on that.
You want me to do a study on it.
I got my material.
Here's his question.
I believe one baptism in scripture refers to the souls that Jesus was laden with
on the cross were immersed or washed by his spilled blood.
Am I correct.
If he holds a limited atonement that would make more sense in representation and election.
Because we died with Christ Romans 6 8.
We were crucified with Christ Romans 6 6.
We died with him Colossians 3 1 -5.
So there's a real sense in which the blood of Christ cleanses us.
Forgiven by the father to the son John 639 and Jesus cancelled the certificate
of dead at the cross Colossians 2 -14.
It would make sense that ultimately the blood of Christ cleanses us at that point and justification doesn't occur until
faith.
See ya.
Ok if I'm understanding what he's.
Getting at I would say yeah it sounds pretty good.
The gentleman Paul that asked about the apostate when the Catholic church
apostatized 384 remember.
Yes October 4th at 1234.
October 4th it was at 1230 something
1223 I said that's when it happened.
There you go.
Were many of the church fathers not Protestants and believed in the seven sacraments.
Were what were they false converts or people
can be false converts for different reasons and true converts.
With a lot of error.
Well if you believe in the seven sacraments does it mean you're not a Christian.
It depends are you believe that sacraments save you.
Then you would.
I wouldn't say you're a Christian.
I wouldn't say you're inside the camp of Christ.
And just because it's a church father doesn't mean they're right.
You know I was saying my church father can beat up your church father.
They contradict each other just because their church.
You know UFC.
Who's gonna win.
Well depends on what day it is.
Well knocks would knock.
Zwingli would just swing.
Knocks would knock.
It's obvious anymore.
We're done.
So we're at hour 20 we can stop then.
Okay we'll stop 930 our time.
So next week I'm not going to be on vacation.
Will I still be working.
Of course.
But I'm gonna try really cut it down and Nathan and I hopefully do some fishing.
Maybe I'll catch something.
And I'm gonna watch some bad sci -fi movies.
And one of my goals is to eat a entire thing of croissant rolls by myself with butter and jelly.
It's one of my goals.
On vacation.
I can do it.
It's worthless.
It's not good for me.
And I don't care.
And I'm gonna do it.
And so that'll be one of my goals.
I'll probably watch aliens for the 56th.
I've kept count 55.
I got 56 to do.
And so that'll be that.
So then we'll continue on in a week and a half.
Which what day was that going to be.
So that'll be on the 19th.
So I'm not going to be here next week.
I'm not doing the radio show.
And I'm not going to do stuff.
But I will be preaching on Sunday the 9th upstairs here and that's it.
I think it's all I got.
Here is at 1400 North Cole Road at the Well Church at 4 p .m. at the church who meets
here at 4 p .m. the way ministry Chad Pridmore good pastor good friend of mine.
And he fills on a radio show for me.
He said hey Matt could you come preach on the resurrection.
I said sure.
And so that's what I'll be doing this Sunday.
And probably probably will be doing Bible thumping wingnut Monday.
Hopefully I'll have some good time all right.
God bless.
We'll see you all later.