Trinity Oneness Debate Aftershow: 8/11/2021

All right, I'm gonna let this charge for a little bit.

All right, everybody

man.

Are you there Charlie?

Oh, I got a change.

I don't hear you.

Let me do this.

Let me try this.

Can you hear me now?

Yeah, I hear you.

Okay.

I wouldn't have done my hands that keeps wigging out on me I think I.

Okay.

Wow.

What do you guys think?

Why.

I know what I really think.

Yeah a minute to Filter it down to a g -rated comment.

Well, you know what?

I think it's so frustrating when someone misrepresents your position and then I.

Posted in the chat, you know, I would join Stacey in beating the living tar out of the straw

man.

He presented.

I agree with that.

Yeah.

Unfortunate.

He does.

I Kept telling that's not our position.

Yes, it is.

Well, I know about the Trinity that didn't you do?

I asked him what's the ontological Trinity?

Because I know all that the ontological economic.

I know all that.

Well, then what is it?

He wouldn't say he's.

He was lying.

Yeah, I was glad that Stanford truth at least was kind enough to let me

put in the articles that were topical articles.

As you went through the different topics.

So apparent, you know.

Hopefully somebody can go back and take their time and pause the chat.

Look for the link and then they can study it with their Bible open.

It's pretty much what I do during your live broadcasts or in the day I'll Back up post

in.

That's what I do during the live broadcast.

Put in.

Sorry, I just read.

Man I realize how close I have drawn to you because when that guy Say something to you laughing

and said three brains.

I wanted God to give him a spiritual cauliflower here.

Three brain.

What?

Well, hey.

This all his life.

He knows what you teach and you don't even know it.

Yeah, I mean.

Seriously, you know if I don't know he was that bad.

I don't know if I'd agree It's good.

Look, you're not even you don't even know enough to be able to argue.

He didn't.

Well, he got me on several things.

I mean that he didn't get me.

I mean what got me was You don't know you're talking about Matt.

I don't Defending it For over 40 years, you know written numerous articles

on it, but I don't know what it is.

And I Got a kick out of that.

And so he knows a doctrine better than I do and then What's the ontological economic Trinity?

I know what that is.

No, he doesn't.

I think he lied.

I think he did it seems.

Yeah, yeah Marlene said he was scary ignorant.

Yeah, that was the case and he also I couldn't have much of a discussion with him because he doesn't know

how to focus on what the actual issue is.

And he jumps around and he says I'm not focusing on the scriptures.

What?

Yeah.

Yeah, it was funny.

Oh, well.

He's quite a mix of modalism civilianism Aryanism

Lame -ism, you know, there was a point where you know well

He completely missed the preeminence of Christ.

He completely missed your point on firstborn Manasseh and he for him also David is called the

firstborn.

Of course, he was Jesse's youngest.

So I mean The the title and how it's used.

He's completely ignorant of Of The use of the word

as Used in Scripture, which is where we're supposed to limit our definition.

He was not teachable.

He was not teachable sadly.

Oh, no, I'm serious.

He was not.

And You know if I'm arguing with somebody said look Matt that's not our position.

I'm say really okay.

Well, what is your position.

And then I'm gonna argue from what that person says?

And if they say something contradictory like say a Muslim says God is two persons.

I'd say well, that's not what I've heard in Islam.

Can you give me some references to demonstrate that at least I'm.

I'd say, okay, let's let's go through this, you know.

But when I repeatedly told him that's not our position He just ignored it.

Yes, it is.

No, it's not.

Yeah, I I wouldn't trust him to go buy me a bottle of voozoo in Athens.

For as much Greek as he knew.

Yeah, it was.

It's pretty bad.

No telling what he'd come back with.

That's right a Kevin.

And that was good Matt.

I just wanted to comment on something in the debate.

You asked him Did the father called Jesus God, yes.

Yes.

He's Jesus God.

No.

The spirit of the father was in him.

Yeah.

Oh because it's written.

He's referencing himself in the future sense when he was talking about the spirit being in him.

What?

Then why you know, why does he they look upon me whom they have pierced?

That's that's all prophetic so that's the the.

The rug he just he just put everything under it's all prophetic.

So it just it means it really doesn't mean what it says because it's all prophetic.

But you know what?

He failed.

Exodus 6, you know, God spoke for the.

Moses said to him I am Yahweh.

I per day Abraham Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty.

He failed to deal with that.

Also John 8 58 before him was I am what are you gonna say?

You know, you know, sometimes there's a diversion.

I like to go to Isaiah 48.

You look there in verse 12, you're clearly seeing God is speaking.

Oh, yeah.

Okay, but then down as he continues in Isaiah 48 16

There's some interesting language there that He would have a hard time

deciphering.

I think yeah, I don't have this the verse 48 16 up right now, but.

There's also oh I do Isaiah 48 16 with you really quickly.

But that what you're referencing right.

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 sent me and his spirit.

Yeah, there's also there's so much good brought up Amos.

It was before 10 and 11.

Oh, yeah God is speaking.

I sent a plague among you after the manner of Egypt.

I stole your young men by the sword along with their captured horses yet I made a stench of your camp rise up in your nostrils.

You have not returned to me declares Jehovah.

I overthrew you as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.

Wait, wait, wait.

Why is he speaking about himself in the third person?

There's a lot of stuff like this.

There's so many things but he doesn't he doesn't.

Doesn't listen isn't listen.

Redefine living.

Okay, go ahead redefine what living is because I you know, I'd be interesting.

Oh, hey, how are you?

Okay.

Hey great great debate, man.

Yeah, that was just that was a straw man.

Hey, I asked a question and I wanted to kind of clarify so My question was.

My question was Can omnibenevolence be An original

attribute of a God that is not triune and that question was actually in your

favor.

Well, actually, let me before you go through first further.

Omnibenevolence you.

I have a problem with that because it's like saying he's omnibenevolent.

He's all benevolent.

Is he anything else besides benevolent?

What is omnibenevolent mean.

Because when we talk about Omniscience we say that he's a quality of knowing all things.

If we say he's all benevolent that we have it's a different Issue because benevolence

is an attitude where omniscience is a characteristic and so they're slightly different.

Well, so so yes, I mean we would agree that you know that I believe there's the four attributes of God, right?

You'd have omniscience omnibenevolence omnipotence and.

On the presence on omnipotence.

Omnipotence and on the sapience, right?

So the objection would be how can a God that is not triune?

How can omnibenevolence be one of those original attributes because that God could not have

anything to love until it?

Created something to love and the Trinity view solves that problem, right?

That's a whole nother area.

I wanted to get into was the nature of personhood in the extension of God.

Eternally in back in time.

There's no one to fellowship with there's no one to love.

There's no reciprocity it's eternal, excuse me eternal aloneness and

then the true manifestation and.

Actually, there's a whole nother thing.

I could have said there's lots of different things.

I could have said This is what I do with it with the with the Jehovah's Witnesses

and the Muslims I'll say I'll say Is Jesus God in flesh?

No, he's not.

Okay.

Well, I wait a little bit I want to make sure I get that and they say no, he's not and that's okay.

So, let me ask you what's the greatest act of love and you know, those are different things.

I'll say well Jesus said in John 15 13 the greatest act of love.

It's lay your life down for be a friend and say okay good now.

You said Jesus is not God.

So the greatest act of love is to lay your life down for a friend, but you're saying God can't perform the greatest act of love.

So are you saying then that the greatest act of love is done by a creature and not by God?

Is he then greater than God in the expression of love?

Hmm.

Yeah, that's a strong one.

It is and it gets into other things too.

There's other kinds like that fit like that kind of argumentation.

The holiness of God and so but this one is the one that would work best with him.

Okay.

Yeah, that's right x5.

You're not blind to Peter.

Well, yeah, I mean I just wanted to let you know, you know that that's that omni benevolence

question is a It's an attraction to to one of the four attributes of God.

And so the only the Trinity can solve that Objection, so it's it's actually a good

decent question.

I thought it was a good.

Yes, but I wouldn't I wouldn't use the word omni benevolence.

Stay away from that.

It'll trip you up.

Just say Who was God having fellowship with?

Forever.

He wasn't how and who since God is love and love is other centered.

Who was he loving forever?

There's no.

I mean essentially that that is the question.

Yeah.

Cool, man.

So yeah, anyway, I'm gonna I'm gonna get out of here before you guys.

Great.

Everybody you can talk here and they'll get.

Did he understand the doctrine of the Trinity?

No.

Not even.

Yeah, you got straw man really hard.

Yep.

Now is the Trinity three gods?

No, well, no say.

Would you say an accurate representation.

Representation would be three essence.

No, no, there's one essence.

The divine essence who has three is who is represented in three persons.

Not one not three essences because to say three essences is a problem.

There's three different kinds of essence.

If there's only one kind of essence, then there's just one essence.

One essence is one thing like you have three apples.

They all share the one essence.

Appleness.

Right.

Okay, and so there's only one essence.

So if you say there's three essences, that would be an apple and orange and a banana.

They have three different essences.

But if you say there's only one essence then they're one thing and also this gets into the issue of polytheism.

I can address into that the essence of God is no ability and and Transcendentals and it gets more complicated but

it reflects into that as well.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, so who's this gangster looking guy just came in or doodle yeah, how's it going man, how's it going?

All right, buddy.

How are you?

Yeah, awesome, bro.

I can't believe I'm talking to you man.

It's amazing I've been I've been reading your stuff online for the last like 12 years.

So.

Wow, so you're impressed.

Get to meet me.

Can you call the office tomorrow?

Tell her tell my wife.

Tell her baby.

He is so awesome.

He's great.

He's a.

Did you gotta talk me up?

All right, I need to get.

Hey, that was a really good debate.

Man, I don't think we ever met before I'm sky out.

How you doing doing?

All right doing.

All right.

Let's get you.

I want to hear Arturo's talking this guy out.

You're up.

Okay, let's see.

All right.

Yeah, so just I'll be quick.

So the argument that you just used right now about God's love I used that one time and I was actually I

was told by our PC and a guy, you know, truly reformed That basically that it was a

bad argument because God's love is a Relative attribute.

It's not an absolute attribute.

So Yeah, it's called an emergent property this is the issue of love but that he would

say that then in the construction of or the materialization of the Actuality of existence and

other objects to be able to work to love then love is fully manifested.

That's what he's saying, but is that the case that's the question we have to ask because

if the nature of love is self -sacrificial and God is a person by

nature then who's the fellowship is going with that's that's an issue now.

Here is a related thing to this.

All right, so if God is a single person then there is no object -subject Subject

-object relationship if God is two persons.

Then we have a problem.

I'll get is really short that we have the father and the son.

Then we have we have the issue of fellowship and love and reciprocity can be

manifested eternally but that's the problem in there is that the thing that is exchanged

then becomes impersonal so if I'm talking to you the words

are Impersonal in the sense that they don't think the words don't have any self self -consciousness.

So then the love itself would be impersonal and exchange the fellowship would be impersonal and exchanged

between them.

So the this is a short version.

There's there's some issues of discussing that but nevertheless the Trinitarian concept would mean then that that Which is

is exchanged is itself personal.

And so therefore you'd have the Trinitarian essence having the completeness of totality of personhood and the

personal attribution however, if it go back to just to in that abstraction, which is

not personal then would mean that a fundamental aspect of God's nature would be Non -personal and that's

problem.

So I didn't get all the details, but there's another area.

So when we get introduced that then we talk about the issue of love as being an emergent property.

It's an emergent property, but it's eternally actualized always in the condition

of the fellowship of the Trinity.

So therefore it's a necessary property because it's part of what God's nature is eternally.

Okay.

Yeah, I agree with that.

That's good.

Good.

I'm glad you did because I don't know if I was making any sense.

Yeah, it's just it's the whole divine simplicity thing man.

I just it threw me off a little bit when I read Francis Turretin and how he denied that.

I just it threw me Off for a while.

So I you know, I learned that argument from car.

I'm a long time ago and I did it so many times.

Good the RPC and a guy just shut me down.

So, you know the the RPC a.

RPC and a the reform Presbyterian of North America or something like that.

I forgot.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, I could have a discussion with him on that because it gets it gets deeper and deeper.

Okay, I don't know how much he knew and what he was he was talking about there.

And also there's what's called the perichoresis, but the inter -dwelling of the persons in there and the sharing

it necessitates.

Fellowship and love as a necessary property.

What God is because the Trinity.

Trinity is eternal.

If he's gonna say that it's not necessary Property then is he really reflecting the doctrine of the Trinity properly?

That's a question.

We got that right, right, right, right.

Okay, it's tough man.

All right, buddy.

Where do you live?

What city in state real fast?

Yeah, I just moved to Tennessee from Bakersfield, California.

So Bakersfield, yeah, Arturo.

Oh, yeah a whole bunch of um, hey my family live in the Kern Valley.

So, yeah.

Yeah, so you're the guy I would say.

Oh, I'm sorry living in Bakersfield.

I'd say that all like a whole bunch of times.

You're the guy.

All right.

I mean, I love the Kern Valley and even I wouldn't want Bakersfield personally.

Good McDonald's.

They're just off the freeway.

They'll in Bakersfield I.

Know it's a miserable place.

But yeah, I moved out here about four months ago.

The economy got really bad out there and possibly means ridiculous.

So yeah, they got to get rid of Newsom.

That's right.

He was like.

You got to understand what it means to be one this and you ain't understand.

I dropped my bacon sandwich.

Hold on.

You gotta understand me, you know, wait, wait, man, you don't understand what it means to be one this.

You gotta let go of the Illusion that I exist and then you can become oneness.

You know that reminds me when the questioner said well, you know represent the other person's position.

I did his he didn't disagree.

He couldn't get mine.

Hmm.

Oh, yeah, you did an excellent job there.

I am.

That kind of slipped my mind because I wasn't interested in his position.

So I was probably paying attention to side chat at that time.

But yeah, you did excellent when you did that.

It was cool, I love the verses that you brought up.

I was thinking like Revelation 5 and the lamb and all that Alpha and Omega proving Jesus is

Yahweh that you did that too.

That was wonderful, man.

Glory be to God and for for using you to for the Trinity and everything.

So it was awesome brother, and I learned a lot too from you today as well.

So it was really good good.

Well, I didn't actually defend how the doctor the Trinity's arrived at.

I'm saving that for two weeks when I got a Debate coming up another awesome oneness.

Cool, man.

That's great.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well that goes with the question that I want to ask which is I

Like to get my doctrine from God Deliberately teaching it through his scripture.

Good.

And so I was thinking I was reading Apart of that whole section in John

chapter 15 through 17.

And I was like what I'm reading is God deliberately teaching the Trinity doctrine

and it seems it's really blatantly Deliberately being taught there.

Just wanted your take on that.

Well the spirits mentioned John 14 26 15 26 the father and the son relationship

in John 17.

Yeah, that's interesting.

I have to go through and and Look at that to see

About that in that context.

But yeah, it's there also.

Since you talk about John if you go to first John chapter 1 it talks about it.

There's a hint of the Trinity there as well.

In verse 3 what you've seen and heard we proclaim to you You may have fellowship with us fellowship with the

Father and fellowship with the Son.

So us in doing of the Spirit fellowship with the Father and fellowship with his son now here's that's another verse

I could have asked him.

How do you have fellowship with the Son?

How do you do that?

If Jesus is not God in flesh?

How do a million people at once have fellowship with them?

I should have brought that up.

But first John 1 3 and maybe I'll do it for the next thing.

Yeah, there's all kinds of stuff in the Bible about this.

For sure for sure.

He kept saying the same thing like the Father became the Son and the Spirit and denying the incarnation of the

Word in Philippians.

Right, so in Philippians you see the incarnation of the Word and he keeps saying the Father.

Obviously he says well, you know.

The Word became flesh the Father didn't become flesh and the Father didn't die on the cross, right?

So, I don't know why he kept saying Everything you said if you showed a verse that like in first John 5 20 Jesus is

the true God, right?

If you showed him that verse he's just gonna say well, that's just the Father Becoming the Son and that's that's just this Asian

or a glorified creature.

What do you think?

Oh, it's right.

You know, you're right.

He's just gonna interpret the way he wants the grand rule sharp rule of Titus 2 13.

He didn't handle at all.

He's been shown that to Matt in other debates.

I've seen him he's paid no attention to it.

He's blown it off.

But John 15 through 17. That's superb.

Yeah trinitarian Understanding will really bring out the richness of those

three chapters.

I agree.

Superb point.

Yeah one of the things I didn't like about Stacey is is

He can't he could not disassociate his Automatic response from

actually listening with the text says.

Mm -hmm.

Yeah, I agree.

He was misusing and abusing the text and inserting his his view into the text and.

Yeah, and I feel I can see it.

He's inserting the view into the text where it doesn't belong.

It's misusing and abusing the text and it's I said eating the text or the way he's he's actually doing it and.

When it's clear doing it.

Yeah.

It's really funny.

It's crazy.

And when it was very clear I mean, let's say I mean, of course God is invisible.

The Bible says in John chapter 1 verse 18, no man has seen God at any time.

So the Bible tells us in John chapter 4 verse 24 God is a spirit.

The Bible tells us in 1st Timothy chapter 1 verse 17 now to the king immortal eternal invisible.

The only wise God.

So you can't see the very nature and essence of God physically because God is not a physical being.

So Jesus comes to be that visible incarnation the manifestation of the invisible God the Father.

So you can't see God, but Jesus makes himself visible through his life through his words through him being the incarnate God.

So he manifests and makes known the Father.

So God is distinct from his creation.

Therefore.

He is a spirit.

He's not physical.

He is a spirit.

You got to make that distinction of creation.

God is a spirit, right?

So then we have that theophany Christophany and then Jesus Christ becomes the

God man, you kept using that phrase God man, and he kept disagreeing with you.

So I don't see how you can come to conclusion that God is oneness and hold his position.

We can't not consistently.

He's so given over to his position.

He can't see anything else I mean cannot see.

And when he said That each verse refutes the Trinity He doesn't understand how the Trinity's arrived at

and those verses didn't refute the Trinity.

He because he assumes the Trinity is three separate gods.

See the Father's God.

See you're wrong.

It's like you don't even understand our position.

And.

You've got your program right in front of you.

That John 1 18 where it says that Jesus has explained him or revealed him.

Is that the word exegete?

To bring up from behind the curtain and put on display.

That's what the logos would do here.

Let me Take a look.

And I'll share the screen here.

There we go.

Okay, so John 1 18 Explained.

The Greek word is exegesis.

Oh, hey, there you go.

Okay, X a gay.

Sata.

Yeah.

From X a go my oh, that's right.

From X a go my.

That's right to tell lead forward to bring or lead out declare thoroughly.

There you go.

The word picture is airtight in the Greek.

I mean, but he didn't appreciate the Greek whatsoever.

And a lot of people in the room were were were not appreciative of the original language to

it is useful.

When you want to look at a fine point of doctrine, it is useful to avoid a misunderstanding and they were missing

the usefulness.

Yeah, I mean I could come up with an example off the top of my head.

Easy, but that would be off topic.

But yeah, I completely agree with you there.

Go ahead if I may mention about what sky out was saying with the whole long Explanation.

It's just the point that was made to me listening to you there sky out.

Is that.

The Bible just makes sense if you listen to God as he intends and it really is that simple

in a sense.

For sure for sure.

Yeah, and the Bible is actually what dr James White says.

We were forced to believe in a Trinitarian context because that's about the way the Bible is revealed to us.

So no matter what that's the way the Bible is to be understood in that in that context.

Even if you try to fight against it, it's just not gonna work out.

There's very like there's a lot of verses that show that Jesus is Yahweh.

And and and like the God.

Hot chaos, right.

And he Matt brought that up.

And in Hebrews right.

One eight.

But of the son the father says your son Oh God is forever and after forever and ever.

It's a ho throne who saw ho chaos the the throne of thee the God.

So yeah, but it's in the vocative.

Okay, you're right, okay, I believe it's in the vocative there and.

Extremely technical.

I I'm not exactly too sure you might be right.

Yeah, because it's well, no, no, no.

No, it's the nominative vocative, right?

Well, the vocative and the nominative had the same ending Omicron Sigma and Yeah,

so this is with the my notes or my program says that it's The nominative.

That's correct.

The vocative would be God is your throne.

Okay.

No before I you know, I'm getting my brains fried is tired.

Sorry.

Anyway, that's all good dude.

And also in second Peter 1 1 the God and Savior Jesus Christ.

How They are home on.

Kai can't say arise.

So Tyria's the Savior the God of us and Savior of us in Jesus Christ.

And second Peter 1 1 Which is a really good verse to show exergetically that Jesus is y 'all way.

I can't see how he just denies that and tells you you're wrong.

And he would just say where he's our God and that's the father and a Savior Jesus.

Oh, yeah.

That's what they do.

Well, John 17 3 you'll say, you know, right the father and Jesus Christ I you said he'll debate you on the word

and forever.

Right.

And then the part I didn't like is when John 17 5 You kind of clearly showed that Jesus

is praying to the father and highly priestly prayer.

We can see that The father's giving glory to the Son in John 17 5 the Greek word for with

his para and it means with there's an indication of doctrine of the Trinity.

That shows the Greek word for para.

What do you think?

I was.

I was checking on my wife.

So.

I'll just keep going and so that that's what It says there to the doctrine of the Trinity

everyone that in John 17 5 a T Robinson who's the best scholar?

Around says that literally means side -by -side to the father not a plan.

So Stacy who kept saying a plan inside your mind a plan this and a plan that.

Oh John 1 1 is a plan like.

I know right does not say that.

It doesn't say, you know what he kept accusing me of.

He was so guilty of you don't listen to what it says.

You keep changing it and I'd I would quote him a verse and he would alter it.

I mean it was ridiculous.

Yeah, did you catch that?

He was preferred the Geneva translation to the King James?

Nice.

Okay King James remember that yeah.

Yeah.

I don't know if he's aware of the the Geneva Bible is a English translation from the

French.

So, I mean, I don't know his point in referring that.

Well, it's The original.

It might have a lot of advantages for him.

Yeah.

Yeah, and the other thing you mentioned God is your throne there in Hebrews.

That's the preferred translation from the New World translation, which they corrupt the they corrupt the heck out of

that verse.

Can I ask you sky when you're talking about John a second ago, were you talking about

chapter 1?

You know like a log oz in chaos.

Yeah, so I just.

Yeah, I might not have changed the I didn't change the word order here

so let's get something but um, yeah for cross I just Translate

it toward and go from there because that's the most straightforward literal meaning of the

word so the logos in English is most similar

to Statement.

So the statement was toward the father or toward the God.

Sorry the statement was toward the God.

Absolutely.

Yeah, I mean.

And and that's that's it's really you can see that in John 1 1 it's also without the article.

So I think they did that on purpose to show the nature of what the word was.

That the nature of the word and explains it of the nature of the word comparing to the father.

And just like in John 10 30 me and the father are one, you know, he's not saying he is the father or you know I

mean, he's saying we're this we share the same nature and but different positions.

Yeah, you know Manti says that can legitimately be looked at his face to face.

Yeah, right and Thomas even said My lord my god, right.

So You know, what more do you want?

You know, I mean, I can't see how Stacy didn't.

Well, I I see what you were doing Matt.

It was really cool cuz like You were sorry, okay, the one is teachers will agree that Jesus

was called God, right?

However, they'll also teach that like God was acting out in like this father mode.

So this this is becomes difficult because then the one is believers.

How can the father call the son God when in one this doctrine the son is?

Juxtaposed with the father in the same context as a man in the human nature of Jesus was also not God.

So that's the confusing part that I was.

Like, what is going on here?

I think something that was going on is I think by standard convention.

The doctrine that Stacy holds is called Unitarianism.

Yes, if I followed correctly.

Because oneness is where Jesus is the father is the spirit when the Distinction is

completely erased his seem to be the reverse where he says that Jesus is not God

as far as I know.

That's called Unitarianism.

Right, right.

They well, yeah, the Unitarianism is only the father one.

This would be like it's only Jesus acting out in other modes, right?

So which is like Completely a contradiction of Scripture and how it's revealed to us

and how it's revealed to us is that God is in fact Father Son and Holy Spirit three persons and

acting in one God one divine being right and Jesus is in fact Through the

incarnation becomes the man so and he dies on the cross and we're forgiven.

You know, we're saved by him by his grace and we and.

So like Matt was saying he was kind of bearing false witness in that context I can kind of see how he's bearing

false witness because like He doesn't have the one true God so he's actually blaspheming God in

that in that kind of way almost unlike an unforgivable sin sense because he's hard in his heart against the truth of

God which would be an unforgivable sin in in in in a small context.

I don't know how you guys feel about that.

When we talk about the unforgivable sin another context, it's not the Matthew 12 22 to 32 is blasphemy the Holy Spirit.

That's not it.

But no one can be they can be saved.

Yeah later now standing for truth.

I don't know if you answered him.

Wondered when your next debate was with a oneness guy.

I think I posted.

I posted it correctly the August 24th.

Yeah, okay.

It's I posted in the text.

Okay, that's right and it's on your calendar on your home page, by the way.

Yes, it is.

That's where I got it.

Okay, you know that it's on the current org forward slash calendar.

Yeah, that's where I grabbed that one from.

Okay.

Well, I gotta get running man.

You have yourself a good night.

Yeah, I gotta get going here in five minutes myself you too.

Thanks, man.

Okay.

Um, if I may I'll respond to it someone said in the side chat here.

Remy Canadian Said isn't Unitarianism the belief that Jesus is just a man not a deity or

divinity or divinity or connection to God.

I think to say no connection to God depends on how you define connection, but Unitarians

still consider him to be the Messiah and the Son of God.

So I Think to go as far as to say no connection would be an exaggeration.

But yeah, it is the belief that he is.

Not God.

Yeah, but a really really good guy.

I Got some Unitarians here, you know.

When you say that it makes it sound like they just want humans to be good and it's like a proud thing.

And I do think it yeah, it's an ollie ollie in free kind of a thing.

Sure.

Yeah, I do think Unitarianism is In oneness are both motivated

By pride deep on the spiritual level each one in a bit of a different way

but you know, the only accepting of Jesus is To die and

become new and that's the ultimate humbling.

Is that death?

That's right.

Yeah, my wife wrote a little book a little poem book a brand new creature and

Unless you're Unless you allow him to make that brand new creature out of you and you

hasten to his call.

I'm of the belief that I couldn't resist his call Personally

and and that's when he cracked me.

And he did make me a brand new creature and I like her her little book.

You can get it on Amazon by the way.

A brand new creature.

And um, yeah after my experience of salvation when I was studying, you

know, I'm Testing testing different teachers and teachings very carefully and studying the Bible.

Being new I don't call myself a Calvinist, but I'm very

Calvinistic when Calvinism is described accurately.

I don't really find I don't find any disagreement with it and it's just

Yeah, it's not like I came to it by People teaching me

and convincing me or something.

It's like I was looking for what agrees with the Bible.

My experience is a lot less relevant, but obviously that plays a factor in my own perspective and.

That's pretty much what I came to you.

I mean, I'm not a Calvinist, but I've known Matt for over 40 years and he lets me work with them and.

I'm on his board of directors.

Calvinist.

I didn't know that you're a heretic.

No, but properly Presented.

Yeah, Calvinism is is pretty darn sound.

He had Some it was a dandy thinker.

That's for sure and a lot of Calvinists.

Don't represent Calvinism, right?

I'm noticed that yeah people people really Struggle with it.

I think it's what's called antinomy.

I prefer the term my friend came up with simulathia, which is simultaneously true,

but you know, they're like the paradoxes in the text basically and I think that's what people

struggle with is to Accept all the simultaneous truth that the Bible teaches.

If I may mention Where I heard such good description of Calvinism if I may throw it out there for

your audience, is that okay?

Yeah, it's um, I heard it on a channel called Rick Codwell.

They have a show every weekend called the bearded theologians and the man.

His name is Randy and his channel is the Berean voice okay, and

He just did an excellent job of really articulating Calvinism.

Correctly and when I saw it I mean it took them like an hour to be totally discussing the topic and it kind of

took all that time to Have the nuances shown clearly so.

I've sampled some of their stuff on YouTube and From what I've sampled.

I was impressed.

Yeah, they're good brothers for sure.

And then while you said you were wrapping up I guess I'll head out and let you do that.

It's gonna have standing for truth.

Come in if he wants and tell us what he's out of the bait then we can go.

Because I gotta check on my wife make sure she's okay.

I Do it every hour to explain.

How you doing?

She goes.

Okay, but She'll call me if there's an issue.

Yeah, I'll wait a minute to see if he comes in because we're friends.

Him and I.

This headset microphone is so good.

So it's been all going for almost four hours on one charge.

Yes.

Did you give him the link?

Right there.

There he is.

Okay.

Hey brothers.

Good to see you.

Good to see you again, Matt.

Three hour clash.

That's right, even after an hour Q &A I still had people in the in the live chat saying but you didn't you didn't

ask my question I think that was the most questions I've ever I've ever received in a debate.

So that that was epic.

You did a fantastic fantastic job, so.

Man I'm telling that guy he does not know what he's doing.

He does not understand what he's criticizing.

Well as somebody and brother Nick knows too.

I've done a lot of debates against evolutionists.

But I've also studied I'm not an evolutionist.

I'm a young earth creationist so I debate the evolution side, but I have taken a lot of time to study the evolution

side so when I'm Debating them.

I know what I'm debating against and I'm not debating against a straw man because I mean there's

nothing impressive about.

Knocking down a straw.

Well, the rest of us said yeah.

Yeah, I'm with you.

I agree.

Yeah that actually Dr. Kenny Rhodes, he's he's a Trinitarian theologian as well.

And he debated Stacey a few weeks ago.

He was so impressed with your performance Matt.

He asked me if I could give him your email.

He'd like to chat to you a chat was my performance mean tonight.

Yeah.

Yeah, he was in the chat watching.

So he was Kenny Rhodes, dr. Kenny Rhodes.

He he's a theologian for reasons to believe.

Yeah, so he he wants to talk to you give my cell or whatever if you have it or not, I don't know whatever.

I'd love to have you on but I know you're busy.

I'd love to have you on maybe in the next month or two just for maybe like a

program dedicated to defending the Trinity take some audience questions and I.

Can get real deep into the doctrine of the Trinity and lay out the Trinitarian Concept as the

necessary precondition for all intelligibility all morality and the solving

of the one and many issue.

Also get into the nature of the eternal covenant and simultaneous

knowledge of God.

Having all actualities and potentialities who then ordains what shall come to pass all out of the Trinity.

In fact, I use the Trinity as a basis for marriage counseling believe it or not.

Yeah, so anyway.

Amen, I'd love it.

I think that would be very edifying for the audience.

There's.

Yeah, I'd love to.

Yeah, that's awesome.

Yeah, you you did a great job.

Definitely one of the I think best debates on that specific topic.

Very important topic because as we were talking about before there's a lot of Oneness proponents kind of

creeping in and Nick knows what I'm talking about.

I mean, they're.

They're popping up everywhere, there's one thing I mentioned it in passing I did not even tackle

how the doctrine of the Trinity's arrived at right because it's arrived at Systematically not by one verse

and it's not refuted by one verse and this is a I'm saving that for my next debate in two Weeks,

that's good.

You'll know this we're gonna exchange opening statements.

So you know, I could say that but yeah.

I'm looking forward to that debate.

That is Charlie posted it in the in the chat.

What's his name again that you're that you're debating on your something.

Yeah, Rodney.

Okay, Rodney Smith.

Yeah, I see Roger Perkins.

On baptism.

Trinity and baptism.

I think I have learned so much on baptism recently.

I Learned so much I'm getting more convinced that baptism means Sprinkling or

pouring and not immersion.

How about that?

Interesting interesting.

Yeah, and when I get my argument arguments people go.

Those are interesting arguments.

So therefore when you debated Roger Perkins you were debate.

I'm guessing his position as a oneness Pentecostal is that baptism saves necessary for reality.

Yeah, you have to do that.

Yeah, but I've been you know, I've learned so much more since then but.

Yeah, I like teaching on baptism because I still learn I'm still learning about it and I've changed my view on

acts 238.

Slightly and a couple other things.

Nothing heretical.

It's just a you know, look at this look at this, you know, right, right and what does that mean?

You know like the thing I adopted recently within a year or two.

Yeah, the return of Christ the first was taken out of the wicked as Jesus says in Matthew 1330, you know.

It's first get of the tears like.

It's what it says, you know, so.

Anyway, but anyway, you're just stuff like that.

Nothing.

That's heretical just hey, what do you think?

So yeah.

What can I ask you about?

From what I know.

Straight up with the arrow quit.

Okay, go ahead.

Sorry.

From what I know of the etymology of The Greek word for baptism it comes from

dipping which would be more associated with a submersion than a sprinkling.

Yeah.

Except that Jesus for example give you a really short version of stuff.

Jesus was probably sprinkled according to the Old Testament law in order to enter into the priesthood

because never was the priest immersed in water but the priest was sprinkled with bloods or sprinkled with water and I have an

article on that and also.

The whole region of Judea and Jerusalem are going out to John the Baptist to be baptized by him.

Not by a whole bunch but by him.

So there were roughly around 600 ,000 people in that area.

I read different things 640 ,000, but let's just say 600.

This is even 500 ,000 and it says all of them were going out there.

Well, obviously not every individual.

So who was going out?

Well, even if we say only 10 % we're going out to be baptized.

That's still 50 ,000 people.

How does one person baptize 50 ,000 people by immersion?

It's a problem when 3 ,000 were added into The church the one day if

12 people were told disciples were baptizing they would have in eight hours.

They'd have to do one baptism every two minutes and 20 seconds.

Roughly in order to do that and that's a problem because they're in an upper room and you can't do that in upper room

because you would not be able to Have 12 simultaneous vats of water.

Up in an upper room it doesn't work.

There's all kinds of stuff like this and you go to X 1 5 John baptized With water

and you'll be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

Well the way the baptism of the Holy Spirit works.

It's always by pouring.

That's how it's prophesied.

So the word baptism there has to mean pouring and also you go to Hebrews 9 10.

It talks about washings and the Greek word is baptismus.

Well, the context of Hebrews 9 is Sprinklings and You know and

Acts chapter 8 when Ethiopian eunuch and Philip And said let's go get baptized.

They both went into the water, you know, cuz they said both came out of the water.

So see they were immersed.

No, no, it says he both can in you wouldn't be immersed if you're the baptizer.

You'd be up to your knees in water and then come out of the water.

Plus if you read what the Ethiopian eunuch was reading was reading Isaiah 53.

Look at the very last verse of Isaiah 52 and it talks about God's sprinkling nations.

So you get all this stuff you're going.

Hey, and it builds.

I'm not saying it's proof, but it just makes people think.

Yeah, I mean the only point of pushback I can have right away.

Is that in ancient speak?

Sometimes you would refer to one person doing something which would include them in their staff doing things

aside from that.

There's nothing I can say.

But it's true on the perspective.

Yeah, and so I started.

You know, there's a book you can get called William the Baptist.

And I learned a lot of this out of William the Baptist years ago and some other stuff I've learned.

But it's really a it's a short book.

It's a good book.

It's done in a dialogue context and when you read through you go.

Wow, I never thought of that.

That's a good point.

That happens a lot in there.

Not that you agree with everything but William the Baptist.

I recommend it.

Yeah, I like the article you did.

Yeah, you did pretty good on that.

It's more than Your normal little quick and slick things you went into it pretty good.

It's true.

Yeah, but I don't die on this hill.

I just I offered for fun and and.

Yeah, it's fascinating to compare the scriptures and see what those New Testament Christians would have

understood.

They were doing and the methods that they were familiar with.

Absolutely.

Yeah, I'm if it's not immersion then that would be interesting to me.

I think we do have a one obvious anyway.

Similar kind of thing from the other way and that's that the immersion is to be immersed into his death as

If going into the group, but is that the grave you go to?

If you go to Romans 6 it says we're baptized and Galatians 3 baptized into his death.

Yeah, what does it mean?

Because here's a question.

We're buried with Christ in baptism, right?

Yes, so when we're if immersion occurs you're you lay down and then the water comes over

the top of you.

And then you're resurrected out of that water, right?

How was Jesus buried?

You mean in the tomb with a stone covering him?

All the way yeah, I do at the same time think that as a matter of symbolism

We don't necessarily have a con a conflict there based on

the literalness of it being a tomb instead of a grave style burial, but.

They didn't really do grave style burials that way then I guess that's.

That kind of puts the whole thing into question, right?

Right because if we're baptized into Christ what does it mean to be baptized

into him.

Because into Christ is a term of federal headship and If we look at he was put in a tomb.

Can we then learn this out of William the Baptist?

I remember correctly.

Could you then bury someone by building a room onto a House and just put him in on a bed

and then seal it up and that's burial.

The answer will be yes.

Because that's what a tomb is.

Well, then how are we buried with Christ?

What obviously is the symbolism.

I think I think I should.

Symbolism better suits burying there in the baptism.

I like like it that way, but it's not necessarily that way.

Okay, that's my point.

But.

Yeah, I hear that, you know some of these topics.

I don't know what you guys are doing in the time window of Matt's show.

But these topics would be great to have called into his show.

There's the link for the time window of it.

Or the information.

Yeah, I think a lot of people would appreciate Information and some

pointing in the right direction of where to study these topics.

Yeah.

Yeah, I agree with that.

I love your Matt's look live shows and I got to ask you Matt.

Where do you find the endurance?

I mean you did Matt's look live today for an hour.

Then you did a three -hour debate After show.

What's the secret brother?

Naps.

Because I had to take two naps today because I didn't sleep well last night and I got up and took it I got like five

hours sleep so I took an took a nap for an hour and then I had to go do something and they came back and I was.

Just I just just a little bit and I just went after 15 minutes didn't sleep.

Just kind of I call it fake sleep.

That's it.

Then you're good for a three.

I I had an uncle that held down two jobs for as long as I knew him.

And I asked him, you know, you get very little sleep.

How do you do that?

He goes man.

I sleep fast.

That's the secret.

Sleep faster and when you power nap you get a power nap like this.

Well, there's too much to do too much to study too much to watch to to sleep too much.

So sleep faster.

I like that and I read in bed a lot of times.

I'll go through theology and I do on my phone.

Do that.

I do outlines I do all kind of stuff.

Well, if I if I try to read in bed, it's like ether.

It knocks me out.

I Have to I have to I have to I have to I have to I have to I have to I have to I have to.

I'll be awake for at least an hour tonight.

I always had trouble going to sleep.

It's just what happens.

I always trouble going to sleep after a debate.

I don't know what it is.

Maybe I'm all pumped up or maybe yeah.

I don't know.

Yeah, it's like I turn your brain off.

It's hard because I'm like.

You know, I have kind of a different one when it's time for me to go to sleep.

It's like I like to put something on on YouTube and I can be interested in it or something.

But I can't put on like a Bible reading because the Bible just keeps me awake.

Uh -huh, I Can't have anything because I'll start.

What is that?

We're all different.

Yeah I'm the same way actually one thing too before I let you go Matt.

Yeah, didn't you start a page recently on?

Trent on the Trinity.

No, I thought I saw you post something recently either a page or a I'm gonna do a new series.

I go through one or two statements in my broad Thing.

I've been working on the Trinity, okay, but doing it that way, okay, okay.

No, I I like that.

You're doing more of these Trinity debates.

I think we need it and it's.

And we need to do hypothetic Union communicate to idiom autumn imputation justification.

These things need to be covered and known inside out backwards forward because that's the heart of the of the true nature of God in the

gospel especially.

Justification which you did a great job.

Few days ago.

Oh, thanks.

Yeah with the Eastern Orthodox guy.

Yes.

Yeah, I don't think.

Yeah, that's right.

Yeah.

Okay, yeah, I'm gonna be working on you a lot more.

Well, that's a big task because all of my EO Family.

Yeah, they say no matter how long you live you'll never learn it all.

And they're devoted.

I mean, well, I would just respond by going yeah heresy is a deep well.

And it reminds me of the verse about those who are always searching and never coming to the knowledge of the truth.

Exactly taking in knowledge.

They're arriving at the truth.

Well, what was he saying to you Matt on Romans 4 or 5.

But to him that worketh not.

But believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness.

What was he saying about the justification there?

I found it really bizarre.

Do you remember the case?

It was the restoring of the relationship?

Mmm, that's he kept saying if I remember correctly and it was restoring the relationship and.

That when he bore our sins at his body in the cross, it meant that he bore the penalty.

He kept altering the text and it's not right.

Well, yeah.

Restoring that restoring that relationship is is Essential to the Orthodox and he skillfully

avoided using the term they use for that theosis or divination.

He explained it in every way he could without saying the words because I think

some of them are being embarrassed by admitting that that's part of that's a Central part of

orthodoxy is to be absorbed into the power of God ultimately and Become one with

him.

They call it theosis when they also call it divination.

So right you look up those you'll you'll get a better understanding of why he was trying

to Explain himself in those terms.

It'll be clear.

Is that similar to the Catholic view of justification.

Because it reminds me of your debate with Robertson Janice on justification.

Matt where he was he was twisting Romans 4 5 as well.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, you know, he and I had three encounters by the third one.

He was up against the ropes.

Yeah, but yeah, I'm looking at my notes that I took from the EO debate on

Romans 4 5 and.

Where he commented, let's see.

Okay, and He will.

Okay.

Issues when we say that we're justified by faith.

We're not saying that faith is some ethereal substance that makes us right.

Faith is good.

It's always good.

And who it is in it's good because that's my type my notes really fast believe in God believe also in me.

Yeah, I believe because he will need to demonstrate the reputation of Romans 4 5.

And sin is a legal debt.

And that's my notes are related to that.

So I can't remember anything much more than that.

Yeah, he said about.

Justification I'll just put it this way being something other than justification that strikes me funny because you think Eastern

Orthodox would appreciate the Greek language and I think it's a lot harder to be unsure

about doctrines when you check.

When we check the Greek it tends to be more clear and they they tend to.

The words tend to be used so functionally and Usefully

that to like start getting spacey about the words for no reason now that just strikes me very strange.

Yeah.

Yeah, there's some issues but I'm I'm gonna be studying EEO and writing more articles about it.

And incidentally jungle not divination but divinization.

Becoming divine, but they don't mean in your nature.

But in the attributes of God through the energies you participate in and becoming more Christlike and this is how you maintain

salvation.

Yeah, if you hear that word out of an Orthodox, it's describing what they believe is an absorption of themselves

into the Power of God his essence in nature.

Ultimately, I want to ask that is that going back to nirvana?

I want to know.

Anyway guys, I'm out of here, okay.

Yes, good job again, Matt.

I appreciate that debate.

That was must watch needs to be shared around.

So good job and.

Brother make sure you get some sleep.

You've earned it.

Yeah, I go to sleep in usually three to four hours from now.

A party never.

May say to everyone just trust Messiah.

That's right.

Trust Jesus.

Amen.

God bless.

God bless everybody.

See ya.