The following program is recorded content created by The Truth Network. It's Matt Slick Live! Matt is the founder and president of the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, found online at karm.org. When you have questions about Bible doctrines, turn to Matt Slick Live for answers. Taking your calls and responding to your questions at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey everybody, welcome to the show. It's me, Matt Slick. If you want to give me a call, as usual, the number is 877-207-2276. And still fighting a cough, still fighting it, so please bear with me. And if you want to email me, that's easy to do. Just direct your email to info at karm.org. Info at karm.org. And put in the subject line, radio comment, radio question. Either one of those and then we can get to get to them on Fridays like today That's what usually do and sometimes on Fridays if we have wacko mail, I'll do some of that I think we might have one. I'm not sure now for those of you who don't know, you know I've been doing radio for 21 years and I used to get a lot of wacko mail and People just hate me and cuss me out and whatever and I would read them over the air not with a cuss and foul language stuff, but I would just do that and It was it was a lot of fun for me. You know, I enjoy it. I That's me. I'm a professional, you know, don't try this at home. So Maybe we'll get to some of those today We don't have any callers waiting and if you want to call me eight seven seven two zero seven two two seven six and There you go. Oh look at that No interesting, so I think I'm gonna do I'm looking at emails I think what I'm going to do is just jump into some emails. But I think, like I said, I think I might have a hate mail. Let me try this one. Let me see this one. OK, let's see. Dear Matt, I forgot to finish my thoughts in the last email. A lot of people, including myself, have a name that sounds similar to others. I have heard you many times mention your wife's name. And it's a French name. I'm not sure of the spelling. Honest question that you need to ask. Maybe this isn't email. I don't know. We'll check it out. Ask yourself would be if she had an Armenian or a Bolivian name, would you have mentioned the origin of the name every time? My bet would be not. This makes you show off. So if I say my wife's name is Anik, which it is, which is a French word, French name, that's showing off? So what? It's an unusual name. She's American, born here, but Anique is an unusual name. So people over the years have said, really, where's that from? And we just tell it. It's like a habit. So it's not showing off. I want to show off. I'll take my wife out and show her off. She looks good. You know, I look like a bag of rocks rolling down a hill, but she looks good. Anyway, what's wrong with showing your wife off? What's wrong with saying what her name is? People are so, they get so touchy. They get so touchy, you know. See, people don't need to know that you have a marital arts background and certainly is not related to the subject you discuss. You mean my wife's name being Anique, which is a French word? I shouldn't say that? Okay. I'm not sure if you are compensated for the untruth you promote. No, it's true. That's my wife's name. And we've been married 36 years. It says, untruth you promote and pretend to know what you could not have possibly known or not, but it is difficult for me to fathom even if you believe in what you preach. Oh, that's when you change topics. Stop telling me. Thanks again for listening. I love that. That's awesome. So you don't even know you're talking about. You didn't believe it. Thanks for listening. Okay. Well, okay. There you go. Let's see. Um, and then someone wrote, one of the emailers wrote back. Oh, Dave did this. Let's see what Dave... Dave's good. Dave's good. He does really well. If Matt's dialogue disturbs you to such a degree, why in tarnation do you listen to him? Yes, Dave. Good question. I think the truth is, regardless of your opinion of Matt's personal character flaws, you sense that there is at least a grain of truth in what he speaks about regarding the Lord and the scriptures. To that end, I would beseech you to keep listening, and instead of concentrating on the things you don't like, find those truths, examine them, and then ask us a specific question about something. Christianity is an intelligent worldview, and we don't cover our eyes or close our minds to a proper examination of its truth claims. That is good. I've had double his salary. Of course, he doesn't get paid anything. He volunteers. He's a great guy. I've known Dave since 1980, and we used to be roommates. He and I, and some others, of course, went to the footsteps of Paul Tour. His name's David, and David is a biblical name, and he was born in America. By the way, my wife's name is Anique, and she's born in America. It's a French name. So there you go, I guess. And my name, Matthew. Some people call me Matt, and some people call me Doofus. I answer to either one. You say it right politely enough. Isn't that right, Charlie? Charlie's looking at you. See what he's nodding? He'll nod. That's right, because I've known Charlie for 44 years also. All right, now. And then he writes back. Oh, man. Wait a second, wait a second. Thanks for, oh wait, okay, here we go. There's Dave writing this. Okay, Dave writing this. He says, thanks for your email for somebody who doesn't know Matt personally. You sure presume to know a lot about him. That is the height of arrogance. But really, are your comments really the substance of your arguments? Do you really consider it of first importance where etymologically a man's wife's names originates? Your arguments and logic are known as ad hominem and do nothing to give you credibility. Dave, you're awesome, buddy. And dear Dave, he writes back, you're right, I should stop watching him. Exempt the fact that he makes me laugh and I like, and he says a bad word. I will try though. Well, hey, why don't you, Key, whatever your name is, why don't you call me? Why don't you call me? His name is Shariari. It's a weird name. It's a different name. Okay, so anyway, I enjoy that kind of stuff. You know, it's good. It is good. And then there's, I've mentioned this before, there's on Clubhouse. Boy, where are they writing this stuff? This is in emails and then they get transferred to the hate mail and radio mail questions. So there's another one on Clubhouse. There are people who, believe it or not, as impossible as this may sound, there are actually people who don't like me. I mean, can you figure that out? What is wrong with them? I mean, I'm wonderful. And so such are some people who obviously do not have all their paws in the litter box. Let's see, their leash is a little short. How about that? I like that. The anesthesia is not quite anesthetizing. Anyway, there's a bunch of people, I've mentioned this before, Matt Slickness of Lies, The Wake Up Call, and I get a kick out of that. Matt Slickness. Speaking of names, my wife's name is Anique. Why is my name, for real, Slick? Well, I'm just because the guys he brought up the issue of name. I'm gonna tell you how we got our name How I got my name slick is my real last name. Okay, no big deal But what happened is he my my ancestors are from Germany And they came over and their last name was Schlichting. S-C-H-L-I-C-H-T-I-N-G. Schlichting. And so, Schlichting is hard to say. And so they were in, I think, Louisiana. They started in town. So, you know as people do they like my wife's name is Anik. I call her Anik for sure We shorten things is what we do. So schlichting became schlicht and it became slick as a nickname that was called, you know, we were called by my ancestors and so my grandmother my dad's mom had two sons and My my dad is the younger one And so his brother, the oldest one, his last name is Schlichting. And now he's passed away. But when my grandmother had my dad, they were just used to saying slick. And literally when they said, what's the birth certificate name? She said slick. And that's how we got our name. That's it. So how about that? Isn't that incredibly fascinating? That's for the name-o-philes. Name-o-philes? Do they have those? People like names. And so I remember once that I was at a... I was at a... When we first moved to Escondido in Southern California, getting ready to go to seminary. My wife and I, we'd moved there. We got an apartment and I was getting ready to go to school and she's gonna work while I studied. And we went to a street fair. I still remember this. And we like to work out at the gyms, my wife and I. We like to go to the gym. And so Muscle Dude came up to us with a clipboard. And he says, do you guys want to go to the gym? Yeah, we do, actually. We're actually looking for a gym locally, you know, and say, yeah, we're interested. He says, oh, OK, good. And so we took our information. He said, what's your last name? And I said, Slick. And he looked at me weird. I said, no, it's my real name. He goes, uh-huh. I said, no, but it is. What's my ID? He goes, no, it's OK. And he starts taking more information, right? And then he takes my wife's name, Anique. I still remember this. The guy looked at her, he goes, that's it, I'm done. And he turned around and walked off. And we go, no, it's really our name, that's it. And the guy lost the sale because he didn't believe our names. Yeah, I still get a kick out of that. And I'm a reverend, so reverend slick. Okay, enough of this narcissistic drivel. What we need to do is get to some callers if they want to call 877-207-2276. Let's get to Scott from Spokane. Hey, Scott, thanks for calling in. What do you got, buddy? Hey, how are you doing, buddy? Doing okay, hanging in there, hanging in there. Yeah, man, we did it. The election's over. Very pleased with that. Oh, man. Goodness, I was a little nervous there. Thank God. Have you seen the videos of the meltdowns that people are having? They're crying like little babies. That's all I've been watching for the last couple of days. Man. Oh, man. They're so out of touch. And then some of the stuff they were saying that now all of our rights are going to be gone and they're going to jail the people. What planet do you live on? They're so whacked. They're in planet leftist out there, you know, in the cold reaches of the asteroid belt. I don't know. They got problems. Yeah, absolutely. I know my wife is blown away. She doesn't watch politics as much as me, but when she does, she's just exactly what you just said. She's like, what are they even talking about? Like this one lady, I'll have less rights than my daughter or my daughter will have less rights than me. And my wife says, what rights don't you have? What are you talking about? It's ridiculous. They're morons. I mean, seriously, they say these stupid things comparing him to Hitler. And he's a dictator. What? Where are they getting this? I'd love to be on one of those talk shows where they're all Trump haters. And I would just say, look, I'm ignorant. I'm a theologian. I'm not a politician. Can you please give me some examples of the Nazi tactics that Trump has done? I just want to know. You know, I can see them looking at each other, you know, listening for the crickets. Well, you see, he's mean. He said things. He said he'd be a dictator. Well, he did? Where? What? What evidence? What have you got? You know, I'm a researcher. I always check things to make sure that what I'm hearing or what I'm reading is accurate, what I'm told is accurate. Do you guys do that? Crickets. Anyway, that's probably what happened, you know. She used to cry babies. They're diaper radians. Wham, wham. They never show what they said. They'll claim this and then they'll just move on and not show anything. But, yeah. They got problems. But you know one thing, though? It occurred to me. They really are our enemies. They really are. The way they talk about us and the conservatives as fascists, Nazis. Oh yeah, fascists in particular. Yeah, they're enemies. Enemies of the Gospel and enemies of the Constitution. We'll be right back after these messages. Please stay tuned. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. All right, and welcome back to the show. I want to hear from you. Give me a call. 877-207-2276. Let's get back to Scott from Spokane. Okay, buddy, you're back on. Yeah, so I had a question, and this is one of those types of questions where you almost can't tell if it's a good question or a dumb question, but... Well, coming from you, yeah, I can see why you asked that. Yeah, exactly. So I'm wondering... People don't know I know you, that's why. I was thinking last night, and I was imagining, you know, I was thinking about the power God has. and that there's nothing he can't do except for the things we know of, you know, he can't go against his nature, he can't lie. And then it got me thinking about some other things, and basically the question is, if God wanted to, is there a scenario where he could either create something or set something up in such a way that could ever be a challenge for himself, for the sake of challenging himself, or is that just a non sequitur? non-sequitur because God has all knowledge all abilities all wisdom and for them him to set something up that challenges himself means that from all eternity he was going to challenge himself but the knowledge that he would have about challenging himself is always eternal to his nature if he knows all things and all possible challenges then how could he challenge himself okay right Yeah, I figured that was the case, but I figured I'd ask this anyway, because I was thinking, you know, man, if I was God, it would be a challenge for me, for nothing to be challenging for me. You know, some manly thought of my own, of course, but, you know, just thinking out loud. It's okay, it's all right. But you know, God has attributes and certain qualities and characteristics. A lot of people don't really think them through. And it takes practice sometimes to think them through and to say, well, that's this and that's this. You know, most people just don't do that. And I get it. But having needed to defend the faith for so long. You know, I thought those things through because so many questions have been asked me, but, um, you know, it's good. It's a good question. And, uh, the answer to the question is, is, uh, is worth examining. The question is worth examining too. It's not a dumb question. Okay. Okay. Well, good. Okay. Yeah. I think that's all I got. All right. Um, But yeah, no, I'm glad you're back. I hope you had a good trip over there. That sounds great. The pictures I saw, they're just marvelous, man. That's great. Yeah, it was really good. And yeah, it was great. Eric Johnson, he's the guy who runs these things, these tours. And he's been doing them for several years. He's been out of the country 20 times, 20-something, probably 25. Tours he's done with different groups different countries and now he's talking about going to Jordan Which is next to Israel and there's a lot of archaeological stuff in Jordan as well So I said, yeah, I'd like to go and that's in November next year a year from now so there's that and we know we'll see but he's also talking about doing a footsteps of Reformation kind of a thing or go from England to France to Germany and checking things out. So that would be cool. I Yeah, I'd like to do that. I've been to England or Germany, where my ancestors are from, are from Germany, and my wife, her ancestors are from France. I've been over to France with her. She speaks French. And it was interesting, a lot of fun over there. But anyway, so that's it, you know? Yeah. Well, yeah, I will let you get to the next caller then, but I will talk to you soon, my friend. All right, buddy. God bless, Scott. All right. You too. Hey, if you want to call me, we have three open lines, 877-207-2276. Joe from Ohio. Hey, Joe, welcome. You're on the air. Thank you. Firstly, I want to commend you on your patriotism. I always enjoy hearing people that care about freedom and patriotism, especially that promote Christianity. Yeah, I believe we need to follow the Constitution. I think it's well done. And a lot of people don't know that the Constitutional Fathers had a great deal of Puritan Reformed theology influence, because the Pilgrims were Calvinists. And when they decided to develop the early states and the government of their new townships, they asked the ministers to go to the Scriptures. and develop a biblical form of government based out of the Word of God and that was done and it influenced a great deal the Constitutional Fathers and so I believe that the Constitutional is itself a very good document has a lot of biblical a lot of References that can be traced to to the Bible in fact the early church many of their church fathers I mean church fathers excuse me constitutional father said that that the the issue of the Bible the You must belong to church. A lot of their early constitutions in the states required a certain belief in God. And if you couldn't hold that, you could not hold office. Then they had to change it. But you get an idea of how deep it was. So I'm very loyal to the Bible. And, well, I don't trust our government very much. But the Constitution, if it was to be upheld, would be great. And I think Trump, he needs to get in a clean house while he can. He's a clean house and got the FBI and the FDOJ. His time is limited. Four years is not a very long time to do what he has before him, but you know, with the good Lord's help, we can make some headway. I have another comment, if you don't mind. Sure. Last week, a lady called in, and I didn't quite get the scripture exactly that she was questioning you about. the way i was about creation as about one word over another word in the statement do you remember that conversation vaguely but they leave but um... but she she personally said that she was not a uh... she'd say trinitarian but she said she is not a three god person or three got hit a person or something like that. You remember? Well, vaguely. I talk to so many people and then what I do when I'm done is I just go shift my brain to another topic and keep working on other things like writing, researching, whatever. So I don't recall too well. Well, anyway, as the conversation went along, you asked her if she was a Christian. And she said yes, she believed that the Lord Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection, you know, Salvation, you know that she had come to faith because of that and And in the conversation it got it got a little heated, but anyway, pardon me She She As y'all's conversation went on your opinions got further and further apart And, you know, I understand those things happen. And then finally you, you know, you push the line, you know, deleted or whatever. This is Juanita? Because I haven't talked to her for like six weeks. I don't know. She was an older lady. I don't know. It's been just one day last week. Oh, okay. Well, anyway. Okay. Anyway, go ahead. No, I don't think she was a regular caller because I listened quite often. Well, anyway. After you got off the line with her, you know you get a little riled sometimes. Yes, I do. I understand that. You called her an atheist and some other Can you hold on? Collect names for unbelievers. We've got to break. So hold on. I'm trying to remember that stuff, but I can't. But hey, hold on, OK, buddy? Hey, folks, we'll be right back. After these messages, we have three open lines. 877-207-2276. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey, everybody, welcome back to the show. If you want to give me a call, it's easy. Just dial 877-207-2276. And let's get back on with Joe from Ohio. Hey, Joe, you're back on. Yeah, thank you. Anyway, back to my point. he had gotten a little excited or whatever and uh... i understand it's perfectly normal disagree with people you have your opinion they have their opinion but when you uh... implied that she wasn't really a believer and that in fact she was an atheist after the way she had been talking on there i was kind of disheartened about uh... Well, I can't recall, so I can't make a comment. I just don't recall. Yeah. Well, you have a habit of that. People, if they disagree with you and your stance on whatever the topic is, you have a tendency to call them names. Oh, okay. I'm sure you're aware of that. What church do you go to? What church do I go to? Yeah. How does that matter? well uh... it's i think it's your comments are interesting i want to know if there's a certain presuppositional base that that you're arguing from what church to go to well i'm not arguing i'm just making a comment okay what church to go to uh... it's a uh... i guess you would call it uh... they used to call them pentecostal but nowadays they call them uh... i can't think of the word It's all right. Is it oneness? Charismatic? Yeah. Is there oneness? Do they affirm or deny the Trinity? Oh, no, no, no. It's not a, uh, a, uh, getting going blank here. A, uh, apostolic church. No. So they affirm the Trinity? Do they, are they Trinitarian? Yes. Yes. Okay, well that's good. Just checking. I'm not Trinitarian. Ah, okay. Let me ask you, is Jesus God in flesh? The word was made flesh and dwelt among us, that's correct. So is Jesus God in flesh? Oh yeah, he has to be considered God in the flesh. He said he and his father were one. Okay, so if he and the father are one, are he and the father the same person? No, there's only one person in the Godhead. The definition of a person is a human being. There's only one human being that ever represented Godhead. No, the word person means what it means in its context, and the theologians centuries ago adopted the word out of the Latin persona to mean a certain theological concept. That's why it's used that way. So when you say it means, you know, body, flesh, and bones, that's not how it was adopted. That's not how it was used initially. That would be a misrepresentation. Okay? Well, I can't see how it could possibly be a misrepresentation when you consider the meaning of person. A person has to do with having certain characteristics of personhood. So let me give you an example of something. Let's just talk logically. Let's say there's a man who's a Christian and he dies, and his body's in the grave, but he goes to be with the Lord. 2 Corinthians 5.8 talks about this. So he's not in a body, not in a human body right now. Is he still a person? That's the same angle you took with the lady that called you. You went into logic. Yeah. There you go. Okay. Well, so, okay. Is it was he, uh, is he still a person? Well, we're not talking logic. We're talking to scripture, but this God is the, you know, no, no, God is anything. No, he can't. He can't lie. He can't not be. God cannot be unholy. Can't scripture says anything's possible with God. Can God lie? No, okay, so okay, all right, so God cannot lie so when he says anything's possible It's within his nature and within his will that the laws of logic the laws of the principles of logical thought and conduct are transcendentals. That means that they are not dependent upon physical forms, but they are of the mind, and they're universally true. And I can give the argument, I won't do it right now, that the laws of logic, which is the undergirding principle, which are the undergirding principles of good argumentation, exist because they reflect and emanate out of the mind of God. So when we say, if you say logic and scripture are different, well, they're different in one sense, but scripture cannot be illogical because logic is part and parcel of the nature of God. So I think you're speaking of two different matters. There's the logic of mankind, and then there's the logic of God. Okay, so here's the logic. That's a big difference. Here's thinking. Here's just thinking. You said a person is, by definition, a human being. Okay, so you defined it as. So I'm just asking you, if he physically dies and his spirit goes on to be with God, has he stopped being a person? That has nothing to do with the topic that we're talking about. Yes, it does. We're talking about Jesus being the person of the Godhead. And when Jesus died... And who they are after they die is irrelevant to our conversation. No, it's not because it defines what personhood is. So when Jesus died on the cross, in those three days before he was resurrected, was he still a person during those three days? Of course. Good. So then what you're saying is personhood is not dependent upon a physical body. We've established that now, that's good. Well, in Jesus' case, not in your average human's case, it's a whole different subject. But Jesus is human, right? He became human when he was born of a virgin. Yes, and when he died on the cross, was he a man there on the cross? Of course he was. Okay, is he a man right now? Of course he is. Okay, so during the time between his death and resurrection, was he a person? Yes. Yeah, the scripture says he was in the lower parts of the earth preaching to captive spirits. Okay. So, good. So personhood is not necessitating that we have a physical body. That's what you're saying. That's good. No, I'm not saying that at all. A person is a human being. That is the definition of a person. No, no, that's not the theological definition when we talk about God. God has the qualities of personhood. We reckon, see, look, if a man is in a car accident and we don't want this to happen to anybody like this, but his legs and his arms are cut off and he is blinded. Is he still a person? Of course he is. Right. I suppose, I mean, you know. Of course, he's still alive. He's in a physical body. He's all tore up, but he's still a person. That's right. So how do you recognize personhood? You recognize personhood by the qualities and characteristics of personhood. So a person is self-aware, aware of others, thinks, speaks, normally speaks, you know, new people, of course. Can love, can hate, can be rational, things like that. Those are the attributes of personhood. That's all. So they call that person. That's what the theologians used it as. So you have to, you gotta, don't make a mistake. Don't make a mistake of saying your definition right now is the one that they need to submit to a thousand years ago when they were developing the issue 1,500 years ago with the development of the Trinity and understanding it. You can't do that. It's a mistake. It's a huge mistake. Hey, I don't understand what you're saying. The Christian theologians and the church fathers and stuff like that, who had the scriptures and developed the doctrine of the Trinity with the word of God. You're talking about the doctrines of mankind. I'm talking about the scriptures in and of themselves. OK, so Jesus is God, right? Jesus is the person. Express image of God's person. Jesus is the person of God All right, so so that's right as he was one three. So Jesus is God God in flesh. That's good Okay, so who's he praying to in Luke 22 42 and he says not my will be done, but your will be done Who's he praying to he's praying to his father the spirit that created him Okay, so that is the Father God Yeah, He's the Creator. Is the Father self-aware and can speak and has a will? Right? Well, in order to create, He would have had to have had a will. And Jesus has... He can speak and can speak to the Father, and Jesus has a will. So those are two persons. Right there. No, no, no. Yes, yes, yes. No, no, no. Jesus, God is a spirit. No one has seen God at any time. John 118. The only way to see God is in Jesus. Well, they were seeing God in the Old Testament. They saw God Almighty, Exodus 6, 2 and 3, but it was not the Father. Well, it was an image of God. It was the pre-incarnate Christ, because they were seeing God Almighty. No, Christ had a beginning at the virgin birth. No, no, no. The Word is eternal. Okay, we've got a break. Hold on. We'll just discuss some more theology here, okay? Hold on, buddy, okay? We got a break. Hey, folks, Lord willing, if he holds on, I'll be right back and we can continue to discuss this. This is where you learn stuff. We'll be right back. It's Matt Slick live, taking your calls at 877-207-2276. Here's Matt Slick. Hey everybody, welcome back to the show. Let's see, let's get back on with Joe. Hey Joe, you still there? Thank you. Yes. you just thought of something you the constitution was written about two hundred fifty years ago right so the the constitutional fathers had a certain intention when they wrote certain words if someone today were to go and say no those words don't mean what they meant back then we need to interpret with modern definitions of words not what they said would that be good or bad depending on if the modern interpretation is uh... according to uh... literal, you know, proper English. It's called the Original Intent. There's lots of articles and books written on this issue, the Original Intent, and the Constitutional Fathers actually explained certain things, what they meant by certain stuff. So, too, the Church Fathers did that with the issue of the Doctrine of the Trinity and personhood. which is why they adopted the word. And they adopted it from a play, from the theater, where a persona, a face mask, was used by actors. Males only would play the part of many parts, and they'd also play women. And so they would have a mascot representing a woman, a mascot representing this guy or that guy. I actually went to a play like that once on Shakespeare, and it was really confusing to me. But at any rate... I can imagine. It was, you know. And so, I didn't know Shakespeare well enough to build a follow along. But nevertheless, so each mask change, it was a mask, it was a persona. And it represented a different person. And so persona was adopted as person to describe the characteristics of the Trinity in that the Father, Son, Holy Spirit each have a will, each think, each speak, each love, and yet they communicate with each other showing distinction. And that's how the Trinity's arrived at. It's real simple. That's what we mean by personhood. Okay? So that's what that is. Well, even though it's incorrect. Well, it's incorrect if, as I say in my debates, the Trinity's incorrect if the system used to arrive at it is incorrect. That's how the system is. That's how it's arrived at. And I challenge my opponents. I say, show me how the system is incorrect. And nobody has yet. They just say it is. I go, but this is what we have. We have the Bible teaching one God, Isaiah 43, 44, 45. Yet the Father, Son, Holy Spirit are each called God. Yet they speak to each other. So they're distinct. So I say, show me why that's incorrect. And they can't. Well, this would probably put a little light on the subject. People speak of Jesus in the 14th chapter of John, or Jesus speaks in the 14th chapter of John. See the Holy Ghost. So I'm, I'm, I am with you, the spirit or the spirit of I'm with you. I shall be in you well, I think Christian Jim really doesn't focus enough on the fact that the definition of Spirit I Mean, I'm sorry the definition of spirit of ghost is the spirit of someone that has died That's the definition of ghost. So the Holy Ghost is has died Well, the Holy Ghost is the spirit of Jesus. Okay, did you know that the Spirit of God existed in the Old Testament? Like Job 33.4? The Spirit of God has made me. Well, of course. God is a spirit. The New Testament makes it clear. No, no, no. God is a spirit. But it says the Spirit of God made me. So the subject is the Spirit did the making. If you say God is spirit, then you're talking about a quality or characteristic. But it says the Spirit of God made me. Okay? What scripture are you speaking of? That's Job 33.4, for example. See, the wife of Matt went to the store. She went to the store. Matt didn't go. The wife of Matt went to the store. That means the wife did the action. The Spirit of God has made me. Well, the Spirit of God made every man. Okay, so look. The Spirit of God did the making. And this is in the Old Testament. If you say it's the Spirit of Christ, And you said Christ didn't exist until the incarnation. Then you have a problem. That's correct. No, that's not a problem. If you follow the Hebrew scriptures, which is all the Old Testament so far back as Abraham, of course, it was prophesied that he would be created, born of a virgin. Yes, that is His creation. Isaiah 714, I know about that. But the thing is, the Trinity is one God and three distinct simultaneous co-eternal persons. Person, in the context, means self-aware, can speak, can say you and your, me and mine. If you say a person must be a human being, you're just arbitrarily requiring that, when that's not what the theologians and the biblical doctrine says. So you're just arbitrarily saying that. The doctrines of mankind are irrelevant. The definition of person is a human being. No, that's your definition of... Jesus is the only person, human being, that ever represented Godhead. So, I get that, but what you are doing is you're saying this is how the word person must be used, and that the Trinitarian theologians... It's the correct use. No, it's not. No, it's not. The other is traditions of man. OK, look, if I've written about four or five thousand articles, I don't even know how many. If you were to take an article I wrote 40 years ago and then you were to say, I'm going to change the meanings of the words you used. because i just say that's what they mean that's what you're doing you're just saying oh that's what it means person means that that's not what it means in the context of the trinity it's not i didn't say person i said dictionary no dictionary a theological dictionary is what you need to go to that's what you need to do not necessarily because you do you go to You go to that? We're talking about 1,700 years of man's tradition, and traditions are hard to break. You don't understand what I'm saying, and you're not listening. Oh no, I'm listening very well. I've studied the Godhead for over 30 years. Okay, tell me what the Trinity is. Go ahead. Define it. There's no such thing. I didn't care. I didn't say if it was true or false. I just said define what it is. The doctrine that you deny, you at least need to know what it is. The scripture says that the Godhead is hidden in three measures of meal. That's where we find the Trinity. Tell me what the Trinity is, this thing that you deny. Tell me what it is. Oh, it's a doctrine that they came up with in the Nicene Council in 325 A.D. Tell me, define what the Trinity is. This is the doctrine of the Trinity. Okay, tell me what it is. Well, it's a doctrine that the early church fathers under Constantine came up with with the bishops and all of them that they met. Define it. 325 AD and they came up with the idea that there are three people or persons within the Godhead. And what do they mean by person? Well, I'm sure they meant human beings. No, they did not. That's what the definition of a person is. No, that's what you say it is. You don't know what it really was when they used it and developed it. You don't know. Now, you're not going into proper liturgy there. You know, you can take a dictionary from back in the 1800s and look up person and it'll define it as a human being. and eighteen thirty-two dictionary uh... what was that called webster's dictionary eighteen twenty-eight excuse me so now i'm a look up for the word person and i got found it in eighteen twenty-eight the word person okay an individual human being consisting of a body that's one come on, stop that There we go. A man, woman, or child, a human being, a human being, a human being, character of office, in grammar, the nominative of the verb. In law, an artificial person is a corporation or a body politic. It's a transitive to represent a person, to make resemble. This is from 1828. I think they've altered this, actually. So even there, the word person does not necessitate a human being. Well, in most of the definitions it does. So I'm trying to tell you. So you can't, that tells you you can't disregard part of the definition and then accept the other part of the definition that fits your idea of the subject. Isn't that exactly what you're doing? No, no, no. I'm correct. I'm 100% correct. No, you're not. Let me ask you, I'm just not Jesus. I'm just not bound by it. I'm just not bound by tradition. Yes, you are your own tradition. That's a mother tradition. You've got another tradition of scripture. I understand what you're saying, but my tradition is a lot younger than yours. So what do you call God the Father, if not the word person, when he speaks and has a will and thinks and loves? What do you call that? What do you summarize that as? I call that Jesus, because that's where we find him. Father the father is not Jesus because they speak to each other they have different wills The fullness of the Godhead dwells within Jesus Yes, I mean that's how much more simple. Can you get that's what Colossians 2 9? Yeah, I know that's cautious tonight now in Luke 22 42 they speak to each other and have different wills How are they then the same person? No way they could have different wills. Jesus says, always submit to the will of the Father. Jesus says, not my will, but your will be done. Luke 22, 42. He didn't want to go to the cross. He always submitted to the will of the Father. Okay, I got you. You're not listening. And you're not listening. I got you. He always submits to the will of the Father. That's John 530. You can also go to John 519. You quoted Hebrews 1, 3. I told you it was in Colossians 2, 9 about the fullness of the Godhead. I got you. I'm asking you a specific question, and you seem to be ignoring the question. You just go to some other verse, which I tell you where it is. I know the verse, and I draw you back to this verse. So Jesus does not want to go to the cross because of the torture and the torment. And he says, if there's any way to let this cut past from me, please let it do. Nevertheless, not my will, but your will be done. So did they have different wills at that point? He was speaking to the spirit that created him. Okay. Was the will of Jesus different than the will of the Father at that point? No, because he submitted to the will of the Father. Okay, so he said he submitted because he didn't want to go through it. So then he submitted. So he says, not my will, but your will are those different wills. No, he said he always submitted to the will of the Father. You're not listening. It was the Father's will that he crucified. Not my will, but your will. Those are two different wills. Not mine, but yours. Who's he talking to? Well, Jesus himself. As a human being, as a human being, he had the same rights that we have as a human being. And that is to decide one way or the other. That does not change the fact that he submitted to God's will. Well, we're out of time. The music is going to start. Okay, we got to go. Sorry, we're just out of time. The music is starting in like five seconds. Thanks. So, we'll talk to you. Call back tomorrow. I mean, call back to Monday. And study with the word personness historically, because you made a mistake. All right, buddy, we'll talk to you. Hey, I hope that was enjoyable and educational. And this is what I deal with on a regular basis offline, in other places, that is. Anyway, have a great weekend, everybody. We'll talk to you, by God's grace, on Monday. God bless. Another program powered by The Truth Network.