Judah Smith’s Wife, Chelsea, Talks About Roe v. Wade!

Chelsea Smith’s Comments on Abortion and the Womb

Hey guys, Colin here, and welcome back to the channel where we bring you Christian commentary about the things that matter. As ever, please know this video isn't a sinful attack, but rather a Biblical critique.

In today's video, we're going to be talking about Chelsea Smith's comments on killing babies in the womb. And for those of you who don't know, Chelsea Smith is the wife of Judah Smith, one of the foremost seeker-sensitive pastors in the United States.

He's also a pastor to the stars, as it were, as he is personally an advisor to Justin Bieber and his wife on spiritual matters. Chelsea is also a so-called pastor at their church as well, which is contrary to 1 Timothy 2 .12, a topic for another video.

And the church itself, located in Kirkland, Washington, is called Church Home. In the video you're about to see, the one we're going to react to today, she's sitting on a panel discussing the recent Supreme Court ruling which will make it more difficult for some women in some states to kill their babies in the womb.

Watch this.

Psalm 139 and the Personhood of the Unborn

So Chelsea, so many Christians look to a passage of scripture which says, you were knit in your mother's womb. And they stand on that and say abortion is wrong. How can a Christian or somebody who identifies and lives their life by Biblical text, simultaneously read that passage, but still empathize with women that are hurting or that.

Have hurt? I have so much empathy and understanding for followers of Jesus who would say, I believe that life begins at conception. And I believe that stopping an abortion is saving a life. That's a very, saving a life is a very valid cause.

But that's not the only life that we're.

Called to save with your pro-life. Wow, there's a lot of life. So first off, Chelsea says that she quote, has empathy for followers of Jesus who would say that life begins at conception, and that stopping a baby killing, my words, not hers, is saving a life, end quote.

Notice though that she does not officially or clearly identify herself as one of these Christians. She actually seems to actively distance herself from being officially publicly pro-life. I'm not sure what her position is, but I know it's not a Biblical one.

It's not even close. But remember that Chelsea is answering a specific question here. One about how Christians can use verses like Psalm 139 or chapters like Psalm 139, and still have empathy for hurting women.

Just so you know, Psalm 139, verse 13 is the passage at hand. It says, quote, for you formed my inward parts, you knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise you for I am fearfully and wonderfully made, end quote.

This passage is used all the time by Christians who firmly believe that killing unborn children is murder. Here is Chelsea's response to what they say. Watch this. It's also taking one verse.

And making that as, making that one verse, Psalm 139, making that as black and white, as the verses of the forgiveness and love of Jesus Christ. It's one verse versus thousands and thousands of verses that are in the Bible.

And we have a conviction is when we look at the Bible is we put the emphasis where God puts the emphasis and he puts the emphasis on love. He puts the emphasis on forgiveness. He puts the emphasis on compassion.

And so as a follower of Jesus,.

Wouldn't I put the emphasis there? So Chelsea says that using this passage is, quote, taking one verse and making that one verse, Psalm 139, as black and white, as the verses of the forgiveness and love of Jesus Christ, end quote.

There are two incredibly unbiblical implications in this comment, although there are probably many more. These are just the two we're bringing up. The first implication is that Psalm 139 is not as black and white, not as clear, not as obvious in its meaning as the passages which speak about Jesus's love.

And there's really no direct evidence for this claim at all, because again, it's really not defendable biblically, and it demonstrates a lack of sound doctrine. Psalm 139 is actually a very good passage to use against the practice of killing babies in the womb, because it points to the personhood of the child in the womb.

So let's read it again. In Psalm 139, verse 13, David says this, quote, You, God, knitted me, David, together in my mother's womb, end quote. Here's a question. Who was in the womb being knitted together?

What person? The passage makes it clear that David was. David says it himself. Here's another question. Is David a person or a bundle of nondescript tissues? Obviously, David is a person. He says it was, quote, me in my mother's womb.

So is the baby in the womb a person, according to Psalm 139? Yes. And if it is a person, then it has all of the biblical rights that should be given to a person. That's the point. But just so Chelsea can be assured that there is way more than one passage which tells us this, let's read another.

Luke 136 says that Elizabeth, Mary's relative, was in, quote, the sixth month of her pregnancy. Then Luke 141, just a few verses later, says, quote, When Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb, end quote.

So this is John the Baptist, by the way. That's the baby being spoken of. And the biblical word used here to refer to the baby is, quote, brephos. The word does not mean unborn, specifically. It does not mean zygote or embryo, either.

The word means baby or human child. In fact, the same exact word is used in Luke 1815 when it says, quote, Now they were bringing even infants to him, Jesus, that he might touch them, end quote. The same exact word, you see, was used for them being inside or outside of the womb.

Why? Well, because they knew what virtually everyone in the world has known for thousands of years. Babies in the womb are still babies. The fact that we're even debating this at all is a testament to the foolishness of fallen man.

The Bible makes it abundantly clear that life begins at conception, and the Church used to believe that, that unborn babies are indeed fully-fledged human beings. And of course, the Church proper does still believe that, but self-proclaimed evangelical churches don't.

It could not be more black and white. There's no nuance here. There's no sense in which this is a gray area. Oh, I don't know the answer. The Bible doesn't tell us. No, it's absolutely objectively true that unborn babies are people, and murdering is wrong.

Exodus 20 verse 13 says, quote, You shall not murder. Again, this used to be basic biblical Christianity. Yet somehow, despite this mountain of biblical evidence, Judah Smith's wife, Chelsea Smith, one of the foremost figures in the evangelical church who is supposedly a Christian pastor, says that this isn't black and white.

It's not clear. Unbelievable. But we also need to demonstrate where the second falsehood in her argument is. It's very important. Chelsea is making the case that the passages which speak of the love of Christ are somehow more important that they transcend the other passages which speak of the sanctity of unborn life.

Not only is this untrue, it's also extremely dangerous. If a young professing Christian woman hears this and decides to hurt her unborn baby, kill them in the womb because of what they heard, that blood is in part on the hands of Chelsea Smith.

This isn't a small thing. There are real consequences. Real, live babies might be murdered because of the unbiblical advice and excuses that Chelsea Smith is giving here. So this is a big deal. And I know that sounds awfully harsh to some of you, but the fact is, it's still true, and it still really matters.

Chelsea Smith is soft-peddling the slaughter of unborn babies. There's nothing else you can call this. She refuses to call it out. She refuses to make her position clear. And then she takes the only pro-life position that is put in front of her by the panel and says why it's wrong and unloving.

This is nothing short of a loophole for pro-choice activists who want to call themselves Christians. And unfortunately, this is becoming a sort of mainstream view among so-called evangelical leaders.

It's really sad. The issue here is that Chelsea Smith and others in her position do not have a biblical worldview. Again, she suggests that the passages about Jesus's love are crystal clear, easy to understand.

But passages like Psalm 139 and their implications, well, that's very hard. We can't really say one way or the other. This is absolutely false. Psalm 139 and the biblical record in general on this topic can only be used to defend the pro-life position.

There is absolutely no other consistently biblically supportable position on the unborn at all. By the way, since we're on the topic of the love of Christ, let's deal with Chelsea's statement about that because it was really at the core of what she said.

What did Christ say about love? Well, many things, but let's focus on one particular statement that the seeker-sensitive trendy pastors love to quote, shall we? When Jesus was asked what the greatest commands were in Matthew 22, he said that the first was this, quote, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, that's verse 37.

And the second greatest commandment was, quote, you should love your neighbor as yourself, end quote, that's verse 39. But then at the end, Jesus says something else, quote, on these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets, that's verse 40.

So it is clear that Jesus in one of his foremost statements about love attaches love to something, namely, that true love for God and others is to treat them and view them in a way that accords with God's commands according to his word, his law.

This is utterly different from the worldview of Chelsea Smith. We need to understand that. She wants you to believe that we must have this ethereal love, this out in the ether compassion of Christ. And then you can take that general concept, that vague idea of his love and basically remake it in your own image.

Let's love God and others, she says confidently. Well, how do we love God and others in this particular situation with regard to the unborn Chelsea? Well, I don't know, is effectively her response. Why does she say that?

Well, because she's taken one idea in scripture, God's love, and she's using it to negate, to flatten out, to nullify the rest of God's word. Jesus's love is clear, she says, but everything else is unclear.

How does that make any sense? Why would Jesus tell us that our greatest commandment from him is to love, but then not tell us how to love? The fact is, Jesus himself says that love manifests itself in behavior that conforms to the unchanging law of God.

And as we've already covered, the law in Exodus 20 verse 13 says, quote, you shall not. So how do we implement Jesus's love to our neighbor with regard to unborn babies? Well, we implement it by not allowing people to murder our unborn neighbors.

It's really that simple. And that's what you'd say if you have a biblical worldview. But when you just say Jesus is loving, and I don't know the rest, that's when you end up with responses like this. This is the fundamental difference between having a truly biblical worldview and having a really effectively secular worldview, a humanist worldview with biblical concepts sprinkled on top.

It's a big difference. This is the worldview of Chelsea Smith. And unfortunately, it is insufficient to answer the claims of the world. This apologetic is going to fail miserably because it's not biblical.

So many professing Christians believe these things. It's really something we need to fight. The truth is, Jesus tells us to love people according to his objective word. But teachers like Chelsea Smith say that the objective standard doesn't really matter, or they just ignore it.

And they say the idea of loving people in the first place is all that you need. The rest is just fluff. And all of this culminates in yet another unbiblical comment. Watch this part. Chelsea, why do you think that is?

I can tell you why I've been quiet. I feel very humbled. And I don't know sometimes the fine line between humbled and humiliated. I'm a person who follows the teachings of Jesus. And one of those teachings says that we weep with those who weep and rejoice with those who rejoice.

And in this moment, I feel completely humbled and do not know how to follow that teaching. It just seems impossible to be able to do that in this moment. And I am.

Weeping with Those Who Weep and Rejoicing with Those Who Rejoice

So Chelsea says that she's having a hard time responding to this because she's supposed to quote, weep with those who weep and rejoice with those who rejoice. But right now, of course, there are two different groups of people.

One is weeping and one is rejoicing. One is weeping specifically because they want to murder children and can't do that as easily as they once could. And the other group is rejoicing because the murder of children has become less available.

And again, because she doesn't have a full biblical worldview, Chelsea doesn't know how to respond to this biblically. So of course, she goes on to talk about subjective feelings and the opinions of mankind and gives really answers that aren't biblical at all.

By contrast, the Bible makes this very simple. Yes, Romans 12, 15 says that we should quote, rejoice with those who rejoice and mourn with those who mourn, end quote. But what do we do when half of the people we see are mourning and the other half are rejoicing over the exact same issue?

Can we both rejoice and mourn over this decision? And if so, how do we do that? Well, of course we can't. Romans 12, 9 helps us sort this out. It's just before that other verse, and it says this, quote, love must be sincere, hate what is evil, cling to what is good, end quote.

So the answer is right there. Once we stop relying on human foolishness and turn to God's word, that's when we understand. We must hate what is evil, and therefore we cannot sympathize with people because they're disappointed that they can't do evil things.

The desire to kill a baby is sinful and therefore anyone who is sad or hurting or disappointed that they can't do that anymore as easily as they could should not be sympathized with in that sadness. Rather, they should be lovingly called to repentance.

But when someone rejoices at the fact that murder is less legal or less available than it previously was, we can and should rejoice alongside them in that. Why? Well, because that rejoicing is entirely biblical.

So should we mourn with those who mourn? Yes, biblically. And should we rejoice with those who rejoice? Yes, biblically. The reason Chelsea can't give a direct answer here is because she's taking certain biblical principles out of context in order to present herself as compassionate to the secular world and win their approval.

The words of James 4, 4 really ring true here, as it says, quote, whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God, end quote. So in summary, Chelsea Smith, wife of Judah Smith, is a false teacher spreading harmful ideas.

She refuses to defend the rights of the unborn in any clear way. She suggests that the issue of protecting the unborn is not black and white in God's word, and the only pro-life arguments she ever came into contact with, she pushes against.

So we said it once, and we'll say it again, Chelsea Smith is soft-peddling baby murder here. There's no other way to put it, and we can't make excuses for it. She's not a teacher, she's a false teacher spreading heresy.

Romans 16, 17 requires that we mark and avoid her and earnestly desire her repentance. Her comments seem very nice and kind, but in reality, under the surface, she's justifying the murder of children.

Or at the very least, she's excusing it and refusing to oppose it clearly. So let's stop trying to be nuanced for the sake of the worldly secular culture. Instead, let's have a fully-fledged biblical worldview so that we can avoid the errors that we saw in that video.

I pray that this has been a blessing to you, and please know this, I do not offer any of this correction from a high and mighty position. I am nothing but a wretched sinner saved by the grace of Jesus Christ.

So let's pray for Chelsea Smith, that she would stop this false teaching by God's grace and turn to the truth of God's word. Thank you so much for watching that video. Please give us a like and subscribe so that you don't miss any content.

Also, don't forget to subscribe to our Rumble channel as well, just in case YouTube ever takes us down. The link is in the description. And before you go, take a look at this list here. These are the people who make all of the free content you see on this channel possible with their monthly support.

Today's highlighted channel supporter is Chris R. If you also want to help and become part of the solution today, hit the link in the description. Your support keeps us independent and helps us immensely here on the channel.

So I hope you'll consider joining the Truth Army today, and until next time, fight for truth, never surrender, and keep your eyes open. Thank you, and God bless.