AD Responds to a Guy on the Internet's Provocative Video

Christian Nationalism and the Question of Political Violence

Alright everybody, let's get this started. I was on the internet earlier, and I came across this video by a YouTube channel I was not aware of until now. I immediately subscribed, and it's from a guy calling himself A Voice Crying 33.

And the video is very provocatively titled. It's called, Stephen Wolf, How Will You Kill Me? A Question for Christian Nationalism. Now, I am not Stephen Wolf, but I am a Christian nationalist, and so I figured I'd respond to this video.

I can tell that the man in the video is very concerned, very serious, and so I figured it deserves some kind of response. I saw a lot of people choosing to ignore it in some of my circles, but I don't think that's what I'm going to do.

I think I'm going to respond to it, and hopefully address some of his concerns. I think some of his concerns are unfounded. He at one point says that, sorry Stephen, I'm not going to read your book, or something like that, because he was concerned with giving money to a heretic.

And so I just wanted to offer, if you do watch this video, I actually have a copy of the book that I did not purchase myself. It was actually given an advanced reader's copy for free. And those are just automatically produced by the publisher, and they kind of give them out for reviews and stuff like that.

And so I actually haven't done a review of the book either, so you don't have to worry about compensation in any way. So if you're interested in reading the book without giving Stephen Wolf money, I'm more than happy to send you my copy, which again, I did not purchase.

It was given to me for free, and so you can be sure that no money from this particular book is going to Stephen Wolf. And I'm sure you'll want to be educated on the topic that you are discussing here, because I think you might be able to answer your own question if you actually read the book.

But anyway, let's continue, and we will—it's only a five minute video, so that's why I figured I'd do it today.

Distinguishing Civil Authority from Private Vengeance

...of the case of Christian nationalism, and to any other Christian nationalists out there. Now, I know this is a pretty provocative title for YouTube, but I do want to know. Will you kill me? When you get power, will you arrest me?

Okay, so he starts off very quickly. He does want to know, and I think he's sincere. He wants to know that if Christian nationalists get power, will they kill him, or will they arrest him? Now, I don't seek political power myself, in the traditional sense, but I would advocate for Christian nationalism, and I'd offer my two cents if it was asked for, or if there was a vote or something like that.

I would definitely vote for Christian nationalism. But no, I mean, I wouldn't kill you. Well, I guess the answer really depends. Now, I would never kill you because I'm not going to be in politics. I'm not going to be a governor or something like that.

So that just wouldn't be my role. I'd just be a citizen, and I would not be for vigilante justice or something like that. So I definitely wouldn't. So you have no fear—you have nothing to fear from me.

And I think as far as the kind of laws that I would advocate for, it would really depend on what you were doing, of course. And it's just like the same as it is now. I don't advocate for the government executing people, depending on what they do, though.

So if you were out there murdering other people, well, of course, I would advocate for the death penalty. If you were out there raping people, I would also advocate for the death penalty. If you were out there hurting children or something like that, I think you kind of get my point.

So it would really depend. If you were stealing something, for example, I would not advocate for the death penalty in that case. And so, yeah, I mean, I guess the answer really depends just right off the bat.

But he further explains kind of what he means, and so I think it's worth kind of getting into a little further. So let's continue.

And if I don't adhere to your views, will you kill me?

No. See, this is the—so what he's talking about, I guess, in reality—because again, the answer, of course, depends. Should the government execute people? The answer is, it depends. What are they doing, right?

And so he's asking—but what he's asking is, if I don't adhere to your views, would you kill me, is what he's saying. And he's being imprecise, but that's okay. I mean, he doesn't—he hasn't read the book, so he doesn't really know the position of Christian nationalists, where we do have a distinction between the powers that the civil governing authority has and the powers that regular citizens have.

We try to make a clear distinction there. So the civil governing authority has been given the sword of justice by the Lord, by God. And so they're the ones that are a terror to evildoers. They're the ones that are executing vengeance upon the evildoer, because that's what the Bible says in Romans 12 and 13.

It talks about—specifically, it says, do not seek vengeance. He's talking to individuals. Do not seek vengeance, because vengeance is mine, says the Lord. That's what it says. And then a few sentences later, it says, by the way, my avenger is the civil governing authority.

And so there's a clear distinction that Christian nationalists want to make between, on the personal level, like you and me—voice crying—we don't have the sword, right? God says specifically to us, do not seek vengeance, because his—vengeance is his, and he gives the duty, the role of the revenger, of avenger, depending on which translation you use.

He gives that role to the civil governing authority. They're the ones who have the sword. The church doesn't. So the church couldn't go out executing people or something like that. No, it's specifically for the civil governing authority, which God calls his servant, his deacon, is what it says in the Scripture.

So the civil governing authority is God's servant, and it's a specific duty to execute vengeance upon the evildoer, become a terror to evildoers, but also promote what is good. That's the role for the civil governing authority.

And so the answer to your question, it's imprecise, and I don't blame you because you have not read the book, but it's an imprecise question, so the answer is no, I wouldn't do anything to you, even if you were a murderer, right?

If you were convicted of murder, I wouldn't do anything to you, but I would advocate that the civil governing authority do something to you. Now, as far as adhering to your views, again, the answer is it depends because there's nothing inherent in Christian nationalism that would require every citizen to believe in it, in other words.

And I think this is very easy to understand because we have this situation currently. I don't believe in secular government, right? I speak against secular government. I don't think that secular government honors Christ, and I don't think that it's good for people.

Secular government is not good. I don't adhere to it. And yet, I'm not bothered by that. Nobody comes after me. Nobody seeks to kill me. And so it would work kind of similarly to that. In fact, even if you read the Old Testament as well, which I'm sure you have, you can see how Israel was set up, and they would have sojourners that would come, and they would engage in trade and stuff like that, and they'd go back home or whatever.

And as long as they were in Israel, they weren't forced to adhere to Israel's beliefs, right? They wouldn't be forced to adhere, but they would be subject to the same law. So it was the same law for the sojourner or the believer in Israel, and I think it would work the same way.

So if you were a Christian nation, if the United States became a Christian nation tonight, God willing, you still couldn't kill your babies, right? You don't have to believe that that's wrong. You wouldn't have to say, oh, now I believe abortion is wrong.

We couldn't go into your mind or your brain. I'm not for figuring out how to figure out some kind of future crime or thought crime or something like that. I'm not for that. You wouldn't have to believe that it's wrong to kill your own children, but you couldn't kill your own children in that system.

And that's where I think there is some confusion, I think, amongst people that are not Christian nationalists, that we're somehow trying to force belief. No, we're not trying to force belief, but that being said, it is true, whether you accept it or not, that Christ is Lord, and that Christ commands the civil governing authority to execute vengeance upon the evildoer, and that Christ defines what is an evildoer.

That is true, whether you accept it or not. So you are going to act according to the way that the Lord says you should act, and we will have laws that reflect things that are crimes and that you should not do.

So you cannot sacrifice children to Moloch, for example. You cannot go to Planned Parenthood, and there would be no Planned Parenthood in Christian nationalism. But you couldn't kill your kids in an abortion clinic.

Like, you still have to obey the law, because it's the same law, whether you're a sojourner or not, whether you believe it or not. But you don't have to believe it. Like, you don't have to adhere to the beliefs.

Do you see what I'm saying? So there's a distinction there, right? There's a distinction there. Like, for example, I don't think it's legitimate for the government to tax me for, like, an inheritance tax, right?

I don't think that's legitimate. But the thing is, I'm going to pay that tax. You know what I mean? If the civil governing authority charges me an inheritance tax, you know, for the inheritance I get from my father when he passes away, you know, hopefully not for a long time, when that happens, I don't believe in that tax, so I don't have to adhere to the belief.

But I'm going to obey the law for a variety of reasons. And so it would work the same way. You wouldn't have to adhere to the beliefs of Voice Crying 33, but you would have to act in a moral way. You would have to act.

In a legal way. Why I ask is because I did see a snippet of your book. I don't think I want to.

Read it because I don't want to give a heretic like you any money. That's great. And so that's why I'm offering to send you my copy of the book, and I'll even pay the shipping if you want, because I don't know if you would consider that, giving money to a heretic or whatever.

I'm glad to pay the shipping. So if you're interested, I will send you a copy of Christian National, and I'll even send it to a P .O. Box, whatever, you know, you don't trust me. I get it. I get it. So I mean, I even have a P .O. Box.

So yeah, I'll send you a copy for free. No charge. You won't have to worry about giving money to a heretic. And I'm sure that you would want to educate yourself on this topic, because I think that this video probably wouldn't have needed to be made had you educated yourself on the topic.

But that being said, I understand not everybody knows, and so I'm responding. You know, you'll probably turn this off,.

Public Christianity, Heresy, and the Limits of Religious Toleration

But that's how I view you. I view Christian nationalism as a heresy that corrupts Jesus' teachings in exchange for power. Now, you said, furthermore, non-Christians may exercise natural rights insofar that their exercise coheres with the common good, and the common good includes the Christian religion.

And the exceptions are political atheism, subversion of public Christianity, opposition to Christian morality, heretical teachings, and the political and social influence of non-Christian religions. So the thing is, we are not going to just sit back and decide not to speak and not to practice our religions, because, quite frankly,.

We have rights. Atheists have rights. That's it. That's all well and good, you know, and that's completely your choice, right? So if I became the emperor of the United States for a day, which I understand that's not going to happen, but we're imagining something here, right?

If I became the emperor for a day, the kinds of laws that I would enact would probably be at least a little bit lax to some free speech that would be against the things that I would believe. It probably would not be, you know, sort of a, you know, overnight, you know, draconian laws and all that kind of stuff.

However, the goal would be, and I'm not ashamed of this, the goal would be that we would have a situation where we're mature enough as a nation to suppress heretical teachings, to suppress, you know, subversion of the government.

And the reality is that these laws are not, like, foreign or freakish. I mean, we have laws like this right now, so you can speak against the government, but the minute you start taking actions to subvert the in today's land, that's going to be a problem, and they're not going to allow that.

And any nation that's going to survive cannot allow people to actively subvert it. It just doesn't make any sense. And I think some of the reasons why we're in the problems, we have the problems that we have today is because we've been way too lax on that.

And so, and Christian nationalists will differ on this topic as well. So as far as, like, private practice of your religion, so long as it's not breaking laws, you know, like, sacrificing children or something like that, I would be fine with that private practice.

But the thing is, I would not allow you to spread your heretical message, and I would not allow you to try to entice people away from the Lord to other gods. And I would take a lot of this from the Old Testament as well, because in the Old Testament, you know, if you were worshiping, you know, whatever, keep it to yourself is basically the policy.

Keep it to yourself. The minute you entice one of your brothers away from the Lord, it's a threat to the order, to the order of the nation. And so that was dealt with with harsh penalties. And I think that that's totally appropriate.

And so I guess the point, though, is that we would have to employ wisdom here and prudence. And I don't think that switching from the situation we have right today, overnight, tomorrow, to a completely different situation, would be wise.

And so I would take steps towards that end. But the reality is that the Bible, there's nowhere in the Bible that would make you think that it was a bad idea to suppress subversion of a nation, or subversion of the Christian faith, or anything like that.

You can't get that from the Bible. You say you have rights. I understand what you're saying. But your rights can only come from the Lord. And so if the Lord doesn't give you that right, then that's a phony right.

That comes from somewhere else. And I don't respect those rights. I don't, I don't, I don't adhere to those beliefs. And surely, you would not be hypocritical in saying that I'd have to adhere to your beliefs.

And you wouldn't have to adhere to our beliefs. That wouldn't make any sense. And so, you know, I envision a future, somewhere in the future, where if you want to worship, you know, Allah or whatever, keep it to yourself, and we don't have a problem.

I would be for banning public displays of false religion. I would be for banning, you know, public mosques with the Shema, or not the Shema, what's it called? The Shema is the Jewish one. The Shema is good.

The Shema is good. What's the, what's the one with the call to prayer? What's it called? I don't remember what it's called. You know what I'm trying to say. I'd be for banning that kind of stuff in the future, for sure.

So anyway, let's continue. Right. Now, I don't agree with atheism, that there is no God. I believe there's a God. Jesus Christ is the Messiah. He's my Savior.

And I love him. Me too. Me too. And, you know, it's a shame that we, we tolerate, you know, public blaspheming of him. For example, it's a shame that we tolerate that because there's nothing in the Bible that you would, that you could get that would make you think it's a good idea as a civil governing authority, you know, again, with the charge of suppressing evil, you know, punishing evildoers and promoting what is good.

That's their job, according to the Bible, who, you know, which Christ, you know, that's his words, right? So there's nothing in the Bible that would suggest that we should tolerate, if you love Christ, that we should, we should be forced to tolerate publicly blaspheming him.

And so I would say a legitimate function of the government would be to suppress such things. Because I do love the Lord. I do love the Lord. And so I don't want them to be atheists, but I can't force them not to be atheists.

What I can do, though, is suppress their public blasphemy, which I would, which I would seek to do. It's as simple as that. And again, there's nothing in the Bible, again, the words of Christ, whom you love, there's nothing in the Bible to suggest that tolerating public blasphemy against him is somehow a moral good, or it's required, or something like that.

And there's everything to believe in the Bible, that that's the exact kind of thing that the civil governing authority, the deacon of the Lord, Jesus Christ, should suppress those kinds of things, and should promote the public worship of the Lord.

Everything in the Bible would suggest that. Anyway, continue.

Christian Nationalism, Power, and the Use of Force

But the thing is, this really scares me, because I'm wondering, Stephen Wolfe, are you a descendant, a spiritual descendant of the Spanish Inquisition, or are you a spiritual descendant of Ludwig Muller and the German church that supported the Nazis?

Because the thing is, Ludwig Muller believed that Trump would bring back Christian morality. I mean, I made a video about Hitler's quotes about Christianity. I got booted off of Facebook for quoting Hitler and saying, doesn't this sound like Donald Trump?

So my question is, let's say you gain power. We become a Christian nation. I go to the Capitol and I preach. I read scripture and condemn you. Will I be allowed to speak out against you and show how—read from Matthew 23, for example—say how you whitewash tombs, how you go over land and sea to reach a single convert and make that convert twice a child of hell as you, or will I be arrested?

So he starts off this section by saying, this really scares me, and I can see that. I mean, I think you're totally sincere. Your fear is palpable. And he talks about this imaginary scenario where there's a Christian nation and he decides to preach from the scriptures, essentially curses, not exactly, but sort of, calling them whitewashed tombs, using the word of Christ to speak against the regime, right?

And he's, would you arrest me? Would you kill me? That's his question, and it's totally sincere. I can see the fear in your eyes. And I can only speak for myself because I think that Christian nationalists would differ on that.

I would say that, again, this is where you kind of have to consider what's prudent to do, right? And so if Christian nation starts tomorrow, which, again, God willing, the Christian nation starts tomorrow, I wouldn't arrest you for that.

I mean, you're preaching for goodness sake, right? You're preaching. And so I have to acknowledge that, you know, as Christians, there's a lot of immaturity here. And so they would see a Christian in power doing Christian things, and a lot of Christians would be very uncomfortable with that because we have been catechized into thinking that somehow power is antithetical to the gospel.

Even though Jesus Christ is the King of kings, and he's the Lord of lords, and all authority has been given to him, and he's power. You know, Jesus is power. He's ascended. You know, he came to earth, and he took the form of a servant, and then he ascended to the right hand of the Father, and he's putting all of his enemies under his feet.

That is power. Now, for some reason, lots of Christians, in their immaturity, think that power is somehow antithetical to Christianity. And so I would think it would be prudent to allow that kind of free speech, right, where you're not blaspheming Christ, you know, but you disagree with a certain political strategy or something like that.

There's a lot of wiggle room, I think, you know, because I think that there's a lot of prudence that needs to be considered for a particular people, for a particular place, and all of that kind of thing.

So I don't think that if there was a Christian government tomorrow—legitimately Christian, you know, regenerate government, you know, people in government that are regenerate believers—that I would agree with every single thing that they said.

And so I think there's still political activity that would be in play in a Christian government, especially in the United States, especially in the United States, with the kind of tradition that we have.

I think that when the United States was founded, you can see a lot of this kind of thing in action, right? This is not that foreign. You can look at the past and say, I can see how they operated back then.

They had blasphemy laws, and yet there were still political disagreements. And it was allowed, and it was tolerated. I think sometimes too much was tolerated back then, but it was still tolerated. And so we can see how this potentially could work.

In the United States, I think there would definitely still be room for peaceful political action. There would not be room for subversion, and that is true today to a certain degree. And so, again, without any specifics about what you were actually doing, if you were just preaching, that would be okay.

I would not allow for public preaching like atheism or Hinduism or something like that. Again, the Hindus, if they wanted to stay in the United States, they would still have to abide by our Christian laws, and they'd have to keep that to themselves, essentially.

They could not be proselytizing people against the Lord. A nation cannot allow people to rebel against their king, essentially. It doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way in the United States, even though we have, you know, not a great system.

Anyway, so I get the sense that you think this is somehow weird and foreign and completely different than anything that's ever existed, or at least, you know, in the United States, and it's really not.

It's really not. I mean, a lot of the things that you are so fearful of, which I understand, the fear is palpable, are things that we have in place now. It's just that we have a secular evil government instead of a benevolent government, you know, ruled by Christ and seeking to honor Christ in everything.

Why is that so scary is the question I would have for you. Why is that so scary? We have the same essential system except with a false and evil dictatorship that does not seek to honor Christ. That's sons of their father, the devil.

That's not scary to you, but a nation that would seek to honor Christ for some reason is terrifying to you. I think you should search your heart to figure out exactly why that might be.

Convert to your Christianity? The thing is, I can't convert to your way of thinking, because if I do that, I have to abandon Jesus Christ. I have to abandon his teachings.

I have to abandon his love. I don't agree with any of that, by the way, just so we're clear. I don't think you'd have to abandon Jesus Christ to become a Christian nationalist. Obviously, I don't think that.

But no one's forcing you to adhere to our way of thinking or to believe what we believe. Nobody would be forcing you to do that. We would be forcing you to obey the law, and the laws would be seeking to honor Christ.

So you would have to do that, but you would not have to abandon your love for Jesus. Now, here's the thing. I know you think that's weird, but I don't know why you think that's weird, because that's what you currently do.

You obey the laws without abandoning Christ. But we've got secular laws, and some of them are evil, yet you still obey them. This is not weird. You live in a nation, you live in a society, you live in an ordered society, and so you act a certain way even if you don't believe in it.

Hypothetically. I don't know what you believe. Hypothetically, you don't agree with taxes or something like that. You still pay them. You still pay them. Hypothetically, you don't agree with, I don't know, speed limits or something.

You still obey them, maybe. We do this all the time. We adhere to laws that we don't agree with because we understand that the Lord has put us in this place, and so we're supposed to honor the King. Obviously, if they're telling us to do something we cannot do, then we don't do that, but I'm just saying there's lots of laws I don't agree with that I still obey.

And so you do this now without having to adhere your mind and coming up with a way to change what you believe by forcing it. I know you can't do that, neither can I, but again, I ask you to look inside, and why is it that this is all okay and not that scary when we have a secular evil government, but if we were to have a good Christian government that seeks to honor the Lord, obviously they won't be perfect, but they're trying to honor the Lord.

That would be terrifying to you. It's a very important question to answer to yourself. So again,.

Capital Punishment, Stoning, and Opposition to Christian Rule

I'm arrested. I face trial for heretical teachings. Who will kill me and how will I die?

Will it be you? Will it be the state? So this is kind of where I kind of thought, like, maybe I should send you the book, right? Because this is a very easy question to answer, and to be honest, what I'm worried about is that people won't take you seriously because this is such a simple question that almost every Christian nationalist that I've ever known has answered clearly, and you kind of look foolish when you claim this is some kind of a gotcha.

I'm really confused. I don't know. Like, who would kill you? Well, first of all, nobody would kill you unless you committed a capital offense, right? I guess you're saying if I did commit a capital offense, so I'm just going to give you a little bit of extra stuff here.

You did something that requires a capital offense, right? Because preaching wouldn't be that thing. Preaching wouldn't be that thing, but if you did something, Voice Crying 33, that would be a capital crime, it would be the civil governing authority that would kill you, okay?

You would be executed by the civil governing authority, the government. It would not be Stephen Wolf, an academic, sitting in his lounge smoking a pipe. It would not be me, a regular person who's got no role in this.

It would not be a random person. It would be the civil governing authority. It's as simple as that. It's a very easy answer that every Christian nationalist, from the very most junior one to the most senior one, would know the answer to, and so it is a little frustrating that you'd be willing to talk about this and have not the first idea what you're talking about, but that's why I'm willing to send you the book because I don't think that this is necessarily your fault.

It's just ignorance, and look, you're ignorant about the things you're ignorant about. So am I. It's not a big deal. It's not a moral judgment, but I would suggest in the future, if you're going to make a video like this, that you would at least have done the reading a little bit.

There's ways to get Stephen Wolf's beliefs without paying a heretic. There are plenty of ways. I would suggest maybe doing it.

Will you bring back stoning or burning at the stakes, or will it be something more humane,.

Like the gas chamber? So he's asking about the mode of execution now, and again, this would be up to the civil governing authority. So in my opinion, I think that there are many advantages to bringing back stoning.

However, in prudence, I understand that if today we're a secular democracy and tomorrow we're a Christian nation, my first order of business probably would not be to bring back stoning. That being said, I think there are a lot of advantages to stoning, and so if you're interested in that, I think Rush Dooney has done some good work on that, and there are others as well that kind of talk about the benefits of why that was a way that people were executed in the Old Testament, because that's what the Lord commanded.

The Lord of love commanded that mode of execution for Israel. We're not Israel, so we don't have to do exactly everything that Israel does, but there were reasons when there were so many other options that were available.

They didn't have gas chambers, okay, but they did have other options available to them that I guess, in your opinion, would be more humane. But in my opinion, there were reasons why the Lord chose stoning for certain offenses, and there are many advantages to that, and so I would suggest maybe looking into that.

Maybe you haven't read Rush Dooney. Here's the good part about Rush Dooney. He's dead, so you could read his books without giving him any money. There you go. Just maybe a possible suggestion. So anyway, yeah, so the mode of execution, obviously it'd be the government, but the mode of execution, I think, is an area where we need to deploy prudence, and so I would not bring back stoning tomorrow.

That being said, I think stoning is a legitimate form of execution, and I think it has many advantages, and it has the benefit of being directly endorsed by the Lord of love, by Jesus Christ Himself in the Old Testament.

Well, filing squad. I mean, I ask you, and this is not a ridiculous question, because you basically state that you want to be in control. If you're in power and if you're in control, you will have.

Opposition. What will you do to the opposition? It all depends, and that's a very good point, and I appreciate you bringing that up of Voice Crying 33. Yes, there will be opposition. That is true for every government of all time.

They have to figure out what to do with opposition, and I believe that the best antidote for how—the best prescription, I should say, the best prescription for dealing with opposition as a civil governing authority comes from the Christian religion.

It comes from the Lord, and so I think it's very beneficial. Again, we're not Israel, but I think it's very beneficial to look at how Israel dealt with opposition and all of that kind of thing when you're coming up with your strategy for dealing with opposition.

There's no Christian nationalist on the planet that thinks that everyone's going to be for everything the Christian nation does. That's obviously not going to be the case, but we do have to figure out, okay, how do we deal with opposition?

And so I can see your very concern, and there's a lot of body language here that would—that shows me that there is a lot of deep-seated fear and concern coming from you. And so I understand, and I get it, and it's very different than what you were taught in Sunday school, or what we were taught in Sunday school, let's say.

I don't know anything about your history, but what I was taught in Sunday school, but what I was taught in Sunday school was pretty incomplete, and there's an entire Reformed tradition that demonstrates how incomplete that was.

And so a lot of this stuff is nothing new. This is not Stephen coming up with some kind of novel interpretation of Reformed theology or the Christian religion, but a lot of it has been forgotten. And so I understand the fear, because I forgot a lot of this, too.

And when I say I forgot, I mean I was never taught it.

I am almost convinced that if you get into power, I would not be able to make these YouTube videos, and that you would arrest me. That's not paranoia. It's happened time and time again. And I have atheist friends, friends who don't believe, mainly because of people like you.

Yeah, well, I mean, if you have atheist friends that don't believe because of people like Stephen Wolfe, then your atheist friends aren't very intelligent. It's as simple as that, because that's a really stupid reason to not believe in the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, the creator of all things, because Stephen Wolfe exists.

It's very foolish, and I'm not trying to insult your friends, but the reality is that atheists are fools. It says so in the Scripture. The fool has said in his heart, there is no God. That's the fool.

That's the prototype of a fool. That's the way a fool is identified in Scripture. That's the definition. The fool has said in his heart, there is no God. So your friends are fools. And this is evidence.

If the Scripture wasn't enough, it is enough. But if it wasn't enough, this is evidence by the fact that your friends, according to your own testimony, don't believe in Christ because guys like Stephen Wolfe exist.

That is insanity. That is insanity. So I'm not really that concerned with your atheist friends, to be honest, because I don't want to force them to believe anything, but they will have to act according to the law, just like I have to act according to the law unless I want to get punished as a Christian, even if I disagree with the law.

This is nothing weird and crazy. This is just how nations work. You don't have to agree with the law to be forced to follow the law. It's as simple as that. And so I know you're concerned with your atheist friends.

I don't care about them. They're really just not in my—when it comes to how we should run the country, I do not care what an atheist says, nor do I care what a Hindu says, or a Jew, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist.

I don't care what they have to say. That's really not my concern when I'm considering the question of how to run a nation unto Christ, how to honor the King of Kings, how to honor the Lord of Lords. I don't need feedback from atheists on that.

That being said, as far as your YouTube videos, I haven't really watched any of them besides this one, but I don't really see a reason why you couldn't make these YouTube videos. It depends. Again, it depends on exactly what you're doing.

In this case, when you're asking the question, how will you kill me, a question for Christian nationalists, I see no crimes there. That's a legitimate question, and it deserves a legitimate answer, which hopefully I'm providing here.

So, I can't force you to believe that you'd be able to make these YouTube videos. I can't force you to believe that, but that's my take on it. Critics who don't know or act on any of Jesus'.

Christ teachings and don't have the food of the Spirit—it's all about power for you—you will.

Arrest them. Maybe have a registry. That's something. An atheist registry. I've never considered an atheist registry, but it's an interesting idea. I don't see any reason why that would be immoral or against the law of Christ.

An atheist registry. Yeah, that's not a bad idea. I kid. I kid. Again, I don't see any reason why someone who has power automatically would not have the fruit of the Spirit. That doesn't make any sense to me.