Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Hello there, this is A .D. Robles and you're listening to A .D. on the
Fight, Laugh, Feast Network. All right everybody, let's get started today.
I've got some good stuff for you today. I hope you're going to enjoy it. It's Friday, we made it through another week. My week was, uh, it wasn't as successful as I was planning it out to be.
But you know what, that's the good thing about the way we separate our work weeks, is that next week is another opportunity.
I hope that you are blessed this weekend and productive in the coming week.
I wanted to just say this, I have not, I don't think I've mentioned this on the channel, but, uh, this book guys, this book,
The Bonaface Option, Bonafachi? Bonaface Option? This book is really good.
I gotta say, brother Andrew Isker has done a fantastic job.
This is my kind of book. It is not too highfalutin.
It is accessible to any person. It speaks things that we kind of all have thought at times, but it does it in an organized way.
It does it in a way that kind of really kind of pulls the veil back from the whole plan. Um, if you want to know what's going on in the world right now and a good approach to dealing with it, this is a great book.
And, and what's also good about this is it doesn't focus just on like the big picture stuff.
It all, it also talks about, you know, in your personal life, like you as an individual, as a family man, as a churchman, all of that kind of stuff.
And so for that reason, it's very practical for regular people too. More to come on this book, that's sure.
In fact, I've got a secret mission that's happening next week, kind of revolving around this thing.
And so, so yeah, there you go. I wanted to just say this, there is a way to look at a lot of the anti -Christian nationalist rhetoric that I think really shows you how bad it is, how upside down it is, and how wrong it is.
And it's a very easy approach to looking at it because so often when you see, and let me just say this before I begin, there's a difference between the anti -Christian nationalist perspective and then the perspective that, you know, they're not taking the label for themselves.
They're a little bit, you know, wary of the label and they don't necessarily agree with everything that, for example,
Stephen Wolfe says and things like that. But the thrust of it, they get and they're supportive and all of that kind of thing.
They understand that something has gone wrong with our system of governing and just the way that the
United States operates. And they understand full well that a repentance, a return to Christ, not only as individuals, but also as a nation is necessary.
They get that, but they're not so sure about some of the details. And I don't count those as anti -Christian nationalists.
In fact, I've said many times, I don't care if you consider yourself a Christian nationalist or not.
So I'm not talking about that group. I'm talking about the antis. And what's so interesting about so much of what they say is that they never actually speak the affirmations that are implicit in what they're against.
And I think that that's on purpose because if they actually speak what is unspeakable, it'd be so obvious to everybody that what they're promoting is not
Christian in any way. It's not moral. It's not good. It's not something that God would bless.
And I'll give you a few examples of this, but you could use this approach, figure out what the unspoken assumptions are to really see how bankrupt what they're saying is.
For example, I'll give you one easy one. People are very scandalized about the idea of blasphemy laws.
How could we have a functioning society with blasphemy laws in place?
That doesn't make any sense. What's the unspoken assumption there? The unspoken assumption is that in order to have a functioning society, a society that you would assume,
I mean, these are Christians, a lot of them, a society that God blesses, you have to give people the right to publicly blaspheme the
Lord. God smiles upon that. Maybe not the actual blasphemy.
Of course, God doesn't like the actual blasphemy, but he smiles upon a society that tolerates blasphemy, that allows it, that makes it a force of law that people can publicly blaspheme the name of the
Lord. If you don't have that, if you don't have legal public blasphemy, God is displeased.
That's the assumption. And that's stupid. To put that bluntly, that's brain dead.
You cannot read the scripture and come up with an idea that God thinks it's actually necessary for a functioning, moral, good society to have it legal to publicly blaspheme the name of Jesus Christ.
That's insane, but they never speak that. They never say that, right? But if you're against blasphemy laws and you think it's evil to have blasphemy laws, or it's immoral to have blasphemy laws, or unchristian to have blasphemy laws, that's the assumption that, okay,
I guess it's Christian to allow public blaspheming of the Lord Jesus Christ. That's the unspoken assumption, and you can easily see why that remains unspoken.
It's unspeakable. No Christian leader worth their salt would ever say such a thing, but a lot of the antis are saying that without saying it.
They're saying it without saying it, and so that's an example of finding the unspoken assumption to really show you how immoral the anti -christian nationalist position is.
Here's another example. You know, a lot of people are very upset about Stephen Wolf. He goes into some explanation about how we would have had separate nations and different, you know, distinct cultures and things like that, even without the fall, even without the
Tower of Babel, is what people are arguing about right now. And there's an unspoken assumption there as well, that without the
Tower of Babel, the good, the moral good, like the ideal situation, is to have a monoculture, is to have one nation, a one -world government, you know, essentially.
And I don't think that assumption makes any sense at all. In fact, one of the things
I've been thinking about lately—I talked to a few people about this at the Fight Last Feast conference—when you look at the
Book of Revelation, and this is one of those passages that the woke church loves to use to say, oh, you know, we need to have diverse churches and things like that.
And you see all of the nations come together, every tribe, every tongue, every nation.
How many times have you heard Revelation used to promote, you know, diversity quotas and, you know, stupid ideas like that?
And they say, see, even in Revelation, you know, it's diverse. What's so interesting about that?
And I kind of mentioned this in my book, Social Justice Pharisees. When people are worshiping the
Lord Jesus Christ in the end, in the Book of Revelation, there's still distinct tribes.
There's still distinct tribes. There's still distinct nations. There's still every tongue, every tribe, every nation.
They're distinct. And so it's not the case that at the end, when the consummation of everything, you know, that's the purpose, that's the goal, that's the ideal situation, you know, the eternal state.
We still don't have a monoculture. We're not just one blend of everybody together and everything.
No, everything is still distinct. There are distinct tribes. There are distinct tongues.
There are distinct nations, even at the end, when we're worshiping the Lord Jesus Christ.
And so, yeah, in the Book of Revelation, there's definitely a unity put forward there, because we're all worshiping the
Lamb. But there's also a diversity there. There's still distinct—we haven't been turned into a melting pot of gobbledygook genetically or culturally or any of these things.
And so the unspoken assumption there that this monoculture is the good, that's the goal, that's the thing that God blesses, is, well, it's unspeakable.
That's why they don't speak it, because it would be very obvious that they were wrong. If you're one of these people that's kind of on the fence about Christian nationalism and anti -Christian nationalism—or better yet, if you're one of these people that maybe you're in agreement with a lot of the thrust of Christian nationalism, but you're not sure about the title, you're not sure about some of the details, like what
I just mentioned about Stephen Wolfe and the Tower of Babel and things like that—I would encourage you to—this is a good exercise to do when you're looking at the claims of the anti -Christian nationalists.
Try to find what the unspoken assumption there, the unspoken affirmation, because that's really what it is.
It's an unspoken affirmation that kind of seems like an oxymoron, but it's true.
Every time they come against something like a blasphemy law or, you know, things like, you know, distinct cultures and, you know, in -group preferences and things like that, or ordered loves, things like that, try to find what the unspoken affirmation is.
And what I think you'll find is, oftentimes, if you wrote down all of the unspoken affirmations of the anti -Christian nationalist perspective, you're going to find a hellscape.
It is not a functioning society. It is in a distinctly immoral society.
And if you write it all down and you see what they're not speaking, but affirming, you're going to find that it matches up with guys like Klaus Schwab, you know what
I mean? It matches up with the worst of the worst crazy leftists.
That is an interesting exercise that I encourage you all to do. In fact, maybe I'll just do this exercise because I haven't really done it in an organized, ordered way.
But maybe I will do that because that'll be a very interesting little project,
I'll say. But anyway, so yeah, that's what I wanted to tell you about that. The unspoken, unspeakable affirmations of the anti -Christian nationalist perspective.
Now, let's have a little fun though. This is not all serious. This is all a little fun. Let's talk about some stupid tweets.
All right, Neil Shenvey. Neil Shenvey, my goodness.
He says, if the 2019 version of you would be horrified by and ashamed of the 2023 version of you, you need to ask yourself some hard questions.
To be fair, to be clear, this is really dumb. You got to think about why did he choose these dates, right?
2019 against 2023. Well, obviously we're in 2023, so that's obvious why he chose that date.
But 2019 is interesting because 2019 was right before COVID really kind of revealed all of the rot of our culture, all of the evil that we are capable of, all of the insanity that we're capable of.
It didn't create it, but it revealed it. That's something that actually Andrew talks about in his
Boniface Option book. And I think that's true. So the 2019 version of so many of us was completely ignorant of where things are.
And 2020 revealed that to so many of us. And I'm not saying we were all completely ignorant in 2019 because we weren't.
And so many of us were on different spectrums of this. But if you look at the 2019 version of a lot of people, it is very, very different than the 2023 version of those same people.
And you might say a lot of those people got radicalized in 2020. And Neil Shenvey here is trying to act like that should be your barometer, right?
The 2019 version of you probably knew better than the 2023 version of you. Because here's the thing, when we were in our state of ignorance, of course, there's going to be some things that you'd be horrified and ashamed that you now know in 2023.
The 2019 version of people, in many cases, were stupid.
They were blissfully stupid. And so they had no idea the moral implications of many of the things that they just assumed because they learned it in civics class, or they learned it in science class, or they learned it wherever.
They just knew it. They just assumed. They never examined it. It was just assumed. But 2020 changed so many of us.
And I'm not ashamed to admit that 2020 changed me in many, many ways.
Look at my content prior to 2020 and look at it now. And it's very, very different.
I don't mince words as much as I used to back in 2019. And that's a good thing.
That's a good thing. And I looked at some of the comments of this. He's definitely gotten ratioed here quite a little bit.
I look at some of the comments and so many people are saying the same thing. It's like, yeah, you know, the 2019 version of myself was an idiot.
He didn't know what was going on. He didn't care what was going on.
He was cruising through life. 2020 put a stop to that.
All of the riots, all of the insanity of the transsexuals, all of the government overreach, the fact that so many pastors were just willing to shut down the worship of the
Lord at their local assembly just because the government said that there was this really dangerous sniffles out there.
That's all it took. That's all it took. And Neil is over here saying, no, no, your barometer needs to be what the 2019 version of yourself would have thought at the time.
That is stupid. That is stupid. Does that mean that everyone has changed for the better?
No, that's not what it means. But the 2019 version is not the barometer for that.
It's just not the case. This is a brain dead tweet. Neil Shenvey is a smart guy.
Neil Shenvey is a ethical disaster. It's as simple as that.
It's as simple as that. This is the man who is allegedly very concerned and troubled and probably a bit fearful of wokeness going to one of the wokest conservative churches in the
SBC and still going to it. You need to develop your worldview over time.
And when you get new information that you didn't have before, you should not care what the 2019 version would think about that.
Because the 2019 version did not know what you now know.
You are not crazy. That's one of the themes of my channel. You are not crazy.
You've seen what you have seen. And sometimes when you realize what you have seen and you realize the truth of the matter, you need to make drastic changes in the way you think, in the way you operate, and the way that you understand what the worship of God truly is.
Neil Shenvey would prefer you to, in theory, be against things like wokeness, but not actually take action.
His whole life preaches that message. He chooses to take his children to a church where they are indoctrinated in wokeness, all while writing to you how concerned and fearful he is about the influence of wokeness.
Why is he doing that? I have no clue. But what I do know is that Neil Shenvey is an ethical mess.
That's all I'll say about Neil. You know, this is a serious episode. I thought this would be more fun. But, you know, hey,
I'm a serious guy. Sometimes. Speaking of wokeness, here's
Derrick Webb. Here's Derrick Webb. I will be honest,
I have no idea who Derrick Webb is. And I don't seek to learn anything about him.
What I do know about him, I know from context. He's some kind of Christian something. Maybe he's a musician.
Maybe he's a pastor. Maybe he's a filmmaker. I don't know.
Something Christian that he claims. And I guess he was going to receive a, or maybe not receive an award, but he went to the
Dove Awards and he decided to attend the Dove Awards, a
Christian, allegedly, situation, wearing a dress. He's a cross -dresser.
And Derrick does this 30 -second video about why he chose to wear a dress to the
Dove Awards. Let me explain why he chose to wear a dress to the Dove Awards. Because he's a cross -dresser.
He wears that which pertaineth to a woman for fun. He thinks that kind of rebellion is cool.
That's what he thinks. Is he gay? I don't know. Probably. There's definitely some gayness there.
I don't know if he actually has sex with men, but it would not surprise me. And so that's why he wore a dress to the
Dove Awards. He wants to flaunt his rebellion against the Lord, the wicked strut about.
That's what the Bible says about people like Derrick Webb. But I would like to give him the opportunity to explain, in his own words, why he chose to cross -dress.
Why did I wear a dress to the Dove Awards? As a cis, straight, white man,
I walk into a room like that, and any room, with an incredible amount of advantage and privilege.
If I'm attending as an ally of friends and colleagues, I should do everything possible to surrender that privilege at the door.
If the way you look at my loved ones isn't the way you look at me, I'm not truly standing with them.
It's like Stan Mitchell says, if you claim to be someone's ally, but aren't getting hit by the stones thrown at them, you aren't standing close enough.
Plus, I have amazing legs. All right, so that's what he says.
Now, what I want you to notice about that is all of the buzzwords, right? Allyship, standing with the oppressed, what was the other one he used?
He said, what was the other one? Anyway, all the woke buzzwords, right?
And this is the thing, guys. This is a logical conclusion to the other woke church stuff, the stuff that goes on at J .D.
Greer's church, where Neil Shenvey sits there with his children learning about how to be a woke
Christian. This is a logical conclusion. I guess,
I mean, if I'm going to be a true ally, if I'm going to weep with those who weep, if I'm going to identify with the oppressed and the downtrodden, well,
I mean, what better way to do it than to wear a freaking dress? It makes sense from the woke perspective.
It's just going a little further than a guy like J .D. Greer would go.
For now. For now. Because if I'm not mistaken, J .D.
Greer has talked about sexual minorities. And this is the thing, guys.
Maybe J .D. Greer will never end up there, where he actually wears a dress. Maybe he will.
Because there's nothing logically to stop him. The woke church stuff is actually dangerous.
Because you could end up wearing a freaking dress. Like this guy.
Being a man, wearing a dress. I think that some of the peer pressure amongst guys like J .D.
Greer will prevent him from wearing a dress. And that's good. Peer pressure sometimes can be a good thing.
But the woke church stuff has no brakes. I would not be surprised to one day see
Jamar Tisby wearing a dress. I'm not saying he's going to, but I would not be surprised.
I would not be surprised. Any woke church person you can think of, I would not be surprised to see them showing solidarity with transsexuals and crossdressers.
It's the same thing, really. Any of them. Praise God that he's put something in most of them to stop them from doing that.
Because not all of them are doing this. And some of them still have some semblance of God's morality in their brains.
Some semblance of something holding them back. And I would hope and pray that that's the
Holy Spirit living in them saying, no, you can't go that far with it. But I don't know.
I don't know. Because I don't assume anymore that woke church people, the people that think that there are white cops out there hunting down blacks for sport and stuff like that.
It's another thing that Boniface talks about. People that believe those kinds of lies against all of reality will literally believe anything.
Are capable of believing anything. I do not assume that woke church proponents have the
Holy Spirit of God living inside of them. I hope that they do. But I don't assume it.
And so here's the thing, guys. My whole point of this episode is that you are not crazy.
The 2023 version of so many of us has a much more accurate picture of the situation we find ourselves in right now than the 2019 version of us did.
And that is not something to be ashamed of. That is not something to be worried about. That is something to borrow a
Big Eva phrase to lean into. Seek out people that are willing to tell you the truth in a very clear way and then act like it.
Because Neil Shenvey's little scam is completely worthless.
He tells you one thing with his words. His life preaches something different.
And that's the bottom line. I hope that this episode was helpful. Again, I was thinking we'd have a little bit more fun with the
Twitter thing. But that first part of this episode got me in a more serious mood.
And that's okay. Because though I like to have fun, I am a very serious person.
I'm also a very reasonable person. And so I hope that you found this podcast helpful. God bless.
Don't forget to tune in next week. On Thursday, maybe. I don't know. On the fight on AD.
Don't forget to tune in next week to AD Robles on the Fight Laugh Feast Network.