The Shadow That Follows Liberalism

We are now live on the Conversations That Matter podcast, starting a little bit early. I have a good reason for it though.

And some of you who do smoking will understand. This is my app. Let's see if I can get the camera to focus on it.

I can't. It won't focus on it. All right, well, oh, there you go. So I have my new thermometers out there in my smoker.

One's in the meat. One is in the smoker itself. And as you can see, the smoker is at 230 degrees.

The meat, I have a shoulder of pulled pork. It's gonna be pulled pork at 190. When it gets to 200,

I'm taking it out and I'm eating it. And it's been smoking for, well, it's not smoking now, but I started the process though of smoking it last night at about 930.

So it has been slow cooking now for hours. And I had to get up in the middle of the night, the rainstorm came and I thought, oh no, oh no, it's gonna flood my smoker.

I've never had that before since I'm so new to this, but it was fine. It just cooled it off for a little bit. And anyway,

I'm looking forward to that. And I was in this kind of catch 22 of like, do I take it out now or do

I wait? So I'm gonna do the podcast and then I'm gonna go eat my pulled pork. So it doesn't get better than that, right?

Hope you all have some pulled pork or something good to eat today. It is where we are starting the weekend pretty soon.

Nathan Phillips is on. Hey Nathan, how you doing? It looks like other people are coming on as well.

Valerie Parker. Hey Valerie, good to see you as well today. We have a lot to talk about guys.

And I think I just wanna say to begin with that we don't seem to be exiting a time of transition.

In other words, things don't seem to be settling down and changing. And I guess that's what life's like in general.

There's always gonna be change and flux, right? Some things remain the same, but a lot of things change. And more so I think with the technological advances, the globalist market, world market that we have, the people moving all over the place, there's just a lot of changes, a lot of disruption.

It hasn't actually all been good. There are some blessings we can point to in technology.

Sure, absolutely. In fact, there's amazing things. I'm just amazing that some of the solutions that the doctors have come up with to help couples who are infertile, or not infertile, but having issues in that area.

I mean, that's one of the things that I didn't know much about. And I'm learning more about that. That's amazing.

That's technology. That's the grace of God using the, if you do it the right way, that God has ordained it to be done, using the stuff in the created world for the betterment of mankind.

Because mankind is precious, right? But at the same time, we know that, to just pick this one example, the devastating impact that things like mass in vitro fertilization, for example, are having in surrogacy.

And so, I mean, if you could push a button and make it all go away, I don't know any of us who probably wouldn't do that.

Just because of the effects of it, the impact of it, how people are using it, how it's allowing people to think about the process of having a child.

This is only one little thing. It's a big thing. I mean, it's a big thing in the sense of priority, but it's only one thing in the grand scheme of all the things that are changing.

And so, one of the things that I see changing out there that's causing some either growing pains, or I don't really know what to call it.

Maybe we'll just call it that, is there are Christians and there are conservatives, and there's overlap between these groups for good reason, that are turning to unconventional approaches to politics.

They're considering things they had never considered before. They're thinking through where we went wrong, right?

They're looking at what we've been doing for the past few decades, and they're saying, it isn't working. Why isn't it working?

Let's go back to the drawing board. What did our grandfathers and our great grandfathers and people before them think that we don't think anymore, that we reject?

Maybe they had something right, we have wrong. These are all, I think, very fair things to consider, but it's happening at, since 2020 especially, at a fast pace, accelerating.

Especially, I saw a poll the other day that Generation Z, the males that are 18 that are exiting high school in Generation Z are more conservative than I think since they've been doing polls.

At least they identify that way. Now, that's pretty incredible because Generation Z is overwhelmingly, like,

I don't even know if liberal's the word. I mean, they're crazy, right? Some of them think they're cats. I mean, it's nuts.

But you have a huge fracturing. There are some people that are revolting against that, and it's not just a mild revolt.

It's not just a quest for moderation, and let's excise the craziness.

It's more of a complete and thorough rejection, and then trying to embrace something that's more solid.

I see this in so many areas. I see this in churches. I see this with friends who reach out to me.

I've had this a number of times and say, and some of you might be surprised by this, but even Baptists saying things like, what about the

Catholic Church? What about the Eastern Orthodox Church? Why are these questions even being asked? I look behind it.

I don't just condemn them right away and say, well, you're looking at these options because you don't know theology.

Yeah, they could be. They're not thinking through things theologically, and I do try to, I have

Protestant convictions. What can I say? I have Catholic friends, but I have Protestant convictions, and I will go back to the

Council of Trent. I will try to show the things that I think are out of step with Christian tradition even, and how

Rome got off the track, and they're still off the track on many things, and one of the main things, of course, is the idea of infused righteousness being something for justification, and so anyway,

I go through all that, but when people ask these questions, I don't immediately condemn them because I know what's happening.

They are seeing fractures everywhere. They feel condemned and betrayed by their own leaders.

They want something solid, and it feels like an evangelicalism that reinvents itself every 10 years isn't that.

There's just a number of things happening, and on the political front, the same thing. People are starting to question, is the whole

America proposition nation, rah, rah, rah, freedom thing, is that actually even real?

What are we fighting for? What are we trying to preserve? I mean, if it's just freedom, I mean, now people are saying freedom is grooming kids at a library.

I didn't sign up for that. My grandfather didn't fight in World War II for that. This is what people are starting to ask.

They're starting to wonder about. What kind of freedom? What is a nation?

As soon as someone sets foot across the border, are they now my kindred that I am supposed to think of in the same ways and sacrifice the same way for that I would for my neighbor who's been here for generations?

These are real questions. And we need to,

I think, be clear about them as much as we possibly can. We need to think through them. We need to be brave enough to ask questions that are even politically incorrect.

And we need to be brave enough to provide answers. And I'm a guy who,

I'm more comfortable when I get into the territory I'm about to get into. Everyone's waiting.

It's gonna get zesty perhaps, but I like doing it in a podcast form more because it is easier on Twitter for people.

Man, there's a lot of just people on Twitter and social media in general who have hard reading comprehension skills.

I can give you examples from the last week. Even high profile people that just really don't have good reading comprehension skills. And if I can take the time to talk about some of the things we're gonna talk about today and do so hopefully in a rational way where hopefully many of you are lighting up the chat board here,

I can answer questions in real time and we can make some progress on some of these questions. So we're not gonna talk about some of the things that we could.

We could talk about some of the concerns I suppose I have, because I do have concerns about where younger conservatives are going.

But I'll tell you what, my concerns about gatekeeping far excel the concerns

I have for young conservatives. In fact, I'm very encouraged by young conservatives right now and young Christians who are starting to think outside the box more.

Because we have been in a death spiral we have been doing things wrong. Something isn't working.

That's very true. And some of them are coming to conclusions like monarchy might be the best thing on a political level for our government.

Maybe the constitution. I don't know of many that are going this direction but I know in specifically monarchy but I know there is kind of this totalitarianish bent that people are starting to observe.

And they're saying there's younger conservatives that they don't seem afraid of big government.

They wanna control big government. They wanna use big government. And do I have a concern about that? Sure, I do.

I mean, I'm glad that here's the thing that encourages me. I'm glad that they want power in a way. Cause we conservatives need, like Christians need to not be allergic to power because that actually is loving your neighbor.

When we wield power correctly, the way God has intended. However, if you look at the history of the

United States every time, I think without exception every time there's centralization just about it is a leftist innovation that gets forwarded in that move.

Leftists are the ones that control this. You know, what do you think you're gonna do? When we make, let's make the government bigger.

Let's get someone in there who's even the Protestant Franco thing. Like I get it. I understand it.

But there is a danger to this. This is something that we can't be unaware of the dangers associated with that.

You have someone that comes in and says I'm just gonna clean house law and order. I mean, I think that's inevitable. That's part of the thing.

Like if we keep going in this immoral direction that is inevitable. It's going to happen on some level because people are going to demand order.

You can't have a society that has no order. And if it's not going to come naturally through shared trust and the bonds that we'll talk about later a little bit that foster that, then it will be totalitarian.

I don't want that. You don't want that. No one really, I think wants that. Hardly. I mean, except some people we really don't trust some rich men

North of Richmond. But there are conservatives now thinking that's what we need to do. I get it.

I get it. And when it happens, I mean, it's like being against the weather, I suppose. I mean, if it's gonna happen,

Hey, I'd want it to be someone who is godly. I want it to be someone who cares about the people they're serving.

That would be my preference. But what I'd like more is to get back to some federalism and some real federalism where states are really the sovereign entities they should be.

That's, and of course that puts me on the opposite end of the spectrum. But I'm looking at all these approaches. In some ways, the problem

I just brought up reminds me of the people who really have a fascination with the

Spanish Civil War versus the people that have a fascination with the American Civil War. Because if you have a fascination with the

Spanish Civil War as a conservative, you tend to think more in totalitarian terms. And I think the conditions possibly are different.

I haven't studied it in depth, but you had a window of opportunity when Franco took power.

He kind of beat the communists to the punch. He was, I think we're, we passed that point.

But who, what general in the military today? I mean, look at the generals in our military. Has, can command that loyalty, has that kind of respect and the ability.

It's just the military has been too infiltrated by leftists.

And I know this firsthand. I've heard some horror stories lately from people I know who are in there. So the people then that think of the

American Civil War more, they studied that, who are conservatives. They tend to be more suspicious of centralization. And, but here's the deal.

We've just been centralizing more and more and more throughout the entire country's history, right? We just have.

So we're gonna talk today without much further ado about some hot button topics.

We're gonna talk a little bit about, I guess, race, if you wanna put it that way. We're gonna talk about nations, nationality, culture.

We talked about this stuff before, but there's some controversy online about it. And I think we need to address it.

I just, I sensed this the last two days. I need to do another episode and just talk about these things more. And we, it's gonna be a long episode, okay?

It's gonna be long. We need to also talk about sexuality a bit. We need to talk about where conservatives are going when it comes to sexual ethics, because I do not like what

I'm seeing from the gatekeeping conservatives. From younger conservatives, I'm encouraged.

But the question is, will that power be transferred from the gatekeepers to the younger conservatives who are seeing things more clearly?

And some of them have, they've been ravaged by the consequences of divorce and all the sexual anarchy, some of them being raised by lesbian parents.

And so they see it differently. They're victims of it to an extent. And so they want that traditional.

I mean, some people mock the trad wives thing. And I get why some people mock it. There's some things, people say some things online.

Sometimes I just scratch my head and they think, why would you say that? Like, it's just, it's people who are trying to rediscover the fact that men are the leaders and have headship and men should be taking political power, not women.

That's not, they're not suited for that because that's, it's really what commands warfare.

You're not directly involved, but you're indirectly involved. I mean, people are coming to these conclusions, but then they're taking things to places that they don't need to take them.

But I understand why they're doing it. I understand. And that's my first goal. And that should be, I think all of our first goal is to understand, understand the greater context, understand what's happening and understand where the evil really is out there.

And before you get too offended, encourage the good. And I would say this even about some of the,

I guess not the hard woke people, but some of the people who are ignorantly woke, I would say, even then you can look at some of their desires to make sure that things are just in their conception of justice.

And you'd say, there might be a good motive on some of these guys, right? Now, as you get hardened and more into it, not so much, but at least initially you can see that.

And I would say, even then try to understand so that this is what the podcast is gonna be about today. All right.

So I guess we have someone who's Catholic in the channel. I don't know. Brethren, please turn from the folly of Protestantism.

Man, not the day -to -day for me to get into that, but I am a Protestant. You are listening to a Protestant podcast.

I hate to break it to you, Jacob. So yeah, I mean, it's Protestants believe that,

I mean, traditionally at least, we believe that Protestantism is not so much of an ism as it is a reclaiming of the one holy true

Catholic church away from errors that took centuries to form. But anyway, other folks in the chat, a lot of you.

Hey, Brian Babes is in the chat. Good to see you. Good to see you, Violet. Well, let me quickly, stress on the quickly here, just make a little announcement, and then we're gonna get into the material.

We do have a men's retreat coming up and I'm speaking at it, a number of really great guys.

One of them is Andrew Rappaport. I wanna play for you. This is a promotional video. It's about a minute long from Andrew Rappaport, and it's on the upcoming retreat for men,

September 21st through 24th. And I would encourage everyone to sign up because we only have about three more weeks and seating is limited.

In fact, I don't know if past the next week, if we're gonna have enough seats for people.

Part of it is I have not gotten as many people signing up as I did last year. And so I've had to renegotiate with the camp to, and I haven't finalized it yet.

If we get an influx, then I'll change it. But I've had to say, can we lower the number? And if we do, then we're gonna have a hard cutoff.

And that may be, it may fill up this next week. So if you are planning on signing up, overcomingevilconference .com,

overcomingevilconference .com, here's Andrew Rappaport. I'm Andrew Rappaport, the Executive Director of Striving for Eternity Ministries and also the

Christian Podcast Community. I'm excited to be at the Men's Conference in Upper State, New York, Overcoming Evil.

This is gonna be a great time for us to, as men get together. I was asked to deal with a practical way of how we can persevere through the hardships of ministry.

Ministry is not easy. It is hard. When you set yourself against the world, the evils of the world, the world wants to respond back.

How do we deal with that? This retreat is one that you wanna make sure you attend. I'm gonna take my 30 plus years of ministry experience, having been through many trials and explaining how you too can overcome evil and still glorify

God. I hope to see you there. I hope that you'll enjoy the talk. All right, well, here is the website to go to overcomingevilconference .com.

And as you can see, once you go there, there's more videos, there's links if you wanna know more about speakers.

There's two tracks. So whether you wanna come on Thursday night or Friday night, any other questions, you can email me, but there's a whole entire schedule there of what we're gonna be doing and there's plenty of time to fellowship.

So I would encourage you, Overcoming Evil Men's Conference, overcomingevilconference .com, overcomingevilconference .com.

Okay, that is the announcement for today. I want to now shift.

We have a lot to talk about today. This might be one of my longer episodes for a while. And there's more than one story,

I suppose, going on here. So I'm trying to bring together a bunch of things.

I think they all fit together, but the best starting point is something that happened early last week with Charlie Kirk defending

Matt Walsh. Actually, it's really what Matt Walsh said. I just have the Charlie Kirk defense here. I should probably acknowledge though, since I'm at the beginning of this, someone in the chat did say for 9 .99,

I have no idea how modern evangelicals can critique the Anabaptists. At least the Amish are self -governed and preserve their people, land, and faith.

Modern Eva is just pietistic pacifism with no benefits. Now, I will say this about the

Amish. They're older. That's one of the things they have, because of their lifestyle, they've held on to some older ideas and ways of life that we've in the modern world just rejected.

And because of that, I mean, this was common to everyone at one time, but the Amish have just been holdouts. So yeah, they've certainly preserved their way of life better than,

I mean, you can see this with Jewish people too and we're gonna get into that hopefully a little bit today on they weren't supposed to be an empire.

They were supposed to just work their land. And in fact, the generational laws only applied to Jews. Foreigners couldn't come in and just take their land.

I mean, they had specific laws that favored them. And so they were able to, and they have been, even in other places, they've been able to keep their identity.

So anyway, good point. The Amish, I hadn't thought of it, but the Amish really, I guess, are a parallel of that.

Okay, well, let's talk about this. So what did Matt Walsh say? What did Matt Walsh say? Well, according to Charlie Kirkmash, Matt Walsh said nothing wrong.

Now, this is evidence that things are changing, even in conservatism, okay? Matt Walsh basically, and I'm not gonna play for you the audio because this will be a three -hour podcast if I play everything.

Basically what Matt Walsh did is he said that we should try to preserve

Anglo -Protestantism in the United States, that that would be a good thing to do. And he said this because primarily the culture of Anglo -Protestantism is what

America foundationally is, really. That's what our founding documents and our mores, our laws, our customs, all are based upon this shared culture.

Now, the Proposition Nation people disagree with this, which is why I'm glad Matt Walsh, I don't know if Matt Walsh is a

Prop Nation guy, to be honest with you. For those who don't know what that is, that's fine. I talk about it a little bit in Christianity and Social Justice, and I will talk about it a whole lot more in the next book

I'm writing currently, which hopefully I can get out before Christmas so everyone can get it. But anyway,

Matt Walsh seems to think that there is a connection between ethnicity, lineage, shared ancestry, right?

And traditions, culture, et cetera, that there is a connection there. Now, before, like,

I don't know, 1965, maybe even later than that, before 1975, this was just kind of a, like, no duh.

Like, everyone knew that. Everyone thought that. No one would have really challenged that, not any serious person, at least.

But today, things have flipped completely, okay? You aren't even allowed to, if it's a

European, Western culture of any kind, you are not allowed to let them think of themselves in those ways, that they have a culture that is unique to their lineage, that to be part of having that lineage is at least an added benefit.

It is, you're much more likely to hold onto that culture if you have that lineage, in other words.

Now, some will go farther, and they'll say that basically the two are the same.

Some are genetic determinists. Some are scientific racists, someone would call them.

And I'm not that, and I don't think most conservatives are that. But there are people like that. There have been in history.

Because what they're trying to do is they're trying to account for the differences between different people groups. Especially in the 1600s, when you see the term race develop, it's because you have explorers going out.

They're looking at these foreign places and they're saying, they're so different. What do we make of this?

How come Europeans are so different than these people? And most of the time it was, we have technological advancements, we have art, we have culture, we have, they would call it civility, we have civilization.

And these places seem primitive or immoral. There's all kinds of practices like polygamy and even slavery to some extent.

And burning people like in India, I think it was burning,

I forget what it was, widows or something. And the British came in and said, stop this. But anyway, there were all these differences. And so people had to account for them.

So there's some people, when Darwin came out with his book, that was one of the explanations. But that's certainly not everyone.

That's not most people who have just noticed there are differences between people. We all know this.

We all know this at some level, but we're not, it's at a gut level. We're not really allowed to articulate it, at least when it comes to Western civilization and European cultures in any public forum without getting pushback.

That's just what it seems to be. And so if you just see even a parallel there and say, look, people who grow up in this particular area with this shared lineage, because they're part of an extended family, that's what a nation is really.

They tend to think in certain ways that have been molded through generations of time, laws, shared experiences in history.

Our own constitution is to ourselves and our posterity. What does that mean? The children, the lineage, the descendants of those who erected the constitution.

It doesn't mean that others can't participate in the blessings, but that's what it was there for according to them. Okay, so this shouldn't be controversial,

I guess is what I'm trying to say, but it is. But Charlie Kirk at one time said, there's a quote,

I don't have the full quote in front of me, I guess. I remember this particular event though, where Charlie Kirk basically said, hey, there's nothing inherently race or ethnicity or religion, like none of that has anything to do with being an

American, right? So even Protestantism. And this, of course you can be American and not be

Protestant, but you would be, the idea here is like to say that America isn't a

Protestant nation historically, and that that makes its way into their laws and customs is foolish.

It is on a certain level. It's not like every person has to be a Protestant, but if you have a certain number of people that come in, let's say, and they're not

Protestants, and it overturns the majority who have a Protestant background or heritage, then you don't have the same nation necessarily.

The same thing would apply with immigrant groups from other places. If you have too many people coming across the Southern border and going into places, and everyone on the border knows this,

Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California, that's where I'm from originally. It is not the same

Los Angeles it used to be, okay? That's just reality because there are people coming in that are of a different race or a different family, if you wanna think of it that way, and a different extended family.

And that comes with a bunch of things. It tends to parallel, they have a different language they communicate in. They have a different religion.

They mostly tend to be Catholic, whereas before, I mean, California was always kind of a hodgepodge, but it was more

Protestant at one time, at least. I mean, there's tons of things.

There's cuisine. There's tons of things. I'm not saying it's all bad either. I'm just saying that that is reality. And we just need to acknowledge,

I think, reality before we can even approach these issues. When we acknowledge reality,

I think it makes it a whole lot easier. So if that's a stumbling block for you already, and you're already disagreeing, maybe a good place to start was go watch the video

I did, maybe, what, three months ago, four months ago, on what is a nation? I think that was the title.

What is a nation according to scripture? And I just go through Bible verse after Bible verse, and I talk about what a nation is. Okay, so Charlie Kirk, going back to Charlie Kirk, and my whole point with this, is that at one time, he just said

America was basically embracing certain ideas. That's all it was. So it was a proposition nation.

Now he's defending Matt Walsh, and saying, well, there is a tie. Of course there's a tie between lineage and culture.

That is different, guys. That is a change. That is a sea change. And this is making some people nervous.

This is making people nervous who, it's making the Nazi hunter types nervous, because they see, they kind of see

Nazism everywhere. And anyone who loves their people or place is a Nazi. The conservative critique used to be, the problem with Nazism primarily is it's ideological.

It makes, it's like the proposition nation stuff. It makes the Nazi, it makes the state into the nation.

It makes the totalitarian government into one and the same with the nation.

And that's the primary problem with it. And so it can do things.

It overrides local municipalities and local customs, and it just forces its will.

It's a religion, really, at the end of the day. That's been the critique. Well, now the critique, even in quote -unquote conservative circles, has been, you love your people and your place too much.

You should just love the idea of America, not the land and not the Donald Trump thing, because that's what Donald Trump did.

He loved the people and he loved the land, and he wanted a wall to keep others out, because it was having a negative effect.

That's why he didn't, he doesn't want the money going to Ukraine. It's because it's that whole

America first thing, right? And that's why people didn't like him, liberals at least. It's one of the big reasons. So anyway, going back to this whole issue, in walks

Owen Strand into this. Now, Owen Strand is, for those who don't know, he wrote a book,

I don't know, two years ago, three years ago, called Christianity and Wokeness. And I've been familiar with Owen's work, at least,

I don't know, since 2018 or 19. In 2018 though, and prior to that,

Owen said some pretty woke things. And I gave some of,

I have some of that information on my hard drive. We're not going to go over it today, but I gave it to A .D. Robles, just because I was like, maybe this makes sense of some of the things that he was doing a few months ago.

And A .D. did a whole podcast on it, if you want to go see A .D. Robles on this. But that was, which is fine.

I defended Owen on this podcast because people went after him, liberals, progressives went after him and said,

Owen used to be with us, what happened? He just wants power. And I said, people change their mind. Now, Owen's never acknowledged this as far as I know publicly or talked about it, but I just assumed, okay, people change their mind.

It's okay to change your mind, we all do it. And hopefully, that was what was happening.

In fact, I emailed Owen in like 2020, maybe, and just said, I appreciate what you're doing.

You're trying to go after this stuff. And not many are. And I remember at the time, it was hard to stand against that in some ways.

There were things I wish he would have done, name names more, like the names actually in his circles, like Southern Baptists.

And he seemed kind of reluctant to do that. And it's like, okay, but he's doing something.

And that's really what I felt at the time. I still feel that to some extent. Like, if you're doing something to help push the needle,

I'm not gonna like rain on that parade or critique you too much. But now,

Owen, and I would say more broadly speaking, some of the people who tend to run the

G3, not the speakers at G3, I'm saying, I would encourage everyone who isn't coming to the men's conference, because apparently the weekend's conflict.

I didn't realize that when I was scheduling it. But everyone who's going to G3 to go. And enjoy it and have a great time.

I don't have any hard feelings there, but I just know that the way that people, like myself even, have been treated, and I'll just use myself as the example, has been frankly rude, in my opinion.

It's been rude. And I haven't been as transparent, but I'm starting to wonder if I should be more transparent with things that exchanges behind the scenes.

And the attack has been, and this is public, so people have seen it, has been some of the people who run

G3 against Christian nationalists or people who want cultural Christianity.

And it's been a lot of straw manning. It's been a lot of like painting positions in such a way that is just inaccurate.

I don't even know, what I believe hardly resembles what some of those guys think people like myself believe.

It's not, it isn't this integralism. It isn't a watering down of the gospel in a political gospel.

It's not, it's not like a, it's not Nazi -esque or fascistic or any of that kind of stuff.

It's not, a lot of the things that are being attributed to it, I'm just like, that's not, it's just not a fair dialogue.

And I've invited that. I've wanted that. I know others who have really tried to say, can we get together?

I know guys who have had longer conversations with Owen about this kind of stuff. And I just,

I'm sad to report to you, we haven't been able to get anywhere. And it's just ought not to be with Christians, in my opinion. I would love to have some public exchanges,

I think that would edify the body, but that's, it's not happening. And so, because it's not happening, when attacked, we're kind of forced to respond publicly.

When attacked publicly, we have to kind of respond publicly. And so, that's part of what I'm doing.

But the greater goal here is to help everyone think through the common sense, hopefully common sense, that we talked about at the beginning of this podcast and apply it to this particular situation.

So, here's some tweets from Owen Strawn on, this was over August 17th.

I think these are all from August 17th. He wrote a blog, first of all, and he talked about Matt Walsh in that blog.

And I'm not gonna go through it, it's long. I think it was poorly written, in my opinion. It was poorly argued,

I should say. Not poorly written, but poorly argued. But he put out a bunch of tweets that were even more flamethrowing.

So, he said, if your pastor has been radicalized and now preaches paranoia and a false gospel of ethnocentric nationalism and graciously raise, you need to pray and speak to him and graciously raise major concerns.

It may be time to find a new church home because the pulpit is no place for fear mongers, which, of course, we agree with that.

But who's doing it is the question. Where do you see a gospel, a false gospel of ethnocentric nationalism?

A false gospel. I mean, I don't know of anyone. No one comes to mind. In fact, there was a guy, a more woke guy, that was trying to give me all these examples of this.

And none of them were gospel. The closest he got was one guy who said that the gospel should help you obey the law better.

And he thought part of the law was basically preserving your people. That's the closest he got.

That's nothing close to what Owen Strand is saying here. He said, sadly, looks like some prominent conservatives have bought into a version of the great replacement theory.

Okay, that's, how is that a theory anymore? Really? Like that's, is that really a theory?

They fear the replacement of whites or Anglo -Saxon people and culture. This mirrors fears shown among other ethnicities and it is both very dangerous and pernicious.

And I feel like I'm being gaslit at this point. I'm like, this is the guy who wrote a book against wokeness, supposedly?

That's woke, right? Like how, if someone sees it differently, please help me.

Because I don't understand how this isn't woke. That's what's happening.

And we've cataloged this on this particular podcast over and over and over. So he's in, he said, here's just a few other things.

He says, while believers honor elements of unique cultures, the New Testament nowhere commissions Christians to preserve the ethnic homogeneity of a society.

We can honor distinctiveness, but the gospel brings disparate peoples together in both church and society. The devil despises this.

Okay, I mean, if that's true, and I know Owen is against this. He doesn't want open borders, but if that's true, why not open borders?

I mean, there's nothing, there's nothing in scripture that says we have to have a border. It doesn't commission

Christians to secure their border. I mean, this is silly. He says, Christians honor various elements of different cultures and ethnicities.

We love diversity because God formed it. But hear this clear as a ringing bell. The gospel, here we go again.

The gospel of ethnic or cultural preservation is not the biblical gospel. It is a replacement gospel. It is a false gospel.

So here's what I got to say to this. And I might be a little strong, but I think it's worth saying. And this is in hopes that if Owen hears it or someone close to him, they can really help him with this.

Because this needs to be retracted. This is exactly what the social justice activists did to us.

Just a few years ago, this is exactly the kinds of things that you saw from people like Eric Mason and Matt Chandler and so many others,

Paul Tripp. And they were saying things like, well, these evangelicals who aren't concerned about racial stuff, they have a false gospel or a path gospel or they have an incorrect gospel or some kind.

And they have it because they're getting this ethical thing wrong over here that we think disparities should be eliminated and they don't.

So they don't have a good gospel. This is the same kind of thing. It's like no one's saying that preserving your ethnicity is part of the gospel.

No one's serious. And I haven't seen even like an anon account on Twitter. I have not seen one example yet of that.

I'm sure it's out there, but if it is, it's so minuscule. No one's saying it.

No one's serious. It's not a major threat. Owen Strawn seems to think it is. And so he uses this device, this rhetorical device of categorizing it as a false gospel, whatever it is.

And then instead of having the ethical argument with someone about what are the boundaries with immigration policy?

How separate should cultures, nations be? Is it incumbent on us to preserve our people?

Instead of having those conversations, the conversation that's going on right now is whether or not there's a false gospel looming out there, threatening your church.

Folks, there are false gospels out there, but this is an invented one. And I really don't want him giving anyone ideas because someone will take that and they will develop their own false gospel.

So anyway, I have more tweets to share with you. I don't know if we'll get through all of them. I don't wanna beat the dead horse, but I did respond because Owen said, civilization should not actively try to replace a given ethnicity.

Immigration is a practical matter. Countries can and should limit it per their stability. All that's totally sound.

Why is it sound though? I don't know why that sounds. Why is that sound? I'd love to hear an explanation for that because this article doesn't really give a good explanation of it.

What is not sound is thinking that the gospel is about preserving an ethnicity. It's not. Yeah, no kidding.

No kidding. Like literally no, everyone says amen, including people

Owen would probably think are white supremacists say amen if they're true Christians. And so this is what

I said. I said, I'm confused, Owen. Who are you talking about? Your position on the first paragraph looks indistinguishable from people like Stephen Wolfe.

I don't think I've ever seen an example of what you object to. And the second paragraph, who says the gospel is about preserving an ethnicity?

And of course he did not respond to me, which I, at this point, I'm not expecting it. I wish it were the case that, and I know that's discouraging for some of you because you just wish that, well, can't you guys talk to each other?

I wish, I wish more. Yes, and I'm getting to that in a minute. Nathaniel Keen for 199 says Dumez and company are retweeting

Owen. Yes, and I'm about to show you that. So let's keep going here.

If we can, more tweets from Owen Strand. The head of the Christian church was not a Viking.

I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time keeping it together. It's just so funny to me because it's such a straw man.

Like who's saying this? All right, the head of the Christian faith, the head of the Christian faith, all right, was not a Viking clan chieftain.

Wow, who incarcerated, who incarnated to build a new and greater

Anglo -Saxon order. The head of the Christian faith is the Jewish God man who came to bleed out on a

Roman cross to form a people from every tribe, tongue and nation. I will point out, Owen seems to think it is important to point out

Jesus' Jewishness in this particular context, which I do find that interesting. Like, I guess, wait, so like is ethnicity significant?

Is lineage significant in this one case? But here's the thing, no one is saying, who's saying, you know what,

Jesus is a Viking clan chieftain who's going to restore the Anglo -Saxon order.

If you find me someone, I guarantee it's not someone having a lot of influence, not in Owen's circles, not a looming threat.

Excited to share, he says this publicly. Okay, so he's very excited to share this, this good news. Here's the news.

Despite apparent confusion, to the contrary, the savior of the Christian faith, Jesus Christ, was actually not a white

Anglo -Saxon from a European village but a full -blooded Jewish Messiah from the Middle East. Who's saying that?

There's no specifics in any of this, which is, again, another one of the things that drove all of us nuts a few years ago about Big Eva.

They would say these things about racists looming everywhere, racists in our churches, racists taking over institutions.

And you'd always know that there's that one guy that they'll point to to say, like, this guy is, but you knew it wasn't a looming threat.

You knew, you believed your eyes, and you said, that's not the threat, and we're pulling resources away from the real threats. And it's being done all over again.

This is Russell Moore's tactic. Why is Owen Strawn doing it? All right, so here's where things really blew up.

So let's see if I can, I'm trying to get the right order here, okay. Andrew Torba, here's what

Andrew Torba said. God created different ethnic groups. To preserve them is to preserve

God's creation and is therefore an inherent good. Someone is saying that the video's not working.

Please, if the video feed's not working, let me know, guys. I wanna make sure, I'll re -upload this if people aren't getting it.

Anyway, Andrew Torba. God created different ethnic groups. Okay, let's pick that apart for a moment. This is a very scaled back, like, it's a very basic tweet.

There's not a lot of qualifications. It's probably not the way I would phrase what Andrew was trying to communicate.

And one of the reasons I know that is because I actually talked to Andrew, and I might read for you some of the private messages he sent me, because I was,

I did message him, and he actually responded to me. And he basically said, no, people aren't understanding what

I'm meaning, here's what I'm meaning. So here's the tweet again. God created different ethnic groups. That's true, God did.

That's what Acts 17 says. God, whether, I mean, you could look at the

Tower of Babel to be an instrument that God used to this. I tend to think, and I'm not alone in this, that there was a plan for people to spread out and form nations before the

Tower of Babel. And because they weren't doing it, God forced the issue. But I don't think that's part of the fall.

I think that's part of God's plan. But whether you think, however you land on that, yes, that is true, that sentence.

To preserve them is to preserve God's creation, and is therefore an inherent good. Now, think about this with me for a moment.

If we said that God created a certain species of bird, and environmentally that bird is under threat, would we seek to try to preserve that bird, that certain species?

And you say, well, God never gave us a mandate to. Right, I mean, there's not like a chapter and verse

I can point you to that says, you need to protect this wildlife here. But we know instinctively that that was something

God called good at one point. Yes, marred by the effects of the curse of sin, but that's something

God called good. And preserving that and taking care of that is a good thing. Just like preserving and taking care of our families is a good thing.

Just like protecting our countries is a good thing, right? That's really all Andrew was trying to say.

And I know because I talked to him about it. And I'll give you some of the things that he sent me. He sent me some tweets that he said, this is basically my position, or this is a clarifying thing.

And I asked him specifically, I said, Andrew, were you saying that interracial marriage is wrong?

He says, I wasn't saying anything close to that. I wasn't even, I wasn't thinking that. That's what people that were taking this, and they're calling him a kinist.

They're saying that it's, this is all about interracial marriage. And whatever your disagreements with Andrew Torbas, because I know some of you probably have them, and maybe some of you are concerned about some things, this tweet right here, it's just not what it's being portrayed as.

I didn't think of it in those terms when I first saw it. I didn't assume the worst about it. I can sort of see how some people might think, okay, like preventing interracial marriage is a mechanism for this, but that's not what

Andrew Torba said, and it's not what he believes, according to him. So Onstrand retweets that.

He says, this hot nonsense is catching on in evangelical and reform circles. Opposite it, oppose it like you would oppose the plague.

Okay, so now that's the plague. It's the plague to want to preserve ethnic groups.

Now, one of the questions I think people have is there's confusion over the term ethnic group. Stephen Wolf got in trouble for this, because Stephen basically says, ethnic groups are either people living with shared experiences over time.

It doesn't have to be genetic. That's an ethnic group. Torba didn't define what an ethnic group is.

Some people think it's purely genetic, and that's all it is. One of the difficulties is the terms ethnicity, race, people, they all kind of meant the same thing a few hundred years ago and now, especially since Darwinism, some of these things have been separated and given new meanings, and I mean, this is why you hear creationists say, we don't believe there's only one race.

Well, before Darwin, people were saying there were different races and they weren't evolutionists, right?

So this is part of the problem with these terms, but I tend to think of them as just, you're talking about a people that's living together, intermarrying with each other.

It's an extended family. Extended family will have people adopted into them, by the way. So it's more organic.

It is not this regimented thing, in my opinion, that is like, they must all share this genetic gene or something, this gene to be part of the family.

I mean, that's the birthright, but you can adopt and extend a birthright to people who don't have that, and they adopt your way of life and your customs, and so this is called assimilation on a mass scale.

So we have some people in the chat. I should probably get done with my point and then I'll go to the chat.

So give me a minute, guys. I don't know what's going on in the chat here, but let me just finish my point here.

So Torba then responds. He says, this feminine scolding and self -righteous liberal virtue signaling doesn't work anymore and it never will again.

And then he says, cry me a river, and he has some strong words for Owen, you self -righteous liberal.

I can share the gospel of Jesus Christ and fight against the evils of ethnic cleansing, which you apparently think is not a problem at the same time.

Weak men like you are why we are in the position we are in. Strong men like me are how we will get out of it.

Keep my name out of your mouth. Now, that is provocative. I would not have said that, I don't think, but that being said, what

Owen accused Andrew of is far worse than what Andrew's saying to Owen, actually, if you think about it. And the retort that Owen has to him, oh,

I'm sorry, I should have read this first, because Andrew's responding to this, this is what set Andrew off, is

Owen saying, Andrew, I pray you understand the true biblical gospel, which has nothing to do with your kinnest message of ethnic preservation and propagation.

I say this in love, you are promoting a false gospel and you are leading many astray in doing so, please repent and follow Christ. So I say this in love as I lie about you.

I don't try to understand, and that's, I think, one of the things I keep coming back to. That's one of the things this platform is built on, is trying to understand.

And I see far, not enough of that out there. There's no attempt to understand here.

It is just, let's construe these words in the worst possible way, and then let's just even add to them.

Let's just call this a false gospel, even though Andrew's not bringing anything related to the gospel into this at all.

This is, you know who needs to repent is Owen in this. Owen needs to apologize to Andrew, even if there's other problems with Andrew that he thinks

Andrew has. In this one instance, he needs to apologize. And I am on firm ground in saying that.

I mean, this is just not how we treat each other as believers. And maybe Owen doesn't think

Andrew is a believer, but you need to at least try to provide some evidence for that.

All right, so this got picked up by a bunch of leftists. Bunch of social justice warriors picked up Owen's thoughts and they, so here's just a few examples.

There's more, I'm sure. There's more probably coming in even now. You have this guy named Josiah Hawthorne, who's,

I looked at his Twitter feed just briefly, and I'm like, okay, this guy's kind of woke. He said, I'm cheering

Owen Strand on, me cheering for Owen. Say it again, Owen, say it louder. And then Kristen Dumez, Jesus and John Wayne author says,

I'd cheer him on if he hadn't blocked me. So you have Kristen Dumez, she wanting to, this should give

Owen some pause. Like you are doing the same thing they're doing and they love it. This guy named

Ian Harbour said, this is so funny to me. And I'm trying to remember who Ian works for, why

I put this here. He works for, I think near Orthodoxy or something, but, or writes for them. But anyway, Owen said, excited to share this publicly, despite apparent confusion of the contrary, the savior of the

Christian faith, is not Anglo -Saxon, et cetera. And Ian Harbour says, do you know this? No, no, no, like everyone knows it,

Ian. Anthony Bradley, Owen Strand, is being slandered by Christian nationalists as a liberal and a weak man for raising objections to their movement.

Social nationalism is showing their hand, believe them. I think Bob Stevens is another near Orthodoxy guy.

And he goes, we're seeing that Russell Moore quote playing out in real time and it's something. And the Russell Moore quote is, Russell Moore saying that quoting

Jesus will just get you called woke. Well, Owen Strand's not quoting

Jesus here. So, this is a categorization of things that are not the gospel and aren't biblical into biblical categories where they don't belong.

That concerns me. Celeste Irwin, this is someone who is a transgender, a

Christian who's transgender, according to her. I'm confused as to what has led to Owen's recent stand against those to his right, but I'm definitely here for it.

Sorry, a trans woman is supporting your tweet, Owen. I know that's probably not a good look for you. So, this should give

Owen some pause, I would think. That should jolt him a little and make him wonder why in the world are all these people who are from heretics to just social justice warrior types supporting me in this?

And they're loving it. That should give you some pause, right? Nathaniel Keen for 499 asks, can someone explain why interracial marriage is such a universal good deserving of being championed so hard?

That's a good question. And I would say in context of this question is the constant drumbeat.

I saw an advertisement just yesterday, McDonald's put out. The constant drumbeat to force all families to look as diverse as possible in ways that aren't,

I mean, like you have a black wife and a white father with like an Asian kid or something.

And it's like, is that possible? Sure. You know how exceptionally rare that is? Normally advertisers are trying to identify with you to say this person just like you bought this product.

So maybe you should buy it. And they're not doing that. They're doing a political programming to tell you what you should be doing.

You should be, it's a moral good. It is superior. It is more righteous to marry as far outside of your particular ethnicity, if you're white at least.

It seems to be fine if you're not, but that's a moral good. And I will say this, that's nowhere in scripture.

It is not a moral good. There are situations where you do that. There are circumstances I think for that, but that is not a universal moral good or anything like that.

You don't get any points with God or anyone else because you married someone who had far different genetics than someone you could have married or maybe living in the same area you naturally would have married, who would have grown up in a similar region and so forth.

So this is just, this is a good question. And I think it's important to realize that that's the context we're in, where this is being jammed down our throat.

You have to ask why. Why is that being jammed down our throat to create? I think part of it is to create further fracturing because on an individual level, sometimes it can be really good.

It can be the right thing. Some of my friends I have are in interracial relationships and they love each other and it's great.

In fact, I go to a church that's very diverse and I mean, I love it. But on a mass level, a societal level, social wide level, a macro level, these things are destabilizing.

And I mean, there's so many examples you can give of this. You could talk about what's happening in South Africa and how even in that country that the people, it's hard to form a government with people that are so different.

And then the unfortunate thing is the people who are a mixture tend to, black and white, they tend to get persecuted by both sides or at least there's suspicion.

There isn't built trust there. And so if you want to destabilize a culture, there's probably a lot of tools at your disposal, but in my mind, that probably would be one of them.

And you can go back. I know people have found quotes from various Marxist thinkers that have said basically much the same thing.

This is what needs to happen. I know the Soviets even were involved during the civil rights movement in trying to push a lot of the forced diversity because they knew it had a destabilizing effect on a mass scale, not on a macro or micro scale.

So yeah, I mean, important point, good question. That's my answer. Hopefully that helps.

So I should probably just say, because someone's gonna take me out of context here, not against interracial marriage at all.

In fact, I have two sisters -in -law. One's Jewish. One is now a

Dominican. There we go. And I love them. They're part of the family, right?

So if someone is going to use what I just said to try to say I'm a kinist or something, they just have no clue what they're talking about.

But that's unfortunately, we can't have like complicated discussions about real things in this particular setting, political setting.

So there was, I don't know if I wanna go over all this. We've been going almost an hour here. Toby Sumter also responded to this, and I just thought it was a weak, it was just sad.

It's just sad to me. There were some other conservatives, people who have been kind of anti -woke that were dunking on Torba's tweet.

And I just thought this is not exactly helpful stuff.

I think clarifying at first. I mean, that's what I try to do is when I don't understand, I clarify, but people are dunking all over the place.

Now, there's some sad things that Andrew sent me. Because I asked Andrew, I said,

Andrew, what did you mean by this? And there were two things that stood out to me that he sent me. These are tweet threads.

They're so long though that I, and I do not know what happened with my highlighter, I have to say for those watching,

I had specific things highlighted. And for some reason, when I transferred it into this program, it got messed up.

But the words are still there at least. So here's the first one, and I'll just read this.

A word on race and ethnicity. A little long, but please read. I am white. Always have been, but then only somewhat.

That is, I'd never really thought much of it. I came to maturation mostly in the 90s.

Probably the high watermark for race relations in America. I was blessed to attend an excellent private school in the

South, which was of course mostly white, but we had folks from all over. 80 % of the kids were day students, meaning they lived at home with their families, but there was 20 % of boarding students.

This is actually very typical for Christian schools from places like Saudi Arabia, Japan, Korea. And we had the internationally wealthy and poor local white kids who attended on scholarship.

So we grew up this way. And he says, likewise, he says, never was there a whiff of complaint from the non -white students.

We were living in the ideal reality that people theorize. So I didn't really think of myself as white because I didn't think about race at all.

I can actually relate to this to some extent. I've really never thought of myself as white, like primarily.

Even ethnically speaking, I've always thought of myself as more, not always, but since I understood that I was like Scotch -Irish

English, like I knew that I was, I knew I was American. That was the primary thing I knew, but I knew that my ancestors came over and went back to the pilgrims and Virginia and Pennsylvania and the early explorers.

And so that was always my identity. But anyway, not because I'm eager to be proud of it, he says, but because it matters much to me, but because I've been forced to, and I relate to this, to not do so would be like a woman walking down a dark alley gleefully rejecting the notion that she was a woman and thus had nothing to fear, that she needed to take no extra precaution.

In short, I'm only aware that I'm white because I'm vilified explicitly for being white.

If not for that, it wouldn't have crossed my mind. I wish it weren't like this. I once shared a beautiful common culture with my friends of disparate ethnicities, but that's been torn to shreds.

Now I'm forced to be race conscious. One of the last things I have any interest in doing. So as you see a rise in race consciousness among whites, responding with shock and outrage is just about the silliest thing you can do.

It was inevitable once it became fashionable to attack and denigrate white people. You can't turn public hatred of a plurality of Americans into a national pastime and expect there to be no reckoning.

Do I wish it were so? No. Do I blame whites? Also no. And if you're a Christian, particularly a Christian minister and you've got any sort of audience, you ought to think long and hard before you collect those easy likes on tweets about ethnic nationalism and the like.

I genuinely don't know any fellow Christians who are calling for an ethno state.

And I agree, I don't know either in the sense that these guys are thinking it's happening.

He says, what I do know is a whole heap of faithful believers who are getting hung out to dry by big name

Christian voices who are sufficiently insulated from the anti -white hate to take pot shots at the people it's affecting.

So if you want to drive Christians into bitterness, hatred, and ethnic vainglory away from the watch of under shepherds and into the waiting arms of actual race villains, keep it up with those insufferable good boy tweets.

You're not going to like what you get on the other side or you could have the stones to do what might be the most uncomfortable, genuinely counter -cultural thing in your ministry and agree that there's a plan afoot to displace and humiliate white

Americans. After all, the people doing it are proudly bragging about their motives, means, and rampant success.

You can stick up for the largest contingent of Christians in the U .S. While they're under attack, you can tell them it's okay to value their heritage, particularly since if you're an

American, you're enjoying the fruits of it. No matter what color you are, this will be the real test of our famous Christians.

If they stand up for the right in this case, when it will actually cost them, they can be trusted.

If not, then we need to give the microphone to different men. Wow. This is one of the things Andrew Torbas sent me.

He sent me another one and I'm not going to read this. It's also equally powerful though. And he talks about, this is different.

This is someone who was on the mission field and lived in all kinds of different countries and basically says that these differences between peoples are not trivial.

And he links to a video of a Chinese pastor speaking to Chinese audiences about the evidence for God of the

Bible and the Chinese pictograms. And he's like, this shared heritage is what makes it possible. It doesn't mean anything to other people.

So he says, so he gives some hypothetical. Should we throw a bunch of African Christians in there, into China?

Maybe some French and Italians too. They're all Christians, right? How will that go? And he just says that, this is just naive basically.

But he says it using all of his experience. And I mean, it's a good point. It's a good point. It's frustrating that this even has to be said,

I suppose. But it does. You have some people that are being raked over coals in this country.

They've been under siege because of the fact that they're white. And we've lived through that.

And now to have it not really acknowledged, to not have champions.

I mean, people are going to look for champions who stand up and say something. Why do you think? Now, this is broadly speaking.

It's not just white people. I don't even think of it in those terms. I think of it more in terms of, it's like traditional

Americans who want Anglo -Protestantism to still remain. And so, like the LGBT lobby will say our allies.

That's how I think of it. You have the Anglo -Protestants and you have their allies. And they're on the same team here.

They want to preserve America as it was founded as much as possible. And they know that culture is linked in some ways to lineage, at least on a mass scale.

Important to make that distinction. And those people are raked over coals for it.

And you have someone like Oliver Anthony get up and sing a song basically acknowledging that there's corruption, that working class

Americans are having a hard time, that it's these rich men North of Richmond that are doing this. And people gravitate to it like you would not believe because they're looking, they're so desperate for someone who will champion them.

They're so tired of being kicked down and assumed the worst about and straw man and told they're racist and that some of them don't even care.

And if you want to drive people into real Nazi -esque type of white nationalism stuff, then keep doing that.

Keep alienating them. So the only people left that they hear from are the people that are on those extreme fringes as you like to call them.

Yeah, it makes my blood boil, sorry. I knew I had to do this though. I knew I had to do this. Okay, in the context, we're gonna start the gradual descent of landing the plane.

This is your captain and we are starting our descent into the airport. This is just from the last week.

The ADL, which is just as bad as the Southern Poverty Law Center. They are hate groups, pretty much.

They say they're against hate groups. But the ADL, Anti -Defamation League, says the myth that Jews bear collective responsibility for murdering

Jesus, also referenced to as deicide, has been dismissed by historians and disavowed by Christian leaders.

Yet the claim has been used to justify violence against Jews for centuries. Learn more. And so here's what happened.

Some people slapped a community notes post on this that said, actually, there's biblical passages where Jews as a whole say they take responsibility for this.

They're not the only ones, but they do take responsibility for it. And Twitter got it removed. This is,

I mean, what anti -Semitism is now is just thinking that the gospel is exclusive to Christians and Jews aren't part of it.

Thinking that the Jewish people bear any responsibility for the crucifixion of Christ.

That's now anti -Semitism. Congratulations, guys. You're all anti -Semitic now. If you're just Orthodox believers, that'll believe what

Christians have believed for centuries. So, and this happened right near each other.

Max Miller, who is a Jewish member of Congress, or I guess Congress, I think, in Ohio, and religious

Jewish of some variety. He says Lizzie Marbach, who was the, worked in the

Ohio Right to Life, said, there's no hope for any of us outside of having faith in Jesus Christ alone. Okay, straight up Orthodox biblical doctrine.

Max Miller, the supposed conservative MAGA Trump guy, says, this is one of the most bigoted tweets

I have ever seen. Delete it, Lizzie. Religious freedom in the United States applies to every religion. You've gone too far.

So this is bigoted. It's bigoted now. And he made a fake apology about this.

And what happened to Lizzie? She lost her job because of it. There's a whole article in the Sentinel.

Ohio Right to Life fires Christian after Republicans lawmaker blaster for sharing the gospel. Oh, the left is gonna persecute us.

No, guys, it's not just the left. You're going to be persecuted in the political party now that has been strongly represented by and impacted by Christians.

It's turning. Mark it. You're gonna see more of this kind of stuff. You can't articulate the true gospel.

They're gonna gatekeep it. They're gonna gatekeep it. And they're gonna call it racist, which is basically what's happening here.

This is bigoted. This is anti -Semitic. That's what's happening here. Around the same time, there was a huge firestorm about Bradley Cooper, who's not

Jewish, playing Leonard Bernstein in a new movie coming out.

Now, do you realize how many... I was just watching a movie the other day about a knight from like the 60s.

And what's it called? Men of Iron was the book by Howard Pyle, but the movie was called something else.

But the guy who plays the main character is Jewish, which is fine. But that's so typical for Hollywood.

I mean, there's so many instances of Jewish people playing characters who aren't Jewish. But watch what happens when someone who's not

Jewish plays someone who's Jewish. It is racist now. This is the world, and this is just from the last week, guys.

This is the world that we're living in. This is just the reality. Someone had pointed out,

I'm not gonna go too deep into this, but that Owen Strawn seems to be okay talking about black people and Jewish people in ways that he would not be comfortable talking about white people.

And we should, in World War II, we should have supported the Jews more.

We should keep Saddam from destroying Israel. There's this integrity to be maintained there.

And of course, if there's any homogeneous group out there, it's Jewish people. I mean, they monitor even their marriages, the religious ones.

I mean, they preserve their culture, and they've done it for thousands of years living in different places.

And that seems to be okay. There seems to be something that's okay about that, broadly speaking.

But if anyone who's European starts saying something similar, we need to preserve ourselves.

It is not taken the same way at all. I was gonna quote

Augustine. Maybe I'll just say this real quick. Augustine said, it is true that our ancestors had a religious regard for kinship and being afraid that it might be lessened and lost in the course of success as generations, they tried to hold onto it by the bond of marriage.

And if it were to call it back before it got too far away. So it was that when the world was fully populated and there were no more marrying of sisters or half -sisters, people still preferred to marry within their own clan.

And so this is just an observation. People, and why does he say that that happened? People tended to marry within their own clan.

Well, it's because of kinship. So it's a shared love. A shared, and these shared loves create tight bonds.

So anyway, this is just like standard thought for not even just Christians, not unique to Christians.

It's just standard thought that, oh yeah, of course. Yeah, even today with everyone trying to pump in, it's a higher good to be in an interracial relationship.

How many people actually do it? It's not many. There are people who do do it and there are people who should do it.

And sometimes in the circumstances they're in, that is the person who's the closest to them.

And that can serve to help them follow Christ better in their lives.

I know in New York, I'll just speak to where I am. The Christian community is very small. When you go to a church, it's going to be in my area, diverse, ethnically speaking.

And the people that you might even share a common culture with, you don't share a faith with necessarily.

And so it is likely you're going to be put into situations where the people that you develop trust with, and that takes time, are people who are of different ethnic groups.

And so that happens and that's a good thing. And then there's nothing wrong with it. But in general, you have to ask, why is it that for like all of human civilization, even with all the travel that goes on, the vast majority of people still have a common love or a kinship or a built -in trust that doesn't have to be overcome as much when it comes to people who look like them.

Augustine's just observing it. He's just saying, oh, that seems to be part of God's order, I guess, in some way, somehow. So is that controversial?

Is that like, are you a white supremacist for saying that? You shouldn't be. You shouldn't be. I don't know why you would be.

It's just common sense. But anyway, so racism is still being ratcheted up.

You have this whole, Christianity Today, I was just going to go through a bunch of stuff with them.

I mean, they had this article about Barbie. They do a hit piece on Oliver Anthony's hit. In fact, the title is, Oliver Anthony's Viral Hit Doesn't Love Its Neighbors.

It's so funny, because like what, a song doesn't love its neighbors? Because it's against welfare, I guess. It's not, though.

It's against abusing welfare. You have the same Christianity Today. This is just within a week.

They published an article by Francis Collins, which Tom Askell and a bunch of others said, hey, look, Francis Collins, this is the guy who lied about COVID, led many to risk their life and health on false science, led in using aborted babies to experiment on lab rats and support sexual perversion.

Yeah, yeah, Christianity Today is fine with that guy. So there was another article, though, and this is what

I wanted to get to. It's Stephen Wolf, I thought tweeted this out, it was funny, from Christianity Today. And it's about,

I guess, indigenous cultures and the, basically, I remember in missions class this happened, like how should we as Christians view other cultures, right?

When you go into the mission field, you are told in seminary, most seminaries, that you need to now preserve the culture.

Don't impose European things onto those cultures. You need to, which is funny to me, because if Owen's gonna be consistent, he would have to start raging against that kind of thing and saying, what do you mean?

There's nothing in the Bible that says you should preserve the ways of life of the places that you're going into, but people know that there's shared trust and bonds, and if you're gonna change those things, it has to happen gradually, or else there'll be destabilization and all of that.

So here's the article, though. The article says in it, Danny Zacharias, a

New Testament professor who led LeBlanc, who's a character, or a person, not a character, a person in this, while working on his doctorate, remembers that LeBlanc urged him to make his indigenous identity central as a person and as a

Christian. Now, imagine it was a white person, yeah, right. Make your identity central as a white person.

No one would do it. That wasn't something we were told was important, said Zacharias, who is

Cree and Anishinaabe, and on his mother's side, who were even told, this was demonic sometimes, but Zacharias, who is ordained by the

Canadian Baptist of Atlantic Canada, came to see that LeBlanc was right. The integration of his

Christian identity with his cultural heritage was transformative for him. So this happened just this week, and Stephen Wolfe is like, all right,

Owen, this happened the day before you were tweeting that stuff. Why don't you just come out against this? Why don't you say that this, now, the thing is,

I actually think Owen probably would, or might, or has maybe already. I don't think he have a problem saying that, but the point is, his attacks don't start there, and there's plenty of examples.

The attacks don't start there. They start with people who are white in America, and it's like, it seems like, it feels like a crime to be white in America.

Like, you have to make up for something to start off with. You have to like, the assumption is that you're racist, and you have to make up for it by showing that you're not.

That is the reality we live in, and it's in everywhere. It's, I would say it's even in our, some of our

Christian organizations. So let's see if I have more.

Oh yeah, I definitely do. All right, so a few things I wanna show you. Big Eva right now, they are still bent on artificially placing minorities into authoritative positions while driving away white people.

This is, there's an active part of what they do. Let me give you, can I give you an example of it right here?

We need to be churches that know how to love when it's hard, when it's confusing, and when it's with people who do not look like ourselves.

We've talked about the what. We've briefly talked about the why, because God commands us to love him with all our heart, mind, and soul strength, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

That's of utmost important. Now let's get a little practical and think about the how.

I want you all to do me and your church members and your community a favor and evaluate your leadership teams.

See where you can add diversity, not for diversity's sake, but for the benefit of the body.

Look and see where you can add diverse voices. Learn how to celebrate our differences and resist the notion of being colorblind.

God is not colorblind. He talks about throughout his scriptures, every tribe, tongue, and nation. So we need to learn to celebrate what

God has already created. I have kind of coined the phrase, and it's probably not just mine.

We need to grow and be color smart, or some people have said color wise.

Being color smart enables us to see people as made in the image of God, just like us, while also acknowledging the beauty of our differences.

We are not all the same in regards to skin color, interests, likes, gifts, and desires.

And this is a good thing. We can acknowledge it. We don't need to ignore it. Our differences are for the glory of God.

And when we embrace it and enjoy it, it's a way we can extend and express love to our neighbor.

Number three, you're gonna need to preach these truths. We do not want to assume that people know this to be true.

Foster an environment where the gospel is proclaimed, and there's a robust understanding of the Imago Dei.

Okay, so I played it in context. I mean, the short clip was like 20 seconds, but you see the context.

There's some good things she's saying there, actually. And I have to say, I mean, I don't normally comment on someone's looks, but she has some of the whitest teeth

I've ever seen. They look so clean. I don't know what toothpaste she's using, but I need to get it. So anyway, that's a compliment.

But there's some good things she's saying, but there's a problem.

There's a problem in the middle of that. And it's this forced diversity that we have to be obsessed.

We have to think about it. Now, of course, to the woke, it's about power dynamics and power relationships. And you see that come out here.

It's not about appreciating cultures because they're unique cultures that God has made, and he made them to be enjoyed and appreciated and that kind of thing.

It's because it's all about sharing power. That's how the woke people look at this. And to be fair,

Owen Strand and the G3 guys that run G3, I don't think they look at it this way. They more want to take the colorblind approach that I think she probably is against.

But their response to this kind of thing is somewhat inadequate. I think what they want to do, and it's not just them, this is just in general, conservatives have wanted to do this for a long time, is just support some kind of a neutrality where we don't acknowledge the people who are being raked over coals.

We don't, it's not, we have the goal as being this colorblind society of some kind.

But while we have this goal, there are some people that are being blatantly discriminated against.

Because, and if they weren't white, it wouldn't happen that way. And so that has to be acknowledged somehow.

That has to be pushed back on somehow. I'm not saying do the woke thing. The woke thing would be to redistribute. The woke thing would be to say there's haves and there's have -nots, and we need to make things equal.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying that there needs to be an acknowledgement that these people are being attacked and that the people who are attacking them should be opposed because what they're doing is evil.

That's it. Christianity, Big Eva Christianity is still bent on, this is a new video, and it's coming from an organization funded by the

North American Mission Board, actually. So this is coming through the Southern Baptists.

And this is, you're paying for this kind of stuff still. If you're giving to the cooperative program, some of this stuff eventually gets to these kinds of places.

And so here, that's one example I wanted to give to you. Another one, I don't have this one pulled up, but there was a

PCA pastor who was on a Gospel Coalition podcast recently, and Woke Preacher Clips found this one, too.

This PCA pastor, former PCA pastor, Robert Cunningham, told the Gospel Coalition that all the

MAGA people left his church and frames it as a success story. He later boasts about church discipline for QAnon Christian nationalism stuff.

We didn't let them leave graciously. So he brags about it. That's how many of you are viewed, even in this audience.

Even if you don't believe and you want proof and you're not a conspiracy theorist, in the sense of believing unsubstantiated things automatically, you are smeared into you that way.

If you're the person who voted for Trump, yeah, church discipline for you. Church, you don't trust the government.

This is what's going on in real time in Big Eva still. They're still going down this path, and that's one of the reasons they're gonna be destroyed.

And there needs to be an aggressive response to this kind of thing, and we don't have that. We don't have it. There are some signs that that is, in fact, happening.

Here's one example. Mark Dever from Nine Marks Ministries put this out. Check this out. Mark Dever here in Washington.

It's August right now when I'm recording this. We've just done a fun Life at Works interview with Jonathan Lehman. I hope you'll enjoy watching that.

The Nine Marks Conference in Southeastern is rebooting again. We're starting up again with the Expositional Preaching.

Mark, Lord willing, but Danny, Aiken emailed me the other day, and Danny said that only about 130 or 40 of you have registered so far, and if by Monday, August 21st, so that's this coming

Monday, we don't have 300 registered, they're gonna have to just cancel the conference. Okay, I'm gonna stop it right there.

You will notice, I mean, this is getting talked about a lot online. In the background, there's two guys that look like one of them's sitting on the other's lap, like they're cuddling.

I don't think that's what's happening. I think it's someone in a chair that's in front of the other person, but man, the optics are so bad.

So people have been talking about that. Here's what I wanted to point out with Mark Dever. I went to Southeastern, so I'm very familiar with the school.

I remember the Nine Marks events. That's insane to me, that they only have that many people signed up.

That is a area thoroughly saturated with Nine Marks, Southern Baptists, big churches.

They should easily have hundreds of people there. Something's changing, guys. Something, I think, is changing.

So that's one thing. Another thing that I want, and now this is maybe more of the same.

I'm not even gonna read the article, to be honest with you. I had it pulled up, but Willie McLaren has stepped down as interim president and CEO of the

Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee and is no longer considered to be a candidate for that position by the presidential search team because apparently he plagiarized his education, said he had,

I guess, degrees he didn't have. So, I mean, this is happening. This is where Big Eve is heading.

This is just within the last week. It's diminishing numbers. It's ridden with scandal after scandal and controversy, and it's just, it is being buried, and it's,

I know some of you might rejoice at that, but it's sad to me. It really is. I grieve about this because you just go back maybe 15 years and you think there was so much optimism.

I remember there was some major magazine, it might've been Time, did an article on the top ideas affecting, impacting the

United States, and Calvinism was one of them, and I thought, wow. You know, that's amazing that a Christian idea even makes the top 10, and now you look at what's happened to that coalition, and it's gone.

It's fading. T4G doesn't even do conferences anymore. So you're increasingly now, you have, the guys who were

Big Eva now are being more and more put on the, they still have power levers, but they're now being relegated to certain leftist institutions, like Christianity Today.

And the Gospel Coalition can't even post an article without people dunking on it because it's the Gospel Coalition, if it's even slightly controversial at this point.

So it's like, they're a joke. And so right now there's a big opening, and you have, I think that's part of what explains some of the gatekeeping and marking of territory we've seen lately.

You have organizations like G3, you have the Moscow, Idaho stuff, you have some smaller organizations that are trying to do some things, and it's competition.

And this is what I wanna say. Brothers, these things ought not to be. We can work together.

And on the things that we disagree with, we don't need to straw man or lie about each other, and we can actually talk to each other about them.

That would be my hope. And I hope you all pray for that, I pray for that. And I wanna see that.

So, all right, well, we've been going an hour and 23 minutes and let me just check, because the important thing here is where my pork's at.

My pork is at 195 degrees, which means I still have five degrees left. So I'm gonna try to get it up to 200. So that means

I still have some time for the podcast to keep going. So I'm going to play for you.

So let's just put to bed this particular issue. And we will then focus on Dennis Prager a little bit.

I wanna show you some clips from a recent interview with Charlie Kirk on sexual ethics and virtual child pornography.

So let's put a cap on this. I think it's, this is what

I believe. I think it's obvious throughout scripture, if we take the children of Israel as an example, that preserving their culture was at times linked to also preserving, hold on real quick.

I'm getting a text message here that looks like it's important. I know I'm live. This is what, okay. Anyway, when you look at the

Old Testament, preserving culture is important to the children of Israel, passing down the stories of what

God had done, putting up monuments in effect, maintaining genetic ties to the land so that at the year of Jubilee, it goes back to the tribe it was part of, not just the people as a whole, but the tribe.

Foreigners couldn't have that land perpetually. There were certain laws, like even the slave laws, you couldn't, you had the free

Hebrew slaves. You could have slaves that weren't Hebrew perpetually. There was all kinds of things like that, entrance into the temple, for example.

If you were genetically part of Israel, you were far, you made it farther into that.

So there are examples, of course, of interracial marriages, absolutely. And there's nothing wrong with them.

But as a whole, there was a distinction between the foreigners and those who were ethnic

Israelites. And in general, when it came to the Canaanites, there was a, and you have to think about this.

There was, there were laws against intermarriage. Now, why? Now, the standard response is, well, that had nothing to do with race.

That was just about religion. Okay, I believe that. I believe it was religion, at least.

The thing that was concerning was that other gods would be worshiped.

And, but you have to ask the question, what about a Canaanite who came to the Lord, right?

Why weren't there provisions for that put in? There seems to be an assumption, an unspoken assumption, and one that most people have had for centuries, that there is a tie between those two things, that culture and religion.

It doesn't mean that they're the same thing, but it means that if you intermarry into this culture or this other lineage, this different lineage, that has a certain religion, that even if they say they're gonna convert or whatever, that religion is going to, there's an inroad.

They've been conditioned from young ages to be in this other religion, and they have other traditions and other ways of life. The two have a connection in some way, not a parallel connection.

It's not like a one -on -one connection, but there is a connection. And so it's not, again, it's an organic thing.

It's not an abstractional ideological thing. It's very much an organic thing.

And I wish I had better words to talk about that, but hopefully people understand what I'm trying to say. That's where I'm coming down on this.

And I don't think Andrew Torba disagrees with me on that, at least from my limited interaction with him.

And I think that it's just sad that we can't have, I can't say that without being called something.

Okay, last but not least, we're going to talk about this Dennis Prager thing. I played a clip the other day. This is, so the title of the video is the shadow that follows liberalism to perdition or something like that.

So you have, the whole point of that was that you have conservative, you have

Christians and you have conservatives, political conservatives, who are repeating, it's like they want to conserve the last iteration of leftism or something.

Like they're against the current innovations, but the previous things they're okay with. And so you see this,

I think with Christianity, what Big Eva was doing, now you see with these other folks who aren't

Big Eva, they were opposing Big Eva, but now they're using some of the same tactics as Big Eva. They're pushing goals that are similar to some of the goals

Big Eva had. You see that in conservatism, okay? You see that with Dennis Prager. And it comes out in this interview with Charlie Kirk.

So Dennis Prager had gone on a podcast and basically he said something about, it's not a sin to look at animated child pornography.

And of course the internet went wild, at least in my circle, I don't know if everyone did, but Charlie Kirk wanted to do some damage control.

And so there's a non, there's so much to go over here. And I have literally like 15 timestamps, but we can't go over all of them.

Let me just start and give you some of what's being said. And I think it makes it worse, to be honest with you.

Their attempt to get around this, and it spells death for conservatism if this is the direction it's gonna go.

Everybody, welcome to this episode. All right, let's go further in here. Condemned him.

I got calls and emails from some of the leading Jews in America, including conservatives.

Dennis, you must speak out against Candace Owens for not saying anything about her friend, Kanye West.

But I didn't, because I knew how much good Candace Owens has done.

Let's say she made a mistake. Okay, I won't join the bandwagon because she has done so much good.

She has a very high moral bank account with me. What I did was I called her up.

I said, Candace, talk to me, what's going on? Then a few weeks later,

I wrote my column on Candace Owens and Kanye West. And I spoke about how much good she has done, how there's not an anti -Semitic bone in her body, how she is so pro -Israel.

Her husband is one of the leading activists in England on behalf of Israel. And I hope one day she will make a statement.

She should make eventually a statement about Kanye West. That is her decision at her time.

That's what I wrote. And that is the decent thing to do because she had a moral bank account.

Do I not have a moral bank account with conservatives and Christians? Is there a bigger non -Christian friend of Christians in America than Dennis Prager?

I can't think of who that is. And yet to jump on this, all of a sudden,

I am a bad guy? A lifetime of goodness doesn't matter?

All of a sudden, a bad guy? It doesn't reflect on me. It reflects on them. And it is distressing.

I'm sorry, I was muted there. Hopefully people can hear me now. So this is the tact that he was taking, is trying to say that he's being ripped out of context, that what about all the good he's done?

I'm sure, yeah, he's done some good, but this is kind of a major blunder though. When you're saying that animated child pornography isn't evil, that seems like a kind of a major blunder.

Like a lifetime of, like, would you say that about someone who actually watches that?

Like, oh, they had a lifetime of good. Okay, but that's pretty evil. And so, yeah,

I mean, I don't buy that. Let's see, let's go to, let me go 15 minutes in here.

Religions in this matter, and in many matters, I know Christianity pretty well. But the ultimate evil is murder.

So if you murder yourself, are you an evil individual? I wouldn't go that far.

So I don't know what it means to commit evil against yourself. I believe this, you can hurt yourself. You can injure your soul.

There are a whole host of things. See, you are right in pointing. Okay, let me just jump in there.

What's going on is he's trying to say, well, you know, what about the effects that Charlie Kirk was trying to say?

What about the effects that this has on the person looking at it? And Dennis Prager is, he uses murder as the example to say that, you know, murdering, you can't really murder yourself.

Like, of course you can, of course you can. I mean, this is just, he's digging the hole even more.

Suicide actually is self -murder. Let's see, he commits a straw man to,

I think that's right about here. You, if you won't ascribe the word evil, that doesn't mean you think it's virtuous.

I - Of course, exactly, thank you. But that's of course, Dennis. You understand that.

But the audience, so Dennis, I'm trying to help you out just in the sense, I want the audience to know that.

Okay, so this is ridiculous. He's trying to change what Dennis Prager said.

Dennis Prager said it wasn't evil to look at animated pornography. And now he's saying, now they're trying to frame it as all

I was saying was that it's not virtuous to look at it. Well, that's a completely different thing.

So that's a straw man of what he said. They're trying to change it. It's, man, there's just like everything in this.

It's every lame and like attempt to not apologize. The speed limit, is it evil?

Yes, it's evil. If you go 55 in a 25 mile per hour zone where there are kids around.

In other words, it's relative to the circumstance. If you go 70 in a 65 mile per hour highway, it's not evil.

I mean, we can't cheapen the word. It makes

God and religion look bad. I have brought more people to Christianity, I believe, than any

American Christian, okay? And I'm a Jew, I might add, and I'm proud of that.

And part of the reason is I make God real. I show God in a light that doesn't make him look foolish.

If God thinks masturbation is evil, that's not my God. All right, that's, again, he's just creating more opportunities for error, the arrogance of that, that he's led more people to Christianity than any

American Christians, that's just insane. And now he's saying the reason for it is because he makes

God look good, as if God needs him to make him look good. And the God that he's bringing people to apparently doesn't think masturbation is wrong.

And I'm sorry, I should have said if you have kids in the car, but hopefully I said it.

So this is crazy. Someone's arguing with me in the chat.

Let me just pay, someone says, that's not quite what Charlie said, John. Charlie said that Dennis did not say it is virtuous when he said it's not evil.

I think that, I don't know where the disagreement is. I'm pretty sure that that's, maybe

I misspoke or something, but that is what I meant. Charlie's trying to say that he didn't do this affirmative thing of saying that it's virtuous to look at animated child pornography.

And Dennis is like, right, exactly, I didn't do that. That's what I was saying.

And it's like, no, it's not. You said it wasn't evil. So it's the difference between an affirming standard, it's virtuous and a non -affirming standard, it's evil, okay?

So yeah, it's a diversion. So I think most of you get that. All right, man, there's so much else, like here, ah, man, it's so bad.

Let me just play this for you. That hurts me on behalf of religion.

That's mean. And now if masturbation becomes an addiction, if masturbation hurts -

He's saying it's mean to tell someone they can't masturbate. That's what he's saying. It's mean, yeah, so he has a moral framework.

He definitely does, it's not a Christian one though. He talks about, I'll just summarize some things here.

He talks about it being a lesser evil. He says we lose to the bad guys when we make a big deal about his statements about it being evil, not evil, to look at animated child pornography.

He says, compared to using children, it's less evil. Yeah, no, duh, right? Of course, of course it is.

It's obvious that it's worse to actually do it. He says that it's,

I think he said at one point that people who do that kind of thing are incurable or something like that, which,

I mean, that's so out of step with Christianity. And that's, I mean, Christianity, conservatism came from Christianity and now it's secularizing and so it's no longer conservative.

That's really what we have going on. And then he says that he, at the 29 mark, so he's half an hour into the interview, he says,

I'm prepared to call it evil. And then Charlie Kirk, so all these excuses and diversions, and then he's prepared to call it evil.

And Charlie Kirk keeps trying to remind people, Dennis is a good man. He's telling his audience, Dennis Prager's a good man.

And then Dennis goes on to scold people that say they're just playing gotcha. So after he says, I'm prepared to call it evil, he says, people are just playing gotcha with this clip.

And he says, that's a totalitarian impulse. So you're basically a totalitarian. If you're participating in cancel culture, the same thing

J .D. Greer did. If you disagree that you're participating in cancel culture.

And he says, who's gonna be left? You have a purity death spiral, he says. If you get rid of him, who's gonna be left?

Well, hopefully a lot of Christians out there who know that that's evil. I'm not about to analyze private thoughts, he says, because humans are complex.

Well, if you're not going to analyze thoughts, then, I mean, that's where sin starts.

That's where these things start. Yeah, I mean, I don't know. It's just so obvious to me. He says, yeah, anyway, there's so many other things.

There's only like a few other things I wrote down. And Charlie Kirk tries to wrap the whole thing up with basically saying, if the conservative movement has an issue with Dennis Prager, then we got a real problem here.

Because Dennis is one of us. And it's this damage control thing. They're trying to hold the line and it's pathetic. It's contradictory.

It's weak. It creates more problems. And it's not conservative at all. Under Dennis's logic, it should be perfectly fine to then allow animated child pornography to be out there.

Now, hopefully Dennis would say he doesn't want that out there, but he'd have to justify why if it's not evil. Why? We're one step away from some real moral anarchy, even on the conservative side, if we're canceling people who just articulate the gospel, because it's bigoted.

But we have a problem, guys. And yeah, am I encouraged by some things? Yeah, I'm encouraged by some of the young people who are stepping it up.

I'm encouraged. This morning, I was reading Hezekiah. And it actually says that Hezekiah, when he restored the temple worship and all of that, that God actually moved in the heart of the people to respond to his edicts.

So he didn't just force religion on the people. He did, but then the Lord actually moved in the hearts of the people so that it was sincere in Judah.

And we have to be looking for the same thing, that the Lord must move in the hearts of the people. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have someone who's restoring

Christian law, restoring... And it's obviously different than Israel, but at least honoring

God publicly. That used to be a civic ritual. Now it's not. Okay, there's so much more.

Let's see, we got a lot of people in the chat. Noah Alvarenga is in the chat. Hey, Noah. Totalitarian, reactionary, far -right, black -pilled.

Folks like Prager just call others these scary names to make you ignore the actual critiques being made.

Yeah, that's probably true to some extent. I do see that tactic being employed many places.

Someone asked, can we be equally yoked with Christ deniers? Of course not. No, we can't, but you have to ask what yoked means.

So can we have political strategies in which we're co -belligerents with people who are not

Christians? Absolutely. We cannot compromise, though, our faith.

We can't be in a moral compromising or a theologically compromising position. So it takes some discernment.

And this episode, unfortunately, is already almost two hours, so. All right, well, someone says, give me

Dennis Prager for 100 Christians who subvert and pervert truth, and do it in the name of Jesus. I mean, I kind of agree.

I mean, I get it, at least. I get it. Like, Dennis Prager's at least, he says some things.

He critiques the left. And yeah, compared to a Russell Moore, you would think Dennis Prager probably is doing maybe more good, at least in the public realm, when it comes to ethics.

But this is, Dennis can't be the leader of conservatism. Because if he's the leader of conservatism, then we lose it all.

That is a poison pill to say that it's not, thoughts aren't really evil.

Animated child pornography isn't really, it's not evil. He doesn't like it. He doesn't, but it's, if you lose your moral bearings, you don't have anything left to conserve.

And it's just, it's acid that will eat away everything else that you hold dear morally. All right, well, that's it for the podcast.

I know that was a little bit of a hard -hitting podcast, I suppose, but hey, look, pray, pray.

Just pray for, I don't get everything right. So hopefully, for those who disagree, can reach out to me.

But that, I try to be that kind of a guy though, where we can talk through things. I'm willing to change my opinion based on further information.

I don't see that attitude with, unfortunately, people who have platforms in evangelicalism.

And that is also a kiss of death for us. We, without humility, we are going to, we're gonna be in trouble in the days ahead.

We need to be united. So let's pray for that. Let's pray for true unity. The same thing

Jesus prayed in the Upper Room Discourse. And hopefully you have a wonderful Lord's Day. God bless.