UPDATE - Jonathan Leeman/9Marks Apology

Update. Oh, man. This has it all.

It really does. This update thread from yesterday's video on Jonathan Lehman. It has it all.

I want to talk about it because I think it's worth giving credit where credit is due. I get a lot of these same vibes.

Remember that time when Thabiti apologized for something. He didn't really explain what he was apologizing for.

He just kind of wanted you to fill in the blanks there. Everyone was kind of like everyone noticed it right away. It's like when you apologize for something that you've done wrong in the past.

Everyone kind of had the impression that he was apologizing for what he said about that white kid who got smeared in the media for being racist, even though he wasn't being racist.

Thabiti was on top of that. And he didn't apologize for that, but it kind of seemed like he was.

And so everyone noticed like this is a non apology apology, you know, that kind of thing. And I think it's worth mentioning in this case as well, because Jonathan Lehman did something out of character.

He stayed up late. It was 10 o 'clock at night after the fray had kind of all settled and everyone kind of had their say.

People watch the old A .D. Robles YouTube channel where I said that Jonathan Lehman was a snake like 10 times.

So he gets up, you know, he stays up late and he he delivers a kind of a non apology apology.

Let's let's hear it, because Tom Buck, he actually pointed out the same video that I pointed out in my video, where it was very clear that Jonathan Lehman was saying what

Tom Buck said he was saying that Jonathan Lehman denied saying, which it's just ridiculous.

But Jonathan Lehman responded out of character. But 10, 11 p .m. yesterday, here is what he said, where I think it was the day before.

Yeah, it was the day before. Anyway, so he says, Tom, I believe that Twitter is a terrible place for these kinds of conversations.

But I do want to say for the record that for some time I've regretted my statement in that video.

It was a bad early mishandling that misconstrues my perspective. Very interesting.

So he doesn't believe what he said in this video, I think, because he doesn't say why he regrets the statements in that video that misconstrues his perspective.

Let's hear him out again, because this is what he said. You remember in the video yesterday, this is what he regrets.

But I'm not sure which part. And so Christians gravitate on majority culture,

Christians gravitate this way, minority culture, Christians gravitate that way. Satan is psyched over the issue, right?

Because he sees division in the church and we don't trust each other and you're voting for them. Well, you must you must not care about justice.

I don't even know if you love Jesus, right? I question your Christianity and just rank division in the church.

Again, I think this is where we have to allow for Christian freedom, Christian freedom. And remember Romans 14, right?

And differently calibrated consciences, differently calibrated consciences. Yeah, that's interesting. So so does he regret that part about about about freedom,

Christian freedom? Because that's I mean, he should regret that part because, you know, I don't know. I mean, call me nuts.

But the idea that your favorite politician is somebody that thinks, you know, killing babies, ripping them limb from limb, sucking their brains out, you know, injecting them with a burning, you know, poison is, you know, just a differently conscienced

Christian. I mean, that you probably should regret that. I mean, nobody would let you get away with that when it comes to slavery or racism or things like that.

But I guess for some reason it's so, you know, so maybe he regrets that, but he doesn't really say what he regrets.

So it's like, I don't know, is it everything? Let's just listen. Let's listen to the rest of it, because maybe there's more regrettable statements in this.

And the fact that we're united around the gospel and not how I work out my decision on who or who not to vote for.

Yeah, but it doesn't count when it's like a white supremacist, though, right? Like, I can't unite around the gospel with you if I vote for a white supremacist who wants to bring the

KKK back, of course, right? I mean, that's way worse, you know, not liking somebody's skin color.

That's way worse than thinking that it's cool to, you know, suck their brains out of their head. That's way worse.

It's people, man. So I can understand, for instance, how a person might,

I might not agree with it, but I can understand how a person might decide, well, look,

I'm not pro -life, but something I want to kind of point out here, because, you know, he's talking and he's talking in an authoritative way.

And we got Devor over here, you know, looking at his notes and talking in a very authoritative kind of way.

He's got the platform, he's got the guild membership, and he's, he's telling you this stuff like as if it's like legitimate.

But here's Jonathan Lehman saying, well, I regret this statement, but he never actually retracted it. He just lets it hang out there because we can't fault him for regretting something, right?

Like, like, that's fine. Like, you can regret things that you've, I've regretted things that I've said, right? But the thing is, like, when

I've thought about something that I regret, and I think about, you know, what I said, why

I said it, and why I regret it, you know, the polite thing to do, you would think the responsible thing to do, especially for a minister of the gospel who has been given a humongous platform of influence, right?

Like Nine Marks has a lot of influence, you would think that if you've been thinking for a long time, he says that for some time,

I've regretted my statement in that video, it was a bad early mishandling that misconstrues my perspective, you would think that one of the things that you would prioritize is to say,

Hey, guys, like I said this, and I regret it. And here's why I regret it. And here's what

I actually believe, you would think that you would seek to clarify, right, that you would think, because, you know, when

I say I've said things in the past, I mean, I can point you to examples of videos that I've done, that I've said something in the video that I've regretted.

And what I do, I mean, I'm not saying you have to do it exactly this way. But what I do is I draw attention to it.

And I say, I'm leaving the video up for posterity. So you know what I'm talking about. But here's why

I was wrong. I said this, I should have said this, I don't believe this, I, you know, got out of hand, whatever the reasoning is why

I said it, I'll give it to you. Right? There was this one situation with, with Jasmine Holmes, where I said something about about a story she told, and I regretted it.

And like the next day, I drew attention to it. I said, here is what I said. This is why

I shouldn't have said it. And we moved on with our lives. There's been many examples, well, not many, but there's been a handful of examples like this.

And so, so this is the thing, like, Jonathan Lehman, I believe that you regret what you said in this video.

But the thing is, like, number one, why did you just let it hang out there for so long? I think

I know why. Because you like the idea of people seeing you as the kind of guy what I don't have to worry about voting for pro choice candidates anymore.

Because, you know, nine marks says it could be okay. I can understand the calculus that says, well, you know, if they're going to give me benefits, then you know, the abortion thing, it's a side issue.

It'd be really helpful if you could clear up what you regret here and listen to that. I want you to I'm gonna listen the rest of this because I think it's worth it.

We actually didn't listen to this whole clip yesterday. So we'll talk about this. But but look at the rest of this, this, this thread here that Jonathan Lehman put out two days ago at 10 o 'clock at night, right?

It says, it doesn't convey what Andy and I said in the book, which was as simple as we said it.

Christians will adopt different strategies as they figure out who how to pursue both anti abortion policies and other whole life matters.

We weren't commenting on voting. And it's like, but the thing is, like, okay, so you're still being very confusing, right?

Like, okay, so is it legitimate or not? Because in the video, you seem to think that that kind of weird calculus, where you're weighing benefits to you against the death and murder of others.

And you're kind of like, like, is that a legitimate way to go about it? Forget about what you were commenting on voting or not.

We're asking about voting, right? What were you saying? You regret the video?

Good, because you should now explain to us what about the video you regret, because I don't want to have to guess anymore.

You see, there's this is this is such a typical Big Eva thing. Does he clarify anything in this apology, response, regret, you know, mea culpa?

No, he doesn't clarify anything. In fact, he just further muddies the water.

What do you believe Jonathan Lehman? So you don't believe what you said in the video. We're not we're not sure what part you don't believe, but you still don't.

But and then but now but but it certainly seems to me when you don't clarify Jonathan Lehman, when you don't clarify, you don't take this opportunity.

Now that this video has come back up to the forefront, the video that you've regretted for some time, you know, maybe you just forgot to retract your statement and clarify what you said.

I'll give you that. Maybe you just forgot. I don't understand how you forget, but maybe you did.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Love believes all things right. Okay, so now that it's come to the forefront, are you going to clarify?

Well, he actually answers. Listen to this. Listen to the audacity of this snake.

He says this. I may offer a fuller explanation of my views on the ethics at voting at some point in the future.

It's quite simple. But again, it requires more pastoral care than is possible in 280 characters.

Do you see this weasel? I might decide to clarify what

I myself have muddied. I might. And it's very simple.

But it requires more than a tweet. Nobody said you have to tweet about it. Jonathan Lehman, you've got a blog, you can write however many words you want.

I promise you, Jonathan, I will read all of them. And I'll check your

Bible references, because that's what we do. We actually read the other side. If you want to put out a podcast,

I'll listen to every word. And I'll check your scripture references as well. If you want to put out a video,

I love video. That's my thing, Jonathan Lehman. I like the video format. So if you want to put out,

I'll listen to your whole video, because that's what we do. That's what we do.

And we'll see if it holds water, if your ethic really is that simple, if it clarifies anything.

But you see, the onus is on you, Jonathan. Your words were confusing, your words were regrettable.

It's not us. It's you. You're the reason why we don't understand you.

You're the reason. And you've admitted that here, and yet you still will not clarify.

Now that it's come up again, man, maybe everyone forgot. It was in the memory hole, this video with you and Mark Deaver, you know, pontificating about how it's cool to vote for pro -choice candidates, potentially.

You know, we should have unity, right? Okay, but now it's come up again.

So that was in the past, but it's come up again. And you are not clarifying anything.

In fact, you're like, well, maybe it's an election year. I might. It's very simple. My beliefs on voting are very simple, but I might do it.

It takes more than 280 characters. I mean, I don't know what else other possible forum

I could use. Jonathan Lehman, my goodness. Do you think that we are stupid?

We're not stupid, man. This thread's got it all. This update is fantastic.

And I didn't see this yesterday, right? Because, you know, it was buried in some threads and it was done at 10 o 'clock at night.

I didn't see this yesterday. But man, if I did, that video yesterday would have been even better. Let's listen to the rest of what

Jonathan Lehman has to say here. Um, you know, there have been Republican pro -life quote unquote candidates in the

White House for the last number of decades. And yet the laws haven't been overturned.

Meanwhile, I think this, let's just say, I'm thinking hypothetically, the welfare policies of these candidates is actually decreased the number of real abortions in such and such a state and actually brought the number of abortions down.

So though they are pro -choice, I think that they've actually helped the abortion issues as opposed to your

Republican candidates. Yeah, you see. But the thing is, we're not playing pragmatic games like you are. I know, Jonathan, you've got this pragmatic approach where it's like, well, you kind of weigh it out and you kind of you save your capital.

We talked about that a few weeks ago. I got this capital. I got to build up. I got to all obey Christ later because I got to save my capital to obey

Christ later. Like we're not playing that game. Right. So I'm not I'm not going with policies that I think will limit abortion.

I'm going with policies that I think match what God's view of justice is. And so welfare is off the table, my friend, because regardless of what you think the results would be, obviously, welfare doesn't limit abortions.

Abortions should still be illegal and welfare should still be illegal because God's standards require it.

Right. God has set the standard of justice. We don't get to play these pragmatic games. Right. We don't get to decide what's more important to us.

As a matter of fact, God decides what is important, what justice is. Justice is objective.

Justice is something that we can discover, but we don't decide what it is. Right. Like we don't have that right.

That's not our lane to decide what justice is and what it isn't and what justice is more important or less important.

God decides that stuff. Right. So we're not playing pragmatic games. If you if you, you know, maybe that's what he regrets.

Let's not go too deep into it, because maybe that's what he regrets. But the point is, he's he's just going to leave you in suspense.

He might clarify. It's really simple, but he might not have the time to do it in a blog post.

I mean, 280 characters. I mean, it's just not enough. I mean, 280 characters, not that much. It's not that much.

But, you know, I don't know. Call me crazy, but you have a blog. You've written blogs before. You regret this.

And it's very easy to fix. You've said it yourself. My my view on voting is simple. I might not personally agree with that argument.

I might say, well, that's wrong for reasons X, Y and Z. Nonetheless, I can understand how a

Christian in good conscience could make that argument. And therefore, I'm going to leave space for that particular option for Christians.

Unlike now, it's possible we get to an issue. I'm going to vote for a pro Nazi candidate, a

Ku Klux Klan. Why not? A communist party candidate in China. Well, I'm going to I'm going to restrict a bit more.

There are parties, there are candidates that I think are beyond the pale. And it's possible we reach a place in American history where we decide that's the case for certain parties.

And I think some Christians already feel that way. Nonetheless, I would say I think we're still in a two party system where Christians can in good conscience make different kinds of arguments.

And we need to leave space for that last forever, forever. LARPing that that's what these guys are doing.

They're forever LARPing. They're pretending to be bold. They're pretending to deal with issues, but they're not dealing with issues.

It's very easy for Jonathan Lehman to say, well, a Christian cannot vote for a pro

Nazi candidate. We're not there's no Nazis here, right? That was yesterday's battle. A Christian cannot vote for a communist party.

There's no communists. Well, there are communists here, but we don't we're not in China.

Right. So he'll control he'll restrict it everywhere where he has zero influence.

Right. But here where it actually matters, he won't do it. And notice it is not because the issues aren't serious.

Right. Because I would argue I'd rather have the Ku Klux Klan in power all day long.

They hate black people. They hate Puerto Ricans. They just don't like them. Then if you told me that I would have to I've said this before.

If you told me that my life would be more difficult, I would not be able to have as good of an income. I would not be able to have as many rights.

I'd have to drink from a different water fountain. I'd have to do all these things. You said, AD, you will have to do all these things.

But we will end the murder of innocence. We will end the murder of babies, regardless of their skin color.

Murder is against God's law. Will you take that deal? I would take that deal all day long.

I'd rather have racists in the White House than people who think it's a fundamental human right to murder infants.

Guys, this is worse than Nazism. This is worse than racism.

This is worse. It is just worse than communism. But the thing is, it's a package deal for these freaks.

I'm talking about the Democratic Party. They're all communist too. They're communists and they kill babies.

These sins come in a package deal and they're racist. You see what I'm saying? All this stuff comes in a package deal.

He's playing in a fantasy world that doesn't exist, where the Democrats somehow aren't actually socialist.

But they are actually socialist. He is muddying the water so much. He is lying to you because he is a snake.

He wants to maintain his platform. This is why he will never clarify what is in this video.

Jonathan Lehman will never clarify what his position really is, because if he does, he risks alienating all of these people who love him because he's kind of woke.

He will alienate so many people. He'll alienate so much of his support, which wants it to be okay, desperately wants it to be okay to vote for benefits for yourself, costing the blood of innocent babies.

They want that to be an even exchange. They want that to be a legitimate thing for a Christian to do. I want to drink from the same water fountain, therefore those babies got to go.

And that's a false choice, by the way. It's not real. That's not what it is. And if Jonathan Lehman had any cojones at all, he would call that out for what it is.

It's not like the Democrats have any, any redeeming qualities. They've got none, no redeeming qualities, but he'll never say that.

So this whole idea, I may offer a fuller explanation of my views on the ethics of voting at some point in the future.

It's quite simple. He'll never do this. Jonathan Lehman will never do this. It's just that simple.

It's just that simple. But this is an amazing little trick here that he's done.

Well, I'm apologize. I'm sorry. So that way he keeps his conservative bona fides because he wasn't really saying, well, we don't really know what he's saying.

So he wants his supporters, his conservative supporters to continue to like him. That's why he'll never offer a clear, a clarifying response.

He just won't do it. Jonathan, I dare you to do it. I dare you to try to clear this up.

Clear this video up. Tell us exactly what you regret, why you regret it, and what your real positions are.

You won't do it. I know you won't do it because you can't do it because you love your platform too much.

It is just that simple. It is just that simple. So you're willing to put out this false choice where it's like, listen, blacks, your lives are over if, you know, you vote

Republican because they don't like blacks and Latinos as well as Democrats do.

The Democrats just love blacks and Latinos. Even though they are for slaughtering blacks and Latinos in the womb at ridiculous rates, somehow in your brain, it's like, well, they like you and it's okay.

Your conscience should be soothed. It's fine to vote Democrat. This is ridiculous, guys.

This is the non -apology apology. This is the non -regretful regret. This is the non -clarifying, clarifying statement.

He'll never clarify this. He'll never clarify this because it might be simple what his ethics on voting are, but it's not going to be popular.

It's not going to be popular, and so he doesn't want to do it because Jonathan Lehman wants to be popular.

It's just that simple. It's just that simple. Anyway, that's what

I've got there. Jonathan, prove me wrong. It'd be very simple to prove me wrong. Put out the article, put out the podcast, put out the video clarifying this video what exactly you regret about this and what your actual position is.

Until then, I would suggest just maybe staying off Twitter because it's just really not a good way to get your points across,

I guess. And us bad guys are using it. You don't want to send people the wrong message that we're somehow legitimate, right?