Why Did He Say THAT?! Matt Walsh vs. Jillian Michaels

Wise Disciple

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

00:00

I've heard you get very deep into the definition, it's a procreative union. Tell me, what's the deep offense?

00:05

It's a really great question from Michaels, because it helps to reveal specifically where Walsh's defense of marriage is insufficient.

00:13

You can answer this question somewhat by leaving God and the Bible out of it. But when someone asks

00:19

Christians why they reject alternative definitions of marriage, Jillian Michaels presses

00:29

Matt Walsh on his issue with same -sex marriage. And what happens next is great or horrible?

00:35

I don't know. Let's find out together. Now, this happened before, didn't it? Walsh was pressed like this a couple years ago.

00:42

He was on the Joe Rogan podcast, and I reacted to that. And if I remember, I said Walsh didn't do a great job.

00:48

So will all that change this time? Let's find out. But first, welcome to Wise Disciple. My name is Nate, and this is the place where I'm helping you become the effective

00:55

Christian Jesus wants you to be. Make sure to like, sub, and share this video if you find it helpful to you. Hey, don't forget to check out the

01:01

Biblingo app, but only if you want to go deeper into God's word. Biblingo is going to help you learn the original biblical languages, and it's going to do so in an effective and a fun way.

01:11

I'm currently using it right now to go deeper into biblical Hebrew, and it's been very helpful. Take advantage of my special discount by clicking the link in the description.

01:18

But I've got the definition of marriage. I don't see it say. I mean, I got Wiki. I've went to the well on this one.

01:24

Merriam -Webster. Like, what am I missing? So Merriam -Webster. What does Webster say? The state of being united as spouses in a consensual contractual relationship recognized by law.

01:32

Like, what am I missing about? Because I've heard you get very deep into the definition.

01:37

It's a procreative union. But then you also get into the conversation of what about married couples that don't have kids?

01:44

Like, tell me, what's the deep offense? I just want to understand it because.

01:50

Well, here's what I would say. This is a really great question. It's a really great question from Michael's because it helps to reveal specifically where Walsh's defense of marriage is insufficient, in my opinion.

02:03

Like I said, Rogan did kind of the same thing. Asked similar questions, right? Like, what's your problem with LGBT folks getting married, right?

02:11

And Walsh gave an answer. But it really does all come down to the question. We have to pay close attention to what is actually being asked here.

02:20

And by the way, I'm a Christian. Walsh is a Christian, okay? I haven't seen what is, am

02:27

I racist yet? But I want to check it out. And so I want Walsh to do a really great job here. Like, I want to support him.

02:33

I want him to get the Christian worldview out to more and more people who are trying to understand it. So don't misunderstand this exercise at all.

02:40

I'm not trying to bash Walsh at all. The point of this exercise is to help you as you get out there and do what

02:47

Walsh is doing. If you were in his shoes and somebody asked you this question, how should you respond?

02:53

Amen? Jillian Michaels, as far as I understand, I mean, she's a lesbian, right?

03:00

She's married to another woman. And she just wants to know essentially two things. This is what

03:05

I mean by paying close attention to the question. What is marriage? And also, what is the deep offense to Christians if people like her get married?

03:15

Let's see how Walsh responds. You said, well, how does it— Is it religious? Well, it's part of my faith.

03:23

I don't deny that. I also think that what I'm saying, even if I was not, even if I didn't have a deep

03:28

Christian faith, my stance on marriage and the family, I think, would probably be the same.

03:35

Now, it's impossible. Yeah, but the difference is an argument for traditional marriage by appealing to natural law, which is really how

03:45

Walsh tends to argue, it's not the same thing as pointing out that traditional marriage is designed by God for specific theological reasons.

03:54

So the way that I've said it in the past is marriage speaks theology. That means its inception and its purpose go back to God, not to nature.

04:06

So what I'm getting at here is, you can answer this question somewhat by leaving

04:12

God and the Bible out of it. You can point out that there are all kinds of wonderful benefits to traditional marriage, and this is what

04:18

Walsh does. And I think, by the way, I think we should know what those talking points are so that we can communicate them well.

04:25

But when someone asks Christians why they reject alternative definitions of marriage, that cuts deeper.

04:33

Why? Because in some sense, they're asking why we as Christians protest. And that's a question about our faith.

04:42

In other words, Rogan and Gillian, you know, they're not asking an atheist about his definition of marriage.

04:48

They're asking Matt Walsh, the Catholic, about why he doesn't go along with same -sex marriage, about why he sees this institution in the unique way that he does.

04:57

It's because he understands its inception and purpose as a Christian, because those things originate with God.

05:05

So that means that, at the end of the day, one of these approaches does not sufficiently explain why

05:10

Christians get offended, and the other approach explains it completely. So, you see what

05:16

I mean? Depending on which approach you choose to take, you need to be aware that you may not be sufficiently answering the questioner.

05:24

It's impossible to say that, because you take my faith away from me. I'm a totally different person, so who knows what I would say. So your question was, well, how does someone, a gay couple, how does that impact my family?

05:37

And the answer is that an individual, so you, for example,

05:42

Take me. Right. You individually don't have any impact on me or on my family, obviously.

05:50

We're not walking around every day. We don't get up in the morning and we're like, oh man, Julia Michaels, we can't...

05:56

Get married. We can't make breakfast this morning, because that's, of course, not what's happening, and I would never claim that.

06:03

The issue is societal. It's an issue in society. It's a societal -wide issue. When a society abandons what has always been recognized as the definition and meaning and purpose of the marital union, when they write, when they abandon what marriage is, that has vast implications for society.

06:25

Because I'm saying, everything I find is matrimonial wedlock, culturally often legally recognized union, between two people called spouses, that establishes rights and obligations between them, as well as them and their children, if any, between them and their in -laws.

06:39

What is the definition that you have that's outside of what's in the dictionary? That's what

06:45

I'm saying, that's what I'm trying to say. Well, there it is, isn't it? When you appeal to the current dictionary definition, which, by the way, the dictionary is just a document that captures the temporal thoughts of today's society.

07:01

Well, then it seems like there's no good reason to protest, right? But wait a second. Walsh is going to appeal to a different definition of marriage.

07:09

Now, where does that definition come from? How can we not say the

07:15

Bible? Does that answer not sufficiently explain the difference between somebody like Walsh and somebody like Michaels?

07:24

They're two opposing worldviews when it comes to marriage. It's the Bible. I'm trying to understand, is it religious? And then, which religion?

07:30

Because there's different definitions of marriage per polygamy, there's common law marriage, tree marriage, root marriage.

07:40

Marriage codifies, protects, sanctifies the inherently procreative union of a man and a woman.

07:50

Okay, but that's for you, though. First of all, it's not just for me. It's for society since the dawn of human civilization until approximately 15 seconds ago.

08:00

So it's not just me. And there's something very real here.

08:05

This is the way I've tried to explain it, explain my view. That let's say society were to come crumbling down around us.

08:17

And we wake up amid the ashes with no memory of anything that happened before.

08:23

And we're rebuilding from scratch. It's like fundamentally from the ground up. We have to rebuild everything, right?

08:31

And we look around and we see the survivors, the people. And we see that they kind of have a tendency to pair up, you know.

08:39

And we see that there's this one pairing that has this funny habit of creating people.

08:47

There's this one type of pairing that, and only this type, only this type, can create a person.

08:53

Okay. I think we would say, well, that's different.

08:59

This is a different kind of thing because it's different from these other relationships because it has this capacity that no other relationship does.

09:04

And that capacity is not, it's not a small thing. It's not incidental. It's not superficial.

09:11

I mean, this is, it creates people. In fact, the further existence of... Sex creates people. Right. I mean, everyone

09:17

I'd stand can create a person. Right. I would say a marriage nurtures a child.

09:23

In a loving marriage with kids, you're there to love them. You're there to guide them. I can teach my son how to take risks, although I do appreciate,

09:29

I do appreciate the necessity of a father's role. And that is a huge thing. I don't disagree with you on that.

09:35

I'm not trying to take that away from you. But two idiots having a one night stand can have a baby. Sure. Exactly.

09:42

And that's... And this is the kind of difficulty that arises when you reduce marriage down to merely producing children.

09:52

Now, the argument can be made, and I think Walsh is about to make it, that the best human relationship for the flourishing of mankind is when a man becomes united with a woman for life, and they produce a family.

10:07

But, notice, that's not an argument against allowing other types of unions.

10:14

That's an argument for the best type of union, from a kind of utilitarian perspective. Okay? So, in other words, the best for mankind does not automatically equate to the only for mankind.

10:28

And that's why this line of argumentation does not go far enough, in my opinion. The reason same -sex marriage has come to the fore today is actually largely due to our commitment to self -autonomy and libertarian freedom in this country.

10:44

This is why Michaels and Rogan, in the past, they're pushing back on this idea.

10:53

It's not just them. And it's because when you try to evaluate

10:58

Walsh's answer in light of self -autonomy and libertarian freedom, it makes no sense.

11:06

It doesn't do the work necessary to address their particular starting point. Here's a completely different way of thinking about what

11:12

I'm saying now. Marriage is not defined. It's described. Think about that.

11:21

If it's defined by us, and we're committed to libertarian freedom and self -autonomy, well, then the best type of union can still allow for alternatives, right?

11:33

We can make all kinds of allowances in the name of libertarian freedom, right? Because, I don't know, get out of my bedroom and leave me alone anyway, right?

11:42

But wait a second. What if we do not define marriage? What if that's not up to us, but instead we are describing something?

11:50

Well, then the definition of marriage is not up to human beings. We don't get to change the definition of marriage.

11:56

It's actually rooted in something outside of ourselves, which makes it objective. But here we go again, right?

12:02

The only way that this will become incredibly clear is if you go back to the inception and the purpose for marriage.

12:08

I mean, you know, that's why I say this answer doesn't go far enough, which by the way, it's not about like, so if you're thinking to yourself, well, but I can't appeal to the

12:18

Bible because Jillian Michaels and Joe Rogan and others, they don't accept the Bible as a source of authority in their lives.

12:23

Well, of course they don't, right? But your goal is not to change somebody's mind at this particular moment in time.

12:33

Your goal here, because of the question, it comes back to the specific question. It's about clarifying the differences between us.

12:41

We need to articulate what those are. Maybe somebody will change their minds later, right? But the first thing that we need to do is we need to clarify our starting points, where we differ very, very articulately, or else we're just going to talk past each other incessantly and get nowhere.

12:58

That I think only proves my point, that this union, this coupling of a man and a woman is loaded with implications and with a power that no other type of relationship has.

13:12

Yeah, you're right. No other type of relationship has. And so I think it makes sense for society to say, well, this is a different kind of thing.

13:20

And this is frankly more important than any of these other kinds of relationships because of the power that it has. And so we are going to call that something else and we are going to protect it in a way that we don't protect other relationships because those other relationships do not have this capacity.

13:36

And for thousands of years of human history, that's what marriage did. That was the point of marriage.

13:41

It was to codify and protect the inherently and uniquely procreative union of a man and a woman.

13:50

A union that by its nature can procreate. Although, of course, we know that there are plenty of cases where they don't.

13:55

They don't have kids, right. And I would say that it's not marriage that makes a baby, it's sex between a man and a woman that makes a baby.

14:01

Yeah, marriage doesn't make a baby, you're right. Married or not. Marriage is there to protect and solidify that family for when the baby is created.

14:12

Of course, the marriage doesn't create the baby. But the marriage is very much there for the baby. But then why would you deny it? So, I know what he means, you know.

14:20

I know what he's getting at. But you see how reductive this language is.

14:27

It sounds to the untrained ear as if he's saying that marriage is for babies to grow up.

14:34

That's what it's for. You see how that barely captures marriage?

14:42

Those of you that are married, right. Like, what about when the children grow up and then they move out?

14:48

Is the marriage over? Like, what about before the children even arrive in the first place?

14:54

Is the marriage less than what it should be with the kids? You know, the language here that Walsh is using,

15:01

I'm going to sound like a broken record here. It's just, it's insufficient to capture the full answer.

15:07

And I'll give you the full answer in just a moment. Deny children in a gay family to have those protections because there are tons of them.

15:14

There are over 1 ,100 rights that come with marriage. I'm a taxpaying American. Why would I be denied that?

15:19

I mean, the list is like insane. It's everything from making spousal medical decisions, being able to jointly adopt a kid, joint filing of taxes.

15:27

I mean, the list is so long. Property tax exemptions. It's 1 ,100. And these are things that I do want to be able to protect my wife when

15:35

I die to pass our things on to her, for her to be able to visit me whenever, you know, if I'm sick, for her to be able to say

15:40

DNR if I'm dying and vice versa. And then there's all kinds of things that protect kids. Like, what if I was a scumbag and I don't want to pay for the two kids that I had from my previous relationship?

15:51

I literally have to do that. Well, if we were married. Actually, I did not marry this woman.

15:57

But I protect my kids. But imagine if I was a scumbag. If we were married, there's laws that I have to take care of them.

16:02

And if she said, well, you know, the boy child's mine, I would have no right to the child.

16:09

If I didn't have the rights that are provided, she could take my son and boogie. There's so many protections that this provides for the kids and for people who love each other that I can't understand.

16:21

I get why you feel like, hey, you're threatening, what do I have that's special? I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

16:27

And I wish there was a way for me to make you not feel diminished. It's not you threatening. It's the societal recognition of it as a marriage.

16:38

They're trying to equate it with what I would consider to be true marriage.

16:45

That becomes the threat, if you will, if that's the language you want to use. I don't know. That's how

16:50

I'm interpreting it from you, is that it feels like a threat to the things that you hold dear, and it feels like, where does it stop?

16:56

I'm interpreting how I think you feel, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Well, it is because, look, the institution... I mean,

17:01

I like where Walsh is going here now. I mean, I think this is helpful to clarify.

17:07

It's not that Michaels is personally offending or even threatening Christians. That's not the issue.

17:12

The issue is a wholesale redefinition of marriage by society.

17:19

To be something that is antithetical to its true definition and purpose. Once a society does this kind of a thing, they've abandoned not only

17:30

God, but common sense. And the only way to return to this is to clearly communicate our differences.

17:39

Like I said, it doesn't matter if people are not persuaded right away. What matters is they first fully understand the

17:45

Christian position. And Walsh is just not telling Michaels what that is. The institution of the family...

17:52

The institution of the family is the bedrock of human civilization. Marriage is the bedrock of the family.

17:59

So anything that threatens the family, yes, it does. It threatens the things I hold dear because I hold civilization dear.

18:06

And so, in that sense, yes. If we get into the conversation of a hierarchy of family, right?

18:14

And sure, I'm not going to be the one who's going to disagree with you that in a perfect world people can get pissed all they want.

18:19

In a perfect world, you would have a mom and a dad. I understand how important those two roles are. Trust me.

18:26

Arguably, I was like, I don't, you know, I wanted to adopt a child. My ex wanted to have one. I don't want to take that away from her. I'm not sorry.

18:32

Kids, both of them are the apple of my eye. That said, it was of deep concern to have a boy without a father.

18:38

I don't disagree at all. And to have a brother is a very dear friend of the family that's been a father figure.

18:43

The father, no. However, if we get into the hierarchy of it, what about the dad that never showed up? What about the dad that took off?

18:49

What about the dad that was an alcoholic? I didn't have a super duper dad. It's better now.

18:56

But I know a lot of people, like I was just this morning with Brigham Bueller who is a great guy.

19:01

I'm not sure if you know him. He's on Rogan all the time. Foster kid. And I was talking about speaking with you.

19:07

He's like, well, love is the most important thing. I would say that. That would be my argument because from a hierarchical perspective,

19:15

I'll give you the top of the mountain. But then I think love, and that would be a marriage without love, I think you lose too.

19:21

So if you said man, woman, love, I would go, yes, I'm with you, number one. But when in the world are you getting this unicorn society?

19:27

Like your house might be that, and that's wonderful. But I would tell you, I don't think the majority are. Michael's is smart.

19:35

And she's pointing out what I was saying a moment ago, which is if we don't do some work to deal with the starting point, right, of self autonomy and libertarian freedom, on the issue of marriage, well then it will be near impossible to make someone understand that one man, one woman for life in order to produce a family is the only definition of marriage.

19:59

The best that can happen is someone can say, well, I admit traditional marriage is at the top of the hierarchy, but that's not an argument to exclude alternatives like me that exist on lower tiers of that same hierarchy.

20:15

She's pointing something out that I wish could be given a proper response to.

20:21

And I think providing kids with love and structure is the most important thing if you don't have this perfect scenario.

20:30

And allowing gay parents to get married is so much better for the psychology of their children.

20:35

And I think it's a fantasy world to think they won't have kids. I don't think any

20:41

Christian is actively denying people the ability to do what they want in a civilized society.

20:48

Walsh actually made this point earlier. What we are asking people to do is to not violate our theology.

20:57

Christianity was here from the very foundation of this nation. And the principles that our country and its founding documents are built upon were obviously shaped by Christian theology and doctrine.

21:10

The most obvious example is the Declaration of Independence. To appeal to the

21:15

Creator in our Declaration is proof that Christian principles predate novel concepts like same -sex marriage.

21:25

If people want to reject God, if they want to live their lives rejecting His Word, that's on them.

21:30

Nobody's stopping them. But what we are, as Christians, giving pushback to is the idea that a theological concept called marriage which everyone in this country got originally from the

21:43

Bible should be redefined to include things that are not marriages in the name of, again, self -autonomy and libertarian freedom.

21:50

That is a direct affront to our theology. It's a theological issue.

21:56

That's why we give pushback. We just cannot go there as Christians.

22:02

We can tell you, of course, why traditional marriage is also good and virtuous, even for secular people who reject

22:08

God. That's what Walsh has been doing this entire time. That seems to be his M .O.,

22:13

when he's asked this question. But in order to show why traditional marriage is exclusive to a man and a woman for life to produce a family, we need to explain the origin of marriage.

22:25

I've done this before, but let me just do this one more time. I'm pulling up my trusty

22:30

Logos Bible app. Some of you still ask me, Nate, what app are you using to read the word here at this channel.

22:38

It's Logos. I love this thing. It's just been a game -changer for me. Don't miss out on the free book that's featured this particular month for more.

22:45

Check out logos .com forward slash wise disciple. Verse 22 of chapter 5 in Ephesians says this,

22:51

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its savior.

23:01

Now, as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing that she might be holy and without blemish.

23:22

In the same way, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself, for no one has ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it just as Christ does the church because we are members of his body.

23:36

Here it is, Therefore, a man shall leave his father and mother, and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.

23:44

This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

23:51

However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. This is what

23:58

I mean. Aspects of this chunk of text goes all the way back to the very beginning of creation, the creation of mankind.

24:07

Why? Because marriage was there from just about the very beginning. Okay? And it finds its culmination, its sort of great, great symbol in the relationship between Christ and the church.

24:24

This is why I say, marriage speaks theology, ladies and gentlemen. When a man marries a woman, they are speaking with their actions that God exists, and that his design for our lives is good.

24:39

We are also saying, when we get married, that we will reflect God through our marriage.

24:45

That's why it is distinctive and it's unique. That's why its definition is also distinctive and unique.

24:54

Now, does marriage come with certain functions? One of them the production of children? Yes. But marriage cannot be reduced down to that function.

25:03

It is so much more than that if you take Christianity seriously. Nate, can secular people who reject

25:09

God get married? I say yes. Why? Because they are still operating within the parameters of the union.

25:17

Even if they don't understand where the parameters came from. In other words, somebody can still use an iPhone without ever truly understanding who designed it and what it was designed for.

25:28

And when people do this thing with marriage, the end result is still the production of children, which, guess what, was one of the commands that God gives mankind in Genesis chapter 1.

25:40

In other words, secular people are performing the key roles that God wants for husbands and wives, even if they don't know the

25:47

God who invented those roles. Even if Michaels is not persuaded by any of this, that is the answer to her question.

25:59

And somebody should have told her that. Somebody should have given her a fundamental understanding of what marriage is and its purpose.

26:06

Because that's what she was asking. And when you are faced with a similar situation, I encourage you to do the same.

26:13

Amen? Okay. Well, now it's your turn. What did you think? Did Matt Walsh adequately answer

26:19

Jillian Michaels' question? Let me know in the comments below. As always, if you made it this far, you gotta come on down to the

26:25

Patreon community. It's continuing to grow. There's lots of discussions, great features, live streams,

26:30

Zoom hangouts. The big thing that a lot of people are talking about still is the Gospel of Matthew study that we're doing right now.

26:37

So go check all of that out. The link for the Patreon is below. I'm gonna return soon with more videos, but in the meantime,