Something DISTURBING Is Happening With Evangelicals!

Fight For Truth

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

00:00

Hey guys, Colin here, and welcome back to Fight for Truth, the channel where we bring you Christian commentary about the things that matter.

00:07

In today's video, we're going to be talking about David French. Now just for some background, French is not in the typical demographic of people that we critique on this channel.

00:16

He's not a prosperity gospel preacher, and he's not a seeker -sensitive trendy pastor by any means. And while that is the case, please don't lose sight of the fact that his views still represent a serious problem for the

00:28

Evangelical Church at large. Regarding French's resume, he's an attorney, a writer, an author, speaker, and political commentator, and quite an accomplished one.

00:37

Recently, in 2023, he began writing opinion pieces for the New York Times. Before that, many people knew him from his work with National Review.

00:46

He's also spent a significant portion of his career as an attorney with a particular expertise in constitutional law.

00:52

David was long considered a conservative Christian thought leader. By some, he still is.

00:58

But recently, conservative Christians have become concerned and even disenfranchised with his views on a number of issues.

01:05

Most recently, he was justly called out by Fox News host Tucker Carlson. But given that he has a fairly large platform and he's fairly well -known in this space, it would be a great idea for us to survey his views, and genuinely compare them to the

01:19

Word of God. So in this video, that is precisely what we're going to do. Let's start out by looking at a piece that he wrote for the

01:25

New York Times. It's entitled, quote, Don't Let the Culture War Degrade the Constitution.

01:31

In this particular piece, French outlines what he believes to be a glaring inconsistency among conservative

01:37

Christians. He uses the issue of transgenderism as a sort of case study here. Quote, State attacks on civil liberties are even affecting our most valued relationships, the bonds between parent and child.

01:50

And he continues, saying, quote, In January, the Times reported on how public schools sometimes withhold from parents information about a child's gender transition, even in the absence of any evidence of parental abuse.

02:02

End quote. So let's review. French is presenting a fundamentally ethics -based argument here.

02:07

The idea is that parents are in authority over their children, and that parents have the right to make decisions that affect their child's well -being.

02:15

And moreover, this right should not be infringed upon unjustly by any organization. In this case, we have the public schools acting as an impediment to the parent -child relationship.

02:25

And they do this by allowing children to consult their schools in the matter of their gender identity and transgenderism, while the schools apparently have no responsibility at all to share this information with the parents.

02:37

French does see this as a problem, to his credit. But let's ask a fundamental question. Why? What gives

02:43

David French the right to tell these schools that they cannot hide a child's gender transition from their parents?

02:49

The only ultimate ethical answer is found in Scripture. Ephesians 6 .1 says, quote,

02:54

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother.

03:00

Children are commanded to obey their parents, and they are justly under their parents' authority. Proverbs 29 .17

03:06

says, quote, Discipline your son, and he will give you rest. He will give delight to your heart.

03:12

Thus, the right and responsibility to discipline children and to shepherd them ethically lies with the parent, according to God.

03:20

And Proverbs 3 .11 says, quote, My son, do not despise the Lord's discipline, or be wary of his reproof.

03:26

For the Lord reproves him whom he loves as a father the son in whom he delights.

03:31

So we can see that even the Lord Himself is a father. And as our Father, He has ultimate authority over His children, the

03:39

Church, even to discipline them. So what's the point here? The point is that the Bible clearly says that parents are to discipline, shepherd, guide, teach, and exercise authority over their children.

03:50

This principle is true because it aligns with God's holy standard as revealed in His Word and through His creation, to a certain extent.

03:57

David French is making a point here that is fundamentally based in the Christian worldview. He's appealing to biblical values.

04:04

He's appealing to a higher standard. But shockingly, later in the article he continues, saying that, quote,

04:09

Every culture war action against civil liberties has its mirror image on the other side.

04:15

End quote. So he's suggesting here that conservatives, or the other side of the political spectrum, are offering some sort of equal and opposite mirror image of the left in this area of parental rights.

04:26

The example he gives of this will truly amaze you. He says, quote, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas issued a directive to the

04:34

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate as abuse both surgical and pharmaceutical interventions for transgender children regardless of the good faith and desires of the parents, children, and caregivers involved.

04:49

End quote. In other words, the governor of Texas wants to investigate the parents who surgically, chemically, or otherwise change the biological structure of their so -called transgender children.

04:59

As a result, parents who give their children hormone blockers or who surgically change the bodies of their children would face potential consequences, as they should.

05:09

Yet this is something that David French finds morally reprehensible. But there are several issues with his perspective here.

05:15

First, he seems to be forgetting that the two situations he's comparing here are fundamentally different at a basic level.

05:22

In fact, they're diametrically opposed. On the one hand, you have parents who hypothetically want to know if their children are participating in transgender ideology.

05:31

As parents, they have both the right and responsibility to step in. The Lord commands them to guide their children well, and allowing your son to dress like a girl or allowing your daughter to dress like a boy would be the opposite of that, and of course it can get much worse.

05:45

On the other hand, though, we have the wicked parents who are encouraging their sons and daughters in their unbiblical delusions about gender.

05:53

These people continue to promote the idea that their child was somehow born into the wrong body.

05:59

And rather than ushering them in a better direction, they're a confused child, that's what you do with them.

06:04

These parents encourage their children to get sometimes irreversible surgeries by which they can mutilate their bodies.

06:11

So let's ask the audience, since David French clearly thinks it's appropriate to compare these two situations, do you think that these two situations are comparable at all?

06:20

From my perspective, this is an asinine comparison. One group, hypothetically, is trying to honor the standard of God and be diligent, informed, authoritative parents, and the other group wants to irreparably damage their children in a way that God's Word most assuredly condemns as wrong.

06:37

How on earth are those two things similar ethically in any way? Genesis 127 says that the

06:43

Lord created us male and female in His image. Thus, an attack on male and female, as instituted by God in Word and in creation, is an attack on the image of God as well.

06:54

But David French sees the attempt to prevent this transgender nonsense as an infringement on the rights of parents who want to do that.

07:02

Unfortunately for him, he has lost all moral foundation in doing so. You see, his first argument is rooted in Biblical principles, and his second is completely the opposite.

07:11

It's a clear violation of God's Word. French is not consistently implementing the Christian worldview and its ethical standards here.

07:18

That's the problem. His compromise on transgender ideology is disturbing and calls his work into question.

07:24

But this brings us to the second example of his compromise. In the following clip, French is having a conversation with Phil Vischer, the creator of VeggieTales, who's sort of a pro -choice liberal

07:34

Christian. At least, he's pro -choice in some notable areas. And in the video, French makes the case that if you are one of the people who wants more

07:42

Biblical influence in politics, more Christian influence in our country on the political level, then you should be happy with the way things stand currently.

07:50

Why? Well, because Bible -believing Christians are the main voting demographic, or an important voting demographic, for Democrats and Republicans.

08:00

Watch this. If you're saying that we want Christian influence in the United States, I have good news for you.

08:07

The biggest, one of the most important voting blocs in all of America, on both the Democratic and Republican side, are

08:13

Bible -believing Christians. So you have the white evangelical voting bloc, goes to church more than the average

08:20

American, says they believe in the Bible. They're the foundation of the Republican Party. Democrats try winning without black

08:28

Protestants. Democratic Party is nowhere without its core base of black

08:36

American Protestant Christians who are Bible -believing. And so that's one of these things that, imagine sort of the arrogance of saying that a vote for a

08:46

Republican is faithful, and a vote for a Democrat is unfaithful. Now what's truly shocking to me is that David French can say this despite the fact that he has a law degree and is considered an expert in constitutional law.

08:59

I cannot believe that someone so well -educated, so experienced, would make such a basic categorical error as this.

09:06

Basically, French implies that those who want more Christian values to be represented in politics should be happy, to a certain extent, with the

09:14

Democrat Party. After all, he says, black Protestant Bible -believing Christians make up an essential voting bloc for that party.

09:21

What French has missed here is the obvious fact that we don't merely want more people who identify as Christians to vote.

09:28

No, we want people to specifically vote in a way that reflects the values which a Christian will find in Scripture.

09:34

And therefore, voting for a party that supports transgenderism, gay marriage, and the killing of innocent children is not tantamount to Christian influence in the

09:43

United States, and no one should think that. That is obviously secular influence, and it is being advanced faster, more effectively, and on a broader scale in the

09:52

Democrat Party than almost anywhere else in our modern -day culture. Any unbiblical principles of the

09:57

Republican Party do not come close to the rampant, outright, God -hating secularism that we see on the left.

10:04

Basically, David French is suggesting that a party who supports wicked, anti -biblical practices is actually a good example of Christian influence in our country.

10:14

So when it comes down to it, French is not accurately representing the situation here. And more importantly, his response is out of step with the biblical worldview.

10:23

And this brings us to the third example. It comes from an article written by French entitled, quote, why

10:28

I changed my mind about law and marriage again. In this piece, he explains why he has come to be in favor of the legality of gay marriage.

10:36

He says this, quote, I emphasize the word civil marriage because my view on the religious nature of marriage has not changed.

10:44

It is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman, sealed before God and breakable only on the limited conditions

10:51

God has outlined in His Word, end quote. Now, this is important because it establishes that David French is not confused about what the

10:58

Bible says with regard to marriage. He knows exactly what marriage is. He just doesn't think the

11:03

United States legal system should accurately reflect it. And why not? Well, he goes on, saying, quote,

11:09

Millions of Americans have formed families and lived their lives in deep reliance on a

11:15

Birkefeld gay marriage being good law. It would be profoundly disruptive and unjust to rip out the legal superstructure around which they have ordered their lives, end quote.

11:25

So this statement is notable for a few reasons. First, he suggests that gay marriage is the bedrock of the families that it has created.

11:33

In other words, if two men get married and adopt a baby, they are now a legitimate family in his eyes.

11:39

And according to French, it would be, quote, disruptive and, quote, unjust to make the foundation of that family, gay marriage, illegal.

11:48

I agree with him that it would be disruptive for some people, but not that it would be unjust. That's a different thing altogether.

11:54

Again, French is making an ethical appeal with no real ethical foundation. By what objective standard should

12:00

Christians be in favor of gay marriage, legally or otherwise? By what standard would you say that society should implement gay marriage?

12:08

God has not called it marriage. In fact, He's called it an unnatural sin. Romans 1 26 through 27 says this, quote,

12:15

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature.

12:24

And the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another.

12:30

Men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

12:36

End quote. In fact, there is not one Biblical principle in all of Scripture that would indicate we should recognize this as marriage at all.

12:43

Moreover, the governing authority is instituted by God Himself and functions as a minister of God when it comes to justice in society.

12:51

Romans 13 1 through 4 says, quote, For there is no authority except from God. And those that exist have been instituted by God.

12:58

For He is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid. For He does not bear the sword in vain.

13:04

For He is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

13:10

So again, the government, when it functions properly, is meant to enact justice. And how do we define justice as Christians if not by God's Word?

13:19

So here's a challenge for French and anyone who agrees with him on this. Can you give me one

13:24

Biblical text that indicates it would be unjust, as he put it, to make gay marriage illegal?

13:29

For the entire history of the Church, our forefathers thought the exact opposite was true. So clearly there's a big burden of proof here, one which has simply not been met.

13:38

Can you honestly make the case that the Apostle Paul would have fought for the right of homosexuals to marry by law?

13:44

If so, where exactly in his writing does he indicate that? And if you have no Biblical text directly supporting such a novel secular invention, which gay marriage is, then what does that tell us about your commitment to Scripture as our source of truth and the standard of ethics?

13:59

These are all very important questions, and those who subscribe to David French's radical pluralism should answer them carefully, more carefully than he does, in fact.

14:08

It seems abundantly clear that French has gone in a direction contrary to Isaiah 520, which says this,

14:24

French has actively defended the so -called right to transition your child.

14:29

He has also actively defended the so -called right to marry someone of the same gender. And finally, through an agonizing word salad, he suggests that we ought to celebrate the fact that the

14:40

Democrat Party represents the influence of Bible -believing Christianity on our land.

14:45

Nothing could be further from the truth, ladies and gentlemen. This is not the Christian worldview being accurately implemented.

14:52

This is something different altogether. At best, this is a bizarre, unrecognizable hybrid of the

14:57

Biblical and secular worldviews mashed together in a vain attempt to gain some sort of mythical moral neutrality.

15:04

At worst, this is an outright compromise to the malevolent machinations of those who hate God and hate

15:10

His Word. In either case, it's safe to say that French's compromise is significant, and that should be recognized by conservative

15:16

Christians. I pray this has been a blessing to you. And please know this video isn't meant as a sinful attack, but rather as a

15:23

Biblical critique. Pray for this channel, and for anyone discussed in the video. Many of you are looking for teaching resources or trying to find a new church.

15:31

If so, check out the teaching ministries and church networks linked in the description. And by God's grace, let's move forward joyfully, holding to the truth of God's Word.

15:41

Thank you so much for watching that video. Please like, subscribe, hit the bell, and subscribe to our Rumble channel, link in description.

15:48

And before you go, take a look at this list here. These are the people who make all of our free content possible with their monthly support.

15:55

Today's highlighted channel supporter is Amber L. If you would like this channel to do more research, make more videos, and reach more people, please hit the link in the description, and join the

16:05

Truth Army today. And until next time, fight for truth. Thank you, and God bless.