OpenTheo

Christian Nationalism & Merriam-Webster Dictionary Changes Definition of Female

For The King — FTK
00:00
00:00

Christian Nationalism & Merriam-Webster Dictionary Changes Definition of Female

July 27, 2022
For The King
For The KingFTK

This Wonky Wednesday I am joined with Noah, a frequent guest on the podcast! We talk this episode about how Christian Nationalism is conflated with an evil version of itself. We walk through a document from a Christian organization that seeks to expose Christian nationalism even penning a statement of belief about the subject. I hope you enjoy the episode and it equips and edifies you to think about these topics from a Biblical Christian perspective. For The King!

Key Text:

* Psalm 33:12

Sources: Christian Nationalism

* https://www.christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org/statement

* https://www.christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org/endorsers

* https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/christian-nationalism-and-other-things-that-skeerded-us-bad.html

* https://thefederalistpapers.org/current-events/why-did-the-founders-not-require-a-religious-test

Source: Definition of Female Change

* https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

Fountain.fm -> https://fountain.fm/show/U78tm316mhRmq1LFZ6HS

Website: forthekingpodcast.com

Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/For-The-King-105492691873696/

Gab page: https://gab.com/ForTheKingPod

Twitter: https://twitter.com/ForTheKingPod

Contact: forthekingpodcast@gmail.com

Donate Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/f63fd7db-919e-44f6-9c58-8ec2891f3eb5

Kingly Clothing: https://www.bonfire.com/store/for-the-king/

Share

Transcript

Well, I wanted to bring up, they say Christian Nationalism demands Christianity be privileged by the state. Yes, yes, please. Do we want to favor a Jihadic Sharia law? What should we favor? Do we favor atheism where I'm just a monkey and I can throw my dung at your face and who cares? Is it a big deal? And then we come back to the idea of neutrality.
There
is no neutrality. Exactly. You can tell these people have wholesale swallowed the myth of neutrality that are repenting this document.
Don't think I will even ask you to make Jesus
Lord of your life. That's the most preposterous thing I could ever tell you to do. Jesus Christ is Lord of your life.
Whether you serve him or not, whether you bless him, curse him,
hate him, or love him, he is the Lord of your life because God has given him a name that is above every name so that the name of Jesus Christ every knee shall bow and tongue confess that he is Lord. Some of you will bow out of the grace that has been given to you and others will bow because your kneecaps will be broken by the one who rules the nations with a rod of iron. And I'll not apologize for this God of the Bible.
[Music]
Hello everybody. Welcome to the For The King podcast. I'm your host, Rocky Ramsey.
And I'm
joined today with my brother in Christ, a frequent guest on the For The King podcast, Noah Kellam. Brother, thank you for joining me. Hello.
It's good to be here. There he is. And on this
podcast we declare the edicts of the King, namely that Yahweh reigns.
And on these Wednesday
episodes I try to go through some politics and I'm really pleased to have Noah help me think through some of these things today. The two topics we want to get through would be Christian nationalism, hot button topic right now. You'll hear all the news, lots of this term being thrown around and used either derogatory towards Christians or some Christians saying very flamboyant and flowery language concerning Christian nationalism.
The second thing we want to get through today is just a real quick note on Merriam Webster changing the definition of female to include some gender spectrum kind of ideology. So those are the two things we want to get through today. We'll start with Christian nationalism.
We want to provide an affirmative case for what Noah and I think about Christian nationalism. Noah, when we were talking before you had a good definition. Can you walk us through that real quick? Christian nationalism is the view, I think, pretty foundational to biblical Christianity that says Christians ought to work toward Christianizing the nation that they live in and that the nation they live in itself ought to support its own Christianization and it ought to support specifically the Christian religion over all other religions because the God of Christianity is the God who establishes governments.
Yeah, and I agree with that. I mean, that's what we're on the same page with, like that position. Doug Wilson had a really good podcast he just did recently, a blog and may blog.
I listened to the podcast version of it and he brings up how in Romans 9 Noah, obviously you know this well since you memorized the whole book of Romans, well done brother, that the Apostle Paul, you remember when he says that I wish I could be cut off for the sake of my people? He wished he could be a curse so his people would be saved and they wouldn't have a hardened heart, a hardened heart coming upon Israel. So if Christian nationalism is wrong, if it's wrong to love your nation as a religious person and to prefer that your nation does a certain thing religiously, then the Apostle Paul was sitting here, right? But this is actually a great act of love when Noah and I could wish ourselves a curse for the sake of our American brethren actually repenting and turning to Christ. If Paul was an American, he would say the exact same thing.
He'd say, wow, I mean, America's going downhill.
I wish I could be a curse if they would just repent and turn from their sins. So I think that's a pretty, that's a biblical argument on how God's word presents like a Christian or a person that believes in Yahweh and how they interact with their nation and what they would prefer for their nation.
You know, that makes sense.
Yeah, Paul's a really good example. In Romans 9, he mentions that when he talks about the history of Israelites and that they're the people who are the offspring of the patriarchs, the covenant was given to this people, the Old Testament covenant.
Yeah, the Old Covenant
law and he, yeah, it's right that he has this desire to see them come to national repentance and he's distraught that he doesn't see that. So I think it ought to be the same way for every Christian wherever they're living. They ought to have a love for their people and understanding of their history and where they came from and a desire to see national repentance and a national love for the law of God because we see from the scripture that the covenants have accompanying curses and blessings and we can really see that playing out in America now.
The people are becoming increasingly lawless and immoral and as a result, we have
leaders who reflect that. We have immoral, unjust rulers who are passing immoral and unjust laws all because the people aren't basing their lives on the Christian law, the law of God. Yeah, no, exactly.
Another text I want to bring up, well, just the covenantal
nature of nations like you were bringing up Noah in Psalm 33 12, the Psalm says, "Blessed is the nation whose God is Yahweh." And by antithesis, curse is the nation whose God is not Yahweh. That nation is cursed. So like you're getting that Noah, I mean, I agree dude.
America was a nation that declared their rights in the way that they were going to
live in the Paulus from God and the animal rights from God, from creator from Yahweh. That was this nation covenanted with God from the get go. If you go read the constitutions of the early states or even when the pilgrims came over, the like the compacts they made, like the Mayflower compact and things like that, they reference God in making covenant with God over and over and over again.
And with the covenant being made at the inception
of this nation, us forsaking Yahweh, there is going to be curses that come upon this land because of that. So I think that's kind of the important distinction when we think about what's like the biblical version of Christian nationalism, because there isn't a biblical version and we'll kind of walk through that here just a second, but we're trying to make a positive case. The biblical version of Christian nationalism is everything Noah and I are getting at.
A nation's blessed if it's Lord is Yahweh. There's nothing inherently
wrong with wanting your people with where you're at to be blessed in God's law. An analogy I like to think about is in the same sense that I prefer my wife over other women.
I prefer my family over Noah's family. I prefer my church over other churches and
it's not wrong at all to prefer your nation over other nations. And it doesn't have to be tied to some weird like race superiority or I don't know, like class superiority like this is a very rich nation.
It doesn't have to be based in that. It should just be based
in my God is Yahweh and your God isn't. Therefore my nation is better than yours and I like my nation.
It can be just as basic and that's not, that's just the nature of reality in
terms of the myth of neutrality. I totally agree. I mean this nation has been blessed because we've had very faithful ancestors and forerunners.
A lot of our founders were solid Christians. Yeah, we've really profited
from the way that our founders set up our government, the way they set up our economy, like a free market economy can only, what is it? David Chilton wrote a free market can only be found where the nation has an economy for the gospel. So the gospel isn't the whole nation will not prosper in a way that a nation that does have room for the gospel will prosper.
Yeah, no, that's good. I'm glad you brought that up. That was such a sick quote.
David
Chilton hit it on the head there. You can't have a free market without free people in Christ. I mean, it's just it's a simple thought, but it's true.
And that's why it's okay to prefer
your nation to be a free nation where you can actually flourish and love your family, provide for your family, raise your kids up in the faith to actually have peace rather than turmoil over their sin. You know, that it's okay to do that. That's a good thing.
So the Christian nationalism we're presenting to you is in no way, shape or form, evil, wicked or wrong. And those that say Christian nationalism is bad while on the same turn, creating a secularistic humanistic society, a humanistic nationalism, it's petty, it's inconsistent. And it's hypocrisy at its finest for all these atheist secularists, baby murdering crazy people to get mad at Christians for saying that like Christians, Christians just want a Christian nation, Christian nationalism, when in the very same turn, they're legislating according to their worldview, putting in peace people in power that accord with their doctrines of atheism and humanism.
It's hypocrisy at its finest. Do you think that's fair, Noah?
Yeah, that's exactly right. I mean, that's what they're doing.
And they're just they use the Christian nationalism card
as like a gotcha moment, you know, when they're doing the exact same thing with humanistic nationalism, you know, you really have to be paying attention there. They try to kind of twist the Christian worldview and say that Christianity ought to remain in the churches, we ought to maintain our theological distinctions with other religions. It's like almost saying we don't need to try to convert them.
I think that's kind of the conclusion of that. But
Christians are called to love our neighbor and part of doing that is part of doing that. It has to include Christ, dominion in all spheres of life, including civil government.
So if Christians want to love their neighbors, they ought to be involved in civil government. They ought to try to get God's law into legislation. Exactly.
Because blessings will only come when God's law is set in its proper place. Exactly. I mean, that's so good, Noah.
Like when you think about Psalm 1 or even Psalm
1 19, like blessed is the man who meditates day and night on God's law. Right. So if we really want to love our neighbor, then God's law being legislated, right? This is the Christian position, you know, this is consistent Christianity.
That's how we love our neighbor is to actually
hand down righteous laws that aren't based on subjective human reasoning, but based on the eternal and immutable word of God. That's how you love your neighbor, folks. And that's why Christian nationalism is good.
And usually the wicked evil pagans of our land will project
when they accuse Christian nationalism of the wickedness that they think it is when actually they're doing the exact same thing. It's called projecting and it's hypocritical. Okay.
Yeah, you were sorry. One more point. Yeah.
You're dead on. I think you've already talked about this in a previous podcast, but this is a reality that there is no neutrality. It's either you're going to legislate righteousness or unrighteousness.
Yep. Those who are trying to prevent righteousness from being legislated, specifically the Christian worldview, they're going to legislate their own immorality. They're going to do stuff like allow child sacrifice and promote the homosexual agenda, promote androgyny, humanism.
What's the... Sotomy? No. Blanking on the word humanism. What? Describe it.
Yeah, humanism. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah, no, exactly. Yeah. So that's going to be our... That's going to be our kind of, as we continue on this episode, that's going to be our working definition of Christian nationalism.
That's the proper, godly, upright, righteous version
of Christian nationalism. Now, here's what would be... No, I want you to bounce off on this. Here's my analysis of wicked, evil Christian nationalism.
It would be those churches or those Christians in a nation that similar to how Israel thought that they were the only chosen nation of God when God explicitly said to be a light to the nations all throughout the Old Testament. They hogged the oracles of God and the message of Yahweh to themselves, and they didn't proclaim it to the nations. In the same sense, any Christian nation or any Christian church or Christian people that hog Yahweh, that hog Christ, that think that America is the only beacon of Christianity in the entire world and that God's kingdom on earth is America and white people, white people in America or whatever, if they attach it to their race, that is the wicked kind of Christian nationalism.
That probably gets the most headlines that people think is what's being said when really what Noah and I just described before this is what's going on. So that would be my analysis of the wicked, evil version of Christian nationalism, or what could also be termed Christian nationalism, although it's a facade. What do you think, Noah? Seems like a good assessment.
It seems
like a good tactic that the enemy would use to undermine real Christian nationalism. I mean, we know as Christians that Christ is footstooling all his enemies. So nations are going to be Christianized whether people support it or not eventually.
So it just seems like
a tactic that the enemy is using to dissuade and confuse people concerning how they ought to think about nations and how we ought to disciple nations. Exactly. Yeah, it is.
It's always a blurring of terms. And we'll get into that with the
Merriam-Webster dictionary definition. It's a battle for the dictionary.
Words matter.
Words are God's gift to humanity to describe the world that he made. And if we mess up words, then we've messed up basically God's natural law, the way he made things.
If you
can't describe the way something's done, like in 1984, if you can't describe or express a thought because the words have been so marred, then the enemy is winning and gaining a foothold. So we can't let them redefine Christian nationalism to be something wicked and evil. Yeah, I was going to bring up 1984.
That's the reference.
That book is just insane. I mean, if you haven't read that book, please just pick that up and walk through it and you will see how the tactics of warfare from the left, you can see that very clearly in 1984.
Also, also Babel, I think that's just an easy reference. God is confused as the languages of the people who are trying to build a tower to heaven, whatever that means. Yeah, that was his tactic and totally disarming.
And yeah, the project was ruined after that.
Yeah, that's a good point. There's a great power in the dictionary.
God knows it, Satan
knows it. Yeah, there's a unity when two people understand the same language, have a similar conception of the words they use. Even in communication, you need to... There's such a fundamental aspect of communicating is understanding what each other means when they use a specific word.
So there can really be no unity in communication when you don't speak the same language.
Exactly. Exactly.
All right, so let's move on and get to this. Christians against christiannationalism.org.
And this is their statement. Their statement against Christian nationalism from a Christian perspective.
Noah and I, after now having talked about this to find it and given our
thoughts on Christian nationalism, we're going to see what this organization is saying about Christian nationalism. And we're going to refute it. We're going to speak to what lies they've believed and what they're getting at.
So let me read some of it. It's very short,
so that this will be long winded, I promise. So Christians against Christian nationalism.
As Christians, our faith teaches us everyone is created in God's image and commands us to love one another. As Americans, we value our system of government and the good that can be accomplished in our constitutional democracy. Today, we are concerned about a persistent threat to both our religious communities and our democracy, Christian nationalism.
Okay, let's see. Let's see what they say. First thing I want to know, Noah, don't we live in a constitutional republic? Do we live in a constitutional democracy? No, there's no constitutional democracy here.
Exactly. So there's the buzzword. Do what? So straight
up democracy is demonic.
Exactly. We don't live in a democracy. We live in a constitutional
republic that has elements of democracy, mainly at the state level.
So sorry, can I just? Yeah,
go real quick. I just want to flesh out a little bit more. Yep.
The Federalist Papers,
our founding fathers talk a little bit about the exact reason they don't want a democracy. If you have a democracy, then whatever the arbitrary will of a majority is, can, at whatever point be used to undermine God's law? If for whatever reason, the majority of people in a democracy want to legislate something contrary to God's law, then the whole system falls apart. So they wanted to implement barriers and restrictions so that wouldn't happen.
And that's the reason we have a republic. Yep, exactly. Exactly.
And Noah and I are
going to do a more lengthy episode, hopefully sometime in the future, about democracy, why democracy is so wicked, some principles in democracy and talk about the form of government we have now and go into that one more. So here's the second paragraph of the statement. Christian nationalism seeks to merge Christian and American identities, distorting both the Christian faith and America's constitutional democracy.
There it is again. Christian nationalism
demands Christianity be privileged by the state and implies that to be a good American, one must be Christian. It often overlaps with and provides cover for white supremacy and racial subjugation.
We reject this damaging political ideology, ideology, sorry, and invite
our Christian brothers and sisters to join us in opposing this threat to our faith and to our nation. Any thoughts, Noah? Yeah, it's the total false premise that Christian nationalism undermines our constitutional democracy. Yeah.
That's fine. Yeah, it's the false dilemma
right off the bat. And they're claiming that what Christian nationalism seeks to do is to merge Christian and American identities.
Okay, there are some like I said, like we
had already talked about the evil version where they say America is the only Christian nation. Yeah, that is that is blurring the lines there. But that doesn't mean that Christian being Christian and being American, they aren't connected, they aren't related to one another.
That can be very true. And without being heretical or evil or wicked, in the same sense that Paul can be a Jew, but also be justified by faith and towards God and be a citizen of heaven. See, I think that whole line of thinking is the reason Paul wrote Roman's Thessalon 13 because Christians recognized that Christ having ascended to the right hand of God was king over everything.
Yeah. And they thought that that meant that they didn't have to obey
civil government, but Paul was telling them, no, God has instituted the civil government to punish wrongdoers and to instill justice. So government isn't like a necessary evil, something God created for our good to maintain order within the land and to protect people's rights.
So I forget where I was going with that. No, it's good thoughts though. Yeah.
Like the hierarchy of authority that being Christian and being American, the authority God has given to the American government doesn't mean that being Christian means you have to exclusively not identify yourself as an American or something because God's given authority to America as a nation. Right. Not unfettered by the way, the law is king, Lex Rex, the law is king, not unfettered, but yeah.
Anything on there? I was going to move. I'm not going
to move on to the next session. I had another thing here.
Well, I wanted to bring up, they say Christian nationalism demands Christianity be privileged by the state. Yes. Yes.
Yes, please. Do we want to favor a, Jihatak Sharia law? What
should we favors? We favor atheism where I'm just a monkey and I can throw my dung at your face and who cares? Is it a big deal? Then we come back to the idea of neutrality. There is no neutrality.
Exactly. You can tell these people have wholesale swallowed the myth of
neutrality that are pending this document because we most certainly think that the state should take a privileged position concerning its metaphysical principles by which it's deriving all of its laws and civics. Yeah.
Heck yeah. You know what I mean? Like, of
course, duh. This will help tease out the myth of neutrality in your mind if you're having cognitive dissonance hearing us talk about this.
Ask yourself a question. Do the thought
experiment by yourself in a room for 15 minutes. Where do laws come from? Let's say you're a legislator.
How do you go about legislating a law without ever in the midst of that process
appealing to some higher authority that somehow makes what you're trying to legislate as law binding on all humans? What gives you the right? Go ahead and walk through that and try to do that without appealing either to God or to some humanistic human reason. That would be my challenge to you. Any other thoughts there, Noah? No, that was good.
Okay. Here's
the points. Now, here's the last part of the document right here.
We're going to actually
get into some of their major points because they bullet pointed it off. I'll put this in the show notes if you want to go look at the statement. As Christians, we are bound to Christ not by citizenship, but by faith.
Okay, sure. Sure. We believe that.
Here's
bullet point number one, folks. People of all faiths and none have the right and responsibility to engage constructively in the public square. Okay.
Nothing too terribly wrong there. There's
a right for freedom of speech to constructively do things in the public square. Even the atheist has an idea of natural law, right? We can engage constructively in the public square, but they're going to go ahead and take this and blow it up to say that now everybody has this privileged understanding of what's right and wrong.
And that's not true. There's a
measure of natural law given to all men and all faiths, but some less than others. And there is a definitely privileged position of Christianity in terms of God's word revealing exactly what's right and wrong, but we don't have to guess at it.
Bullet point number two,
do what? Sorry, that's Roman say it. Yeah, exactly. Did you have something else there? No, I mean, are you just gonna, we're going to go through these one at a time? Are you going to read them all and then we'll go one at a time? Okay.
I can keep going. All right.
Well, point number two, patriotism does not require us to minimize our religious convictions.
Okay. Fine with that. But, um, patriotism does require the nonbeliever to minimize their religious convictions.
Not us. It doesn't require us. I can be a patriot, be a Christian, but
you can't be a true patriot and love this Christian country, uh, without bending the knee to Christ.
And you're not, you're not a patriot. You're not a lover of America.
If you want to destroy America's very foundations.
So yeah, that would be, that would be my caveat
to that point. Any thoughts? No, yeah. It seems like as Christians, like we're not called, this goes kind of back to the idea of language and communication.
What do you mean by different
words? Christians shouldn't define reality in terms of what the unbeliever or the pagan thinks. So the idea of a nation as Christians, we ought to look at the nations as, um, first of all, a nation is, is a large, I don't even know what you'd call it, entity that's built by, uh, you know, smaller and smaller entities all the way down to the individual. Um, and we should look at the, each of these entities as things that ought to be subverted, um, and rule by Christ.
Yeah. So, amen. Yeah.
I mean, just kind of going off of your point,
we ought to look at our own nation as already being Christian, um, because Christ is reigning and this is owned by Him, whether you like it or not. Exactly. So yeah, a true patriot is going to be one who is a Christian and is going to institute God's law in the civil sphere.
Otherwise you're not obeying God and trying to love your neighbor. Um, and you're
not recognizing the preeminency in the superiority of Christ. Exactly.
Yeah, that was all really
good. Thanks, Noah. Um, so here's the next point.
One's religious affiliation or lack
thereof should be irrelevant to one standing in the civic community. Wrong. Um, and I think um, Job was a ruler of the land because he feared God.
Okay. Your standing in the civic
community is most certainly tied to your religious affiliation. For instance, the atheist, the atheist that doesn't have any law binding him do not want to go rape little, little girls or young women.
Um, that that's a religion. That's a metaphysical position. You don't
think that there's a law by a metaphysical law binding on you to not do that evil thing.
So you've created your own little cult, right? Um, that person, their standing in civic community is most certainly impacted by their ability to, you know, think that they're not doing anything wrong in that situation. Or for instance, if we, if, let's just say Hitler was alive today, you know, what his religious affiliation, his views on the world, his worldview, you know, fascism, Nazism, whatever, would that, would that be irrelevant to his standing in civic community? You know, that's what do you think about that Noah? I think it's a good question. Yeah, whatever your religious affiliation is, it's going to have an effect on your daily life within a community, how you act toward other members of the community.
Like you, you
can't separate your religion from your behavior or from your, your standing, especially your standing in the eyes of God. Yeah, that's, um, yeah, in some ways, a reflection of your standing before other men, because one who honors God will also be honored by men. Exactly.
Yeah. So one's religious affiliation does impact your standing in civic community. It will either make you better make you look bad.
Um, next point, this is, this is the, the
biggest red flag. Government should not prefer one religion over another or religion over non-religion. Get real.
Are you kidding me? Like, what the heck do they think happens,
uh, every single day in Congress, like they have to consider metaphysical realities to run the government to like, like where does justice come from? Like why is it wrong to murder? Like, where's that coming from? Cause in the animal kingdom, it's not wrong at all to murder, right? Uh, you know, the government should prefer one religion over the other because what happens, that is just such a stupid statement. If the government prefers just jihadi Sharia law Islam over, you know, the humanism they have now, guess what's going to happen? The government's going to be completely upended and changed and it won't even look like the government you once had. That doesn't make any sense.
Yeah. It's assuming that all
religions are created equal. I know.
There's the myth of neutrality again. Yeah, exactly.
That just doesn't make it like that statement is just, is it's so stupid.
Like if you have
a different, if you have a government or different religion come into a government, it's going to guess what it's going to do. It's going to completely change the government. And that's what the atheistic humanists have done in our government.
Right. If you don't presuppose
the law of God and his standards, then you have no basis for your authority at all. Yeah.
Exactly. No right to rule. If you're not ruling and got stood.
Exactly. Okay. Here's another
one.
Religious instruction is best left to our houses of worship, other religious institutions
and families. Okay. That's a half truth.
That's a half in my book. When they mean religious
instruction, are they talking about catechizing your kids? Because the government should be catechizing your kids because, you know, I wouldn't use the Westminster catechism. I'd use the London Baptist, the Baptist catechism, right? I'm not a Presbyterian.
So yeah, I
have the, it's on me as a father to catechize my kids accordingly. But in terms of religious instruction, like is it wrong to murder? That's religious instruction. That's not just up to the house of worship to churches to instruct that.
It's also up to the state to instruct
and to teach the law. What do you think? Yeah. I mean, it meant to students, how does the worship or churches, I guess also the home can be kind of a house of worship.
Yeah. But
you really do need to understand the different spheres of authority of the civil government, the church and the family. Yeah.
So I think they're, they're kind of on the right track.
But yeah, I'm not totally sure what they mean by religious instruction. Exactly.
Yeah. Yeah.
So each sphere of authority has its own authority, obviously its own area that it has authority over and they're not allowed to infringe on each other, where obviously it's the church's role to institute the sacraments.
Let's see. Preach the word. Yeah, preach the word.
Then,
yeah, it should be the parents who are up to catechize the kids. We see now parents sending their children to public school. The government is actually the one that's catechizing their children.
Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Religious instruction is best.
Again, religious instruction is best
left to our house of worship. They're projecting because guess what happens in public schools. They're instructed into atheism.
It's projecting. They're doing the exact same. They're accusing
us of doing.
Let's move to the next point. America's historic commitment to religious
pluralism. Okay.
I don't know where they're getting that from. Enables faith communities
who live in civic harmony with one another without sacrificing our theological convictions. Okay.
What happens? What happens? How is there civic harmony between all the different pluralistic
religious positions in America when it comes to the, to the question of abortion? Somebody has to win. Somebody, it either gets outlawed or it doesn't. You can't just sacrifice, you can't just live like that and not sacrifice your theological convictions.
Like if abortion
is legalized and you're allowed to murder your child, then I've now had to sacrifice my theological convictions in the public square and I'm not allowed to, you know, go be a vigilante. Right. So the America's historic commitment to religious pluralism.
What? Yeah.
You mean where does that come from? The pilgrims came over here to set up a Christian colony. What are you talking about? What are you talking about? Like that's just, that's not in our history at all.
What do you think? Yeah. Our roots are deeply Christian. Our founding fathers
had no conception of a nation where Muslims and Jews and Christians and atheists and agnostics and whatever all just live together in civic harmony.
I know. No, they had a view that,
like they had a worldview saying Christ is King over the whole earth and they were founding a nation according to Christian principles. And they assumed that the people would uphold the Christian religion and that the civil authorities would be populated by people with the same worldview.
Exactly. Yeah. And so they're saying civic harmony.
Didn't Alexander Hamilton
and another founding father like have a gunfight outside of a bar and that's how Alexander Hamilton died because they disagreed over politics. Yeah. Something like that.
Like what do they
mean? Civic harmony. Like the men that founded this country would just like, they beat each other up. If they, you know what I mean? Like you're, we, this country was founded on like the struggle to determine what's right and how to, how to live in God's world.
Like you
can't just have harmony. You gotta, you gotta duke it out and figure out what's right. You know, you have to have that verbal battle.
Right. And another point that can be made
here. Muslims have a theology of dominion.
Yeah, exactly. So long-term, how can Muslims
and Christians live in civic harmony if they're both trying to take dominion of the whole world? I know. I know.
Atheism is too. Yeah. It's just everybody's on a collision course
without sacrificing our theological convictions.
Like somebody's going to go, like we know,
we know that Christ wins and then. Yeah. All right.
We got two more. There's no harmony.
Exactly.
Apart from Christianity. Amen. There's only one Prince of Peace.
All right. So two
more points. We're almost done.
And then real quick note on the constitution and then the
definition change. Conflating religious authority with political authority is idolatrous and often leads to oppression of minority and other marginalized groups, as well as the spiritually impoverished of religion. Okay.
We've seen the Catholics do that. Right. Conflate religious
authority and political authority.
And then it did. It impoverished those that were not
able to read the word. Right.
It was in Latin. So they didn't know what God's word said until
Martin Luther came along and actually taught the, you know, the reformation. So yes, this has happened.
But again, they're going to piggyback on that to say that therefore they
should be completely exclusive, you know, which is not true. Just rooted in a false understanding of what real Christian nationalism is. Exactly.
All right. And then last point, we must stand
up and speak out against Christian nationalism, especially when it inspires acts of violence and intimidation, including vandalism, bomb threats, arson, hate crimes and attacks on houses of worship against non against religious communities at home and abroad. Okay.
So Christianity
is not spread by the sword. Um, those Christian, those Christian nationalists that do threaten things like that and vandalize and all that kind of stuff. What is it not Christians, you know, that's not, that's not how Christian, that's not how the word of God spreads in a nation.
It spreads by the Prince of Peace coming and us proclaiming that Prince of
Peace to you through the feet of the gospel, through gospel proclamation. So it looks like standing on a street corner and pleading with people to repent and turn to Christ. It doesn't look like going up like Charlemagne and holding you at a sword until you get baptized.
You
know, we're not Charlemagne. Um, so again, they're, they're conflating evil Christian nationalism with an actual biblical Christian nationalism. But we agree with that.
This,
this point, right? Or at least I do. Right. Yeah, sure.
Yeah. Christ doesn't conquer the
nations by physically dominating them. He converts hearts, converts hearts.
Yep. Transfer
souls into the kingdom of, of God. Exactly.
So I'm going to put that on the show notes.
Um, and you can go check that out yourself. I would encourage you to go look at the endorsers of the statement.
It's a bunch of, bunch of, um, women, uh, Reverend women, ordained women.
So go, go read Isaiah three 12 and then go look at these women and try to square that up. And all the men look like a bunch of queers that are, they're not strong men that can, uh, lead the nation.
Um, so that's kind of where I'm at with the endorsers. Uh, they,
you were right. It's just a bunch of women, a bunch of women.
And yeah, you're right.
It's just a bunch of women. Um, and one thing I've been seeing real quick that I want to take a note on an article six, uh, section three of the constitution that says this, the senators and representatives before mentioned and the members of the several state legislators and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this constitution.
But no religious
test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. So I'm going to put an article in the show notes as well that is going to walk through the history of why the founding fathers would put that in. But these founding fathers are in no way saying that there shouldn't be a, um, a, um, pre-allegiance to a certain religion to those that hold public office.
The, um, that section is specifically saying
that you should, you should never ever have a religious test given to somebody that has to hold public office. And the word religious does not mean every single religion. It's talking about Christianity.
So for instance, you're not allowed to, um, give a test for,
for Presbyterian theology to a reform Baptist that wants to become mayor, right? That's what the, that's what the, um, that, uh, clause is getting out there. The religious test cause not that pagans, atheists, and Muslims that want to take over the country, uh, are allowed to hold office. And the reason we know that is because one of our founding fathers, John Adams makes it abundantly clear.
Um, he says this, our constitution was made only for a
moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. And religion again is Christianity.
James chapter five talks about, uh, um, this is pure religion
that is undefiled before God caring for widows and orphans. That's what religion is. Religion isn't, uh, you know, Islam or Buddhism or Hinduism or atheism.
True religion is that
which is Christian. Okay. We're good enough.
We're good. Um, last thing I want to report
on would be Miriam Webster just changed the definition of female in their dictionary. Again, we're talking about this battle for the dictionary.
Um, so entry number one definition
to be says having a gender identity that is opposite of male. Any thoughts on that Noah? I know we've talked about this a little bit in the past, but yeah, just the idea of female being the opposite of male, uh, it implies that male and female, um, are related to each other over some kind of a spectrum where maybe you can be in between male and female if they're opposite of each other, just as light and darker opposites or somewhere in between is maybe less light and more toward the darker. Exactly.
There's just, there's a scale, but
I think in reality, um, I mean, we ought to go to Genesis to define what male and female are. Um, they're defined independent of each other. They're both, they're both made in the image of God, but they're both entirely distinct creatures, both human, but like both completely separate, having their own individual roles.
Um, yeah, exactly. Yeah. No, I think
that's good.
That's exactly where I was going to go with it. It's, um, you know, the light
and dark analogy is so good that you can have gray, right? You have, you know, black and white, uh, that those would be their opposites, you know, in our mind, like once, once the all colors combined ones, no color. Um, so, you know, male and female, they're, they don't like, they're not contrasted by one another.
They're like this. Now I'm a biblical patriarchus,
but the word complimentary does work well in terms of describing the point here. They're complimentary to one another.
They're not like opposed to one another. They're not opposites.
They're not, they're not diametric.
Uh, it's not a dichotomy or a spectrum. They are like
Noah said, which is completely correct. They're defined independently of one another, but relating to one another by both being made in the image of God.
Um, so if, if they're both made in
the image of God, they can't be complete opposites of one another, right? Cause they're both shared characteristic. They both have the characteristic of being made in the image of God. Therefore they're not complete opposites.
Therefore this, um, this, this definition
is just, it's just bunk, you know, it's not true. Um, so it's not opposite of male. They're their own unique things.
That's interesting. I mean, back to the 1984 references, um, there, we see Miriam Webster redefining a word to fit more with the context of what's going on today, which is what's constantly going on in 1984. Exactly.
Yeah. In 1984, Winston, he can't, there's, there's times where he almost cannot
express his thoughts, um, about the, um, about big brother or what's going on in the world around him because he doesn't have the words to articulate it. Um, and when we, like, let's just say all of Western society adopts, um, this definition of female having a gender identity that is opposite of male.
Well, if that's all you know, if that's all, if that's
what the definition is of female, then in your mind, you are incapable of coming up with the idea that gender is not on a spectrum because female has already been defined as the opposite of male. Therefore it's on a spectrum. Yeah.
That's actually, that's another thought that occurred to me. They're defining male
in terms of what a man is. Yeah.
Yet they hate patriarchy. I know. Patriarchy is inevitable.
Even in their own definitions. Exactly. Oh man.
Yeah. There's, there's a lot we could go into here, but you know, the
main highlight, you know, 1984, you know, Satan is fighting for the dictionary with God. Right.
Um, other gods not going to allow it to, because we have God's word as a sure and
steady foundation, we can always define things correctly in the world. So we don't need to go to Miriam Webster to figure out what a female is. We can go to God's word.
Um, I
think we're good, Noah. I really appreciate you, uh, spending some time with me today. Do you have any last thoughts on the things we talked about or an encouragement or something? You don't, you don't have to.
I just was wondering.
Uh, I guess I just, I'll give an encouragement to be faithful to the scriptures and, uh, to just believe everything you hear about, you know, certain ideals that have a good Christian foundation. Um, but yeah, like, like Christian nationalism, I think there's a, a good biblical case for being a Christian nationalist, if you understand it in the right context.
But yeah, exactly. It's totally being demonized. Um, and I think that's kind of
means we're on a good, a good track.
Like they recognize that Christian nationalism
is, is a threat to, um, their humanistic society and their, their socialism. I agree. That's a really good point, Noah.
Uh, it kind of made me think about like in
terms of an encouraging word, um, whenever you see somebody attacking your faith in a very, very specific wording, a very specific term, you as a Christian, you need to take the time to sit down like Noah and I did really work through what's going on here. What, how do I think about this? What does God's word say about nations? What does God's word say about, uh, law in a nation and building nations and forming nations and co, covenating with nations? Let me think about that first before I just say, you know what? I'm not a Christian national nationalist just because you're afraid of being called a Christian nationalist. Um, if God's word clearly articulates the idea of Christian nationalism, then you need to own that term and fight for all that it's worth because we can't let them have the dictionary in the same sense that we need to fight from female because they're trying to change it.
Merriam Webster is trying to change it. So you, you got to really spend the time to sit down and think about it. That's our encouragement to you.
Um, don't just listen to Noah and
I sit down and think biblically about your own thoughts on how, how you're going to defend this and not let them change the dictionary, change the wording, make you feel bad for something that actually scripture commands us to do. That's good. All right.
Um, I think
that's it brother. Thanks for joining me. Um, I always end well, okay.
If you have anything
you want to talk about from what Noah and I just went over, reach me at for the King podcast@gmail.com. I want to put all my sources in the show notes. Um, yeah, thanks for being with us today and listening to the podcast. Check me out on fountain.fm. It's this awesome app where you can earn Bitcoin for free at Noah and I have been putting clips on there.
So if you want to listen to hear some of the things Noah and I are listening to and things we're into, you can go check out our profiles on there. Um, but thanks so much guys. Uh, peace be with you.
I always end with the doxology king of the ages, immortal, invisible, the
only God, the honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. Holy day.
Oh, glory.
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)
(upbeat music)

More on OpenTheo

Licona and Martin Talk about the Physical Resurrection of Jesus
Licona and Martin Talk about the Physical Resurrection of Jesus
Risen Jesus
May 21, 2025
In today’s episode, we have a Religion Soup dialogue from Acadia Divinity College between Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Dale Martin on whether Jesus physica
What Would You Say to Someone Who Believes in “Healing Frequencies”?
What Would You Say to Someone Who Believes in “Healing Frequencies”?
#STRask
May 8, 2025
Questions about what to say to someone who believes in “healing frequencies” in fabrics and music, whether Christians should use Oriental medicine tha
Bible Study: Choices and Character in James, Part 1
Bible Study: Choices and Character in James, Part 1
Knight & Rose Show
June 21, 2025
Wintery Knight and Desert Rose explore chapters 1 and 2 of the Book of James. They discuss the book's author, James, the brother of Jesus, and his mar
Did Matter and Energy Already Exist Before the Big Bang?
Did Matter and Energy Already Exist Before the Big Bang?
#STRask
July 24, 2025
Questions about whether matter and energy already existed before the Big Bang, how to respond to a Christian friend who believes Genesis 1 and Genesis
Is Morality Determined by Society?
Is Morality Determined by Society?
#STRask
June 26, 2025
Questions about how to respond to someone who says morality is determined by society, whether our evolutionary biology causes us to think it’s objecti
Why Would We Need to Be in a Fallen World to Fully Know God?
Why Would We Need to Be in a Fallen World to Fully Know God?
#STRask
July 21, 2025
Questions about why, if Adam and Eve were in perfect community with God, we would need to be in a fallen world to fully know God, and why God cursed n
What Would You Say to an Atheist Who Claims to Lack a Worldview?
What Would You Say to an Atheist Who Claims to Lack a Worldview?
#STRask
July 17, 2025
Questions about how to handle a conversation with an atheist who claims to lack a worldview, and how to respond to someone who accuses you of being “s
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Three: The Meaning of Miracle Stories
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Three: The Meaning of Miracle Stories
Risen Jesus
June 11, 2025
In this episode, we hear from Dr. Evan Fales as he presents his case against the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and responds to Dr. Licona’s writi
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Two: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?
Licona vs. Fales: A Debate in 4 Parts – Part Two: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?
Risen Jesus
June 4, 2025
The following episode is part two of the debate between atheist philosopher Dr. Evan Fales and Dr. Mike Licona in 2014 at the University of St. Thoman
Licona vs. Shapiro: Is Belief in the Resurrection Justified?
Licona vs. Shapiro: Is Belief in the Resurrection Justified?
Risen Jesus
April 30, 2025
In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Lawrence Shapiro debate the justifiability of believing Jesus was raised from the dead. Dr. Shapiro appeals t
An Ex-Christian Disputes Jesus' Physical Resurrection: Licona vs. Barker - Part 1
An Ex-Christian Disputes Jesus' Physical Resurrection: Licona vs. Barker - Part 1
Risen Jesus
July 9, 2025
In this episode, we have Dr. Mike Licona's first-ever debate. In 2003, Licona sparred with Dan Barker at the University of Wisonsin-Madison. Once a Ch
The Plausibility of Jesus' Rising from the Dead Licona vs. Shapiro
The Plausibility of Jesus' Rising from the Dead Licona vs. Shapiro
Risen Jesus
April 23, 2025
In this episode of the Risen Jesus podcast, we join Dr. Licona at Ohio State University for his 2017 resurrection debate with philosopher Dr. Lawrence
Which Books Left a Lasting Impression on You?
Which Books Left a Lasting Impression on You?
#STRask
July 28, 2025
Questions about favorite books that left a lasting impression on Greg and Amy, their response to Christians who warn that all fantasy novels (includin
Are Works the Evidence or the Energizer of Faith?
Are Works the Evidence or the Energizer of Faith?
#STRask
June 30, 2025
Questions about whether faith is the evidence or the energizer of faith, and biblical support for the idea that good works are inevitable and always d
Why Do You Say Human Beings Are the Most Valuable Things in the Universe?
Why Do You Say Human Beings Are the Most Valuable Things in the Universe?
#STRask
May 29, 2025
Questions about reasons to think human beings are the most valuable things in the universe, how terms like “identity in Christ” and “child of God” can