Megachurch Pastor Reacts to James Talarico's INSANE Claims on ABORTION!? | Live Free with Josh Howerton

All right, Live Free Nation, this is going to be an interesting little react episode. James Tallarico, who's becoming a little pod favorite in some ways here, he is becoming quickly one of the most popular rising stars in Texas politics, actually in national politics. He very frequently kind of poses as a Christian pastor and makes some pretty outrageous claims. This clip that we're getting ready to react to right here, Tallarico was on Joe Rogan, went like insane viral. And he made some comments that have gone like, again, insane viral, that are confusing a lot of Christians, saying things like the Bible actually supports abortion. And he gives some confusing arguments that confuse Christians on why. And Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. And this went so viral that me, Carlos Arazo, and Chad G. Paul T hopped in the studio. and we're going to react to this Tallarico Joe Rogan clip. So without further ado, here we go. This is, for a little bit of context, this is a Joe Rogan interview with James Tallarico. I hope I'm pronouncing his name right. And James is a, he is a American politician, like you said, quote unquote, pastor, former teacher. And he is, what? Go ahead. Well, you described him with- I object to the title pastor. Pastor in the synagogue of Satan. That's right. That's what I'm saying. That's it. But yes, self-proclaimed. And so, man, let's just jump in. So it's just, I get suspicious when anybody, whether it's a televangelist or a politician, tells me that something is central to my faith when Jesus never talks about it. Wait, wait, actually, let him keep going so we know what he's saying Jesus never talked about. To me, that should, I think, ring alarm bells as to what is the agenda here? What is someone trying to get across? And I think if we're looking at the last 40, 50 years, the religious right has made a concerted effort to make homosexuality and abortion the two biggest issues for Christians. All right, pause. So his – first of all, here's why we're doing this. A, the number of people that sent this to me was insane. b it confused a lot of people and it went like super mega viral so this is the kind of stuff you're going to hear a lot so i just want to like walk through a biblically so paul cunningham you start this the james says jesus never talked about homosexuality let's do homosexuality first because he's going to talk about abortion later yeah i get suspicious anyone anytime someone uses the argument jesus never talked about fill in the blank so my alarm bells are going off when i hear that. Because usually it just betrays to me that the person is generally intentionally or unintentionally ignorant of just how biblical arguments work, biblical reasoning works and things like that. And so I think when I hear things like this, I used to tell people three things we need to remember. Number one is Jesus's Bible. Number two, Jesus's identity. And number three, Jesus's context. So in terms of Jesus's Bible, he affirmed the authority of the Old Testament. He said, I have not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. And so that basically says, hey, everything in the Old Testament, I affirm that in terms of God's moral commands. Then we have to remember his identity, that Jesus was God. And so when we say, oh, Jesus never said that, I'm like, well, if it said it in the Old Testament, he is God, actually it is his words. Now it was inspired by the Holy Spirit, but we have to remember in Christian belief, God has one mind, not three. So it's not like the Holy Spirit and the Son of God are thinking different things. Oh, they're thinking the same thing. And so everything that the Holy Spirit inspired are Jesus's thoughts as well, including everything in the Old Testament. And then finally, I have to remember Jesus's context is Jesus never talked about things like idolatry either, even though idolatry was the number one sin in the Old Testament. And the reason is because that wasn't being debated. Jesus was around mostly Jewish people. They weren't debating that and weren't practicing it anymore. So he didn't need to address it. But what you see in Acts and in the epistles is all of a sudden, as the gospel goes out into the Gentile world, where things like idolatry and homosexuality and other things like that are practiced, they do have to address it because they're in cultures that embrace it and where there is error. That's really good. Yeah. So again, so we have to remember Jesus's Bible, his identity, and his context. All right. So here's what I'll say in response to that, because you hear this a lot. Jesus never talked about same sex attraction or marriage or whatever. So one thing I'll say is Jesus never said anything about nuclear warheads, bestiality, or paper straws, but they're all awful too. And I just got to throw paper straws in there because I really want them to go away. So that's number one. It's an argument from silence. It's the weakest form of argument, argument from silence. There's tons of stuff Jesus never explicitly talked about that everyone knows are evil. Everybody knows that. Number two is- Can I say something about? Yeah, please. And yet he did talk about sexuality. He did talk about marriage. Oh, okay, okay, go ahead. Yeah, number two, that's just not true, that Jesus never talked about this. So if here's my analogy, if somebody were to ask me, um, Hey Josh, who, if they walk into Lake Point and they go, Hey Josh, who's your wife? Which, which one's your wife? There's two ways that I can make clear who my wife is. Either I can point to 24,999 people and individually say, that's not my wife. And that's not my wife. And that's not my wife. And that's not my wife until no one's left with Jana. Or I can just point to Jana and go, that's my wife. And by implication, everything else is not my wife. Okay. So what Jesus does over and over again, multiple times in the gospels is he defines what is acceptable sexual expression and what is biblical marriage. So instead of having to literally name, for instance, I mentioned this, Jesus never addresses bestiality or incest. Everyone knows those things are wrong. Only fans. Yeah. Only, you know, we're talking about only fans. So what Jesus did is he went, man, I can't, I'm not going to list every single thing that is wrong. That's impossible to take forever. So let me just go, here's what's right. And then by implication, everything else is out. So this is Matthew 19. Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked Jesus, is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason? Jesus' response. So words of Jesus right here. haven't you read he replied that at the beginning the creator made them male and female so transgenderism is out and said for this reason a man will leave his father and mother so like lazy don't work live in your mom's basement forever that's out and be united to his wife So in other words, we get married and the two will become one flesh. So what you have there is you have the definition of marriage. And then he says, therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate. What you have there is a sexual, heterosexual, lifelong covenant union between a man and a woman. And Jesus goes, that's what's right. By implication, everything else is out. And I love you went to that text because when Jesus defines marriage, it's usually in response to questions about divorce. So Jesus could have simply said, don't divorce. Like he could have answered the question really briefly and said, no. He could have even quoted part of it and said, well, God has brought together to let people not separate. But I think he knew what he was doing. He intentionally went back and even defined the whole scope of marriage and then went on there. That's just one thing I think is important to point out. So yes, he didn't use specific language around homosexuality, but he knew what he was doing when he defined it. He could have simply said, nope, don't get divorced. But he actually gave a positive definition of marriage and identified the target, like you said. You will also, to Paul's point, you'll hear people sometimes, and there's a wonderful grace in this. You will hear people sometimes mistakenly be like, oh man, there's a few Old Testament clobber passages. Actually, it's reaffirmed in the New Testament. So here's your homework. go read Romans 1 or 1 Corinthians 6. And here's what I love about 1 Corinthians 6 is he lists all these sins and he lists things like theft and murder and there's a few other, slander, a few other things. And then he goes, and men who practice homosexuality. And he goes, man, these people will not inherit the kingdom of God. And he's saying, if you continue in these sins in an unrepentant way, then that is an indication you have not placed your faith in the Lordship of Jesus and submitted to him. So he won't inherit the kingdom of God. But then he goes, And such were some of you, but you were washed, you were cleansed, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus. That's gospel. That's grace and good news. So it's simply untrue that Jesus, and especially the New Testament, we're talking about this, it specifically does. You want to keep going? Let's keep going. Actually, can I say one more thing? Please do. Actually, I'm so sorry. I cut y'all. I think even just to help people clarify, because it's a common misnomer to say, oh, the religious right has made these two issues the biggest issue. No, no, no. the biggest two issues is the lordship of Jesus and the authority of his word. And so anytime you're going to challenge that, we're going to respond. And then with that, one thing that sometimes theologians or historians like to say is that heresy often precedes orthodoxy, not in the sense that we make up what we believe, but when what we believe begins to be challenged, we then have to directly and clearly articulate what Christians have always believed. So it may seem like we're the ones who are elevating these things, but we're simply responding to what the culture has elevated. Yeah. It's one of my, as a pastor, that's like one of my pet peeves is like the entire culture will scream about an issue. And it like every commercial every movie every talk show everything you read is about this issue And then a pastor addresses it They like that the only thing you focus on I like bro are you kidding Preach the Bible only Are you kidding? I hate that. All right, let's keep going. And the Southern Baptist Convention was pro-choice until the late 1970s. Okay, pause. Do we want to listen to the whole thing and then go to arguments or do you want it clip by clip? Let's do that. Let's do clip by clip. Yeah, because I want to make sure we answer that. So Paul Cunningham, the Southern Baptist Convention was pro-choice until the 1970s. What say you? No. Just a great example of maybe a half-truth being twisted to try to make your argument. I actually think we have the text that we're going to put up of the resolution from 1971. You pulled it? I pulled it. I pulled it. So if we're going to say these things— He memorized it. Of course he did. I did not memorize it, but if we're going to say these things, let's actually read context. We're going to skip down actually to where it says, be it therefore resolved. Be it therefore resolved at the Southern Baptist Convention, this is a key line, while reaffirming our historic commitment to the sanctity of life. What year was this? This is 1971. So in other words, what they're about to say before they say it, while reaffirming, they were saying, hey, we are pro-life. And then it goes on and it does say, call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow for the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformality, and then likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother. So they were not pro-choice. They were pro-life, but as a denomination did decide that they would say, hey, there are some exceptions that we believe should be legal. Now, that doesn't mean that we have to agree with what they said, by the way, because a few years later- I do not. There was what was called the conservative resurgence, that there were very liberal elements in the Southern Baptist Convention at this time. and over the next 10 to 15 to 20 years, there was a research that basically said, hey, we have drifted away from the Bible and we need to reclaim that. So I'm not saying this to say, hey, we agree with what Southern Baptist wrote here. It's really just trying to give the greater context of saying, hey, while we're reaffirming our commitment to the sanctity of human life. So they were not pro-choice. They were pro-life with exceptions. I'll add this. So the implication that James, synagogue of Satan pastor, whatever his name is, But his implication is like, and by the way, if somebody's listening, they're like, that's mean. I'm going to explain why I'm saying that later. It's not mean. It's actually a very loving thing to be very clear about something like that. But the implication he's trying to make is, man, actually, this is something that church just disagreed on and various opinions, agree to disagree. That's right. That is just historically radically false. So like all the way back to something called the Didache, which was a collection of Christian writings like right after. Actually, the Didache was written before the book of Revelation, if I remember right. Yeah. Well, in this late 90s, early 100s, many would say it was written concurrently with the Gospel of John. There you go. This is still in the time when some of the apostles were living in early Christians. So here's a quote from the Didache, the earliest Christians. What is it? Explain it for the people that have no idea what that is. It's like a collection of devotional writings. How would you describe it? Didache literally just means the teaching. It's like a church manual. It's like an early church manual basically saying, hey, here's just a list of the things. Yeah, yeah. Here's a quote from the Didache, AD 70. This is pretty straightforward. You shall not procure abortion. It's kind of straightforward. Here's one from what was called the Letter of Barnabas. It's an apocryphal deal, but it's dated to around AD 74. Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion. Early church father Tertullian, AD 197. Here's a quote from Tertullian. Murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb. Tertullian, 197 AD. Wow. Here's John Chrysostom. Didn't they call him Golden Mouth? He was one of the greatest preachers in the history of Christmoth. Yeah, a lot of people say John Chrysostom. Yeah. And he refers to, in a John Chrysostom sermon, murder before the birth. So it's like this is the uniform testimony of the church since the beginning. If we fast forward a thousand years, Thomas Aquinas talking about something called the sentences, he who destroys life in the womb incurs the guilt of murder. So even like sometimes I think he's just basically the guy who's trying to say, oh, yeah, it's just a greed, disagree issue. People have disagreed. Like, no, like if I put you in a travel machine, time travel machine, and we went to any time before really last 50 years, like this view would have been described as heresy yeah i mean just outright heresy yeah and just to clarify we don't have time to expand too much on this but for somebody that's listening in and it's curious because they're like well but do you agree with the 1971 position of like yes pro-life but with some of these exceptions josh you would say i do not that's right yeah i do not now by the way tremendous overwhelming like compassion for any any circumstance like that um but no like and dude some people like josh are you crazy that's what you believe i'm like actually no that's not what i believe that's what the bible says and i'm gonna be a bible guy and the bible is just really clear you shall not murder murder equals the taking of innocent life there's a whole different podcast there's the just taking of life and the unjust taking of life. The just taking of life are things like the death penalty for appropriate criminal offenses. And the unjust taking of life is anything else. So I'm just like, hey, man, I do not think one sin necessitates another sin. I'm sure we'll address all of this because I'm sure people are going to be asking some more questions in a future episode, just FYI, that's probably coming soon. Let's keep going. Well, when was abortion even invented? Well, there was certainly abortions in the ancient world. How did they abort? Well, there's some, and again, I haven't stated this enough to say this definitively, but there are interpretations of certain passages from the Torah where some folks will even say that there is some subtle instructions for how to perform an abortion in the ancient world, certain things to drink, things like that. Let's pause. You want to start or you want me to start? You're probably in a more. All right. Let me talk about what he's referring to. Okay. He's referring to Numbers chapter five. Numbers five, verse 11 through 31. It gives these, it's an Old Testament law, and it's giving the instructions for what the nation of Israel should do when there's a woman accused of adultery, but there are not witnesses. So the husband has reason, maybe biological reasons, to believe that his wife has been unfaithful, but there's not multiple witnesses. Numbers five is prescribing what should have been done in Old Testament Israel in that circumstance. And here's, I'll give a quick description of it. So the priest would put the woman under oath and make her swear under penalty of a curse that she was innocent of adultery. After the wife swore her innocence, her oath was written on a scroll. Next, the priest put the scroll into the water until ink came up off the water, at which point he removed the scroll from the cup. Then the priest took the grain offering from the woman, burned it on the altar, and she would drink the bitter water. If innocent, then the bitter water would have no effect. But then if guilty, there would be a physical consequence. And there's debate about how the translation of the physical consequence, we can get to that in a second, but that's what he's referring to. Paul, your response. Three issues. Number one, the text never mentions pregnancy. Ah, yes. Very important. Interesting. Number two, this is about, and you were basically saying this, it's about divine judgment, not human abortion. That's right. And then number three, traditional Jewish interpreters have never seen this as about abortion. And so one thing that I actually like when I'm teaching people how to interpret the Bible is that if you're seeing something no one has seen before, it's because it isn't there. I mean, that's why even when we were referring to people and their views on this throughout history, tradition can be a bad thing, but Condition can also be a good thing. Tradition is the democracy of the dead. It's where dead people get a vote. And if no one really has seen this until, again, the last 50 years and interpret the text in this way, that should give us pause. So, yes, those are just three huge issues with this text in terms of using this of any kind of a reference to justify abortion that the Bible teaches abortion. That's exactly right. So the things to keep in mind. And we don't need to deep dive into this. Let's keep going through the clip. But essentially there's debate about the translation of the physical consequence that, you know, the Bible says would happen under the judgment of God. Most people translate it the falling away of the thigh. What he's doing is some people will translate it as like the shriveling up of the womb. And then he's imputing into the text, as Paul mentions, pregnancies never mentioned, that, ah, well, if she was pregnant because of the adultery, then it's talking about the miscarriage of their, and number one, Paul mentioned this, pregnancy's never mentioned. Number two, that's not the likely interpretation of the passage. Number three, we just need to acknowledge this. It is not culturally popular to acknowledge this, but the potter has the right over the clay. Anytime that God decides to take life, he can do that because he created it. That does not give us the ability to do that. And with this, if you're listening to this, you're not familiar with this, is that there was also not just punishment for the woman, but for the man as well. So if you're just here and there's like, oh, why was it just for the woman? No, no, no. It was also punishment for the man. This was just basically the test to see if something had happened Yeah that right Let go on The point is that this idea that there is a set Christian orthodoxy on the issue of abortion is just not rooted in scripture We can have an honest debate about it. Pope Francis, you... Say more about that. I just said, do not pass go, do not collect $200. We don't need to talk about this. We already mentioned the uniform testimony of church history. You were to come back and sit at this table and tell me, you know, James, I'm pro-life and anti-abortion. Here's my theological argument. I'm here to listen and respect that opinion. I have dear friends who are anti-abortion. All I'm asking is that for Christians who are pro-choice and who respect the bodily autonomy of women, that we be given the space to make our theological argument, because I think there is a lot of biblical evidence to support that opinion. Pause really quick. So a couple things. he's going to go into these arguments. I'll just, so you got to watch this. I did debate team in high school. Here's what you got to watch out for. Uh, the, what people always say is whoever controls the terms wins the debate. Yes. So if you frame it in terms of bodily, so that's what people do is they'll smuggle in language that, that also smuggles in assumptions, the bodily autonomy of women. Okay. That's actually not what we're talking about, man, because there's two bodies involved, not just one. That's what you got to watch out for. There's two bodies involved, not just one. We're not talking about bodily autonomy. We're talking about you're saying you have the right over somebody else's bodily autonomy. That's what happens when you take somebody else's life in utero. All right, let's keep going. What do you think is the biblical evidence to support the opinion of being pro-abortion? So one, in Genesis, God creates life by breathing life into the first human being, which we later call Adam, that life starts when you take your first breath. And that is actually the mainline position in Judaism, is that that's when life starts. Okay, so appealing... All right, you go, you go. Like appealing to Adam's creation to define when life begins, it's like using the burning bush to define laws of botany and thermodynamics. All right, there you go. In the sense of those are, It's a supernatural exception. It's not the norm and the pattern. Okay. And so even like I say, like, it's just a general thing is that we got to be careful about taking a supernatural exception in scripture and then saying, all right. And then this defines the pattern for the rest of scripture. That'd be number one. So Adam was not conceived. He was created uniquely from the dust. Here's the point. Adam was never a fetus. He was never a fetus. And that's what I'm saying is he was a supernatural exception. You can't then say, oh, therefore everything is like this. The other thing would be that scripture teaches that human life does begin in the womb, not at birth. I mean, even just a few places. Number one in Luke, when it talks about the baby leaping in Elizabeth's womb. First person to ever worship Jesus. First person to ever worship Jesus is an unborn child. And the word that is used, baby, brephos, is the same word that is used of infant and children. So it doesn't distinguish. It's the same thing. You obviously have texts like Psalm 139, Jeremiah, where it says, before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. but I also think a key thing here is from like the breath of life is a poetic image and what's interesting is later in Ecclesiastes we get that same kind of imagery. This is what it says, as you do not know the way the spirit or wind or breath comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child. So here he's trying to make the argument of oh no breath is what gives life. That doesn't happen until the baby is outside. Here it says that the breath comes to the baby while it is still in his mother's womb. And so yeah, yeah. He got, I don't need anything, had anything. He nailed it. And he did say, did he say that it was like the mainstream Judaism perspective? Is that true? I don't know anything about that. It might be true today, but there's been variations. I mean, like, for example, we've got Philo, who is an early Jewish rabbi, who would have said abortion was wrong and kind of a thing. I'm not sure that's true. Even if it's a mainstream belief doesn't mean that it's right. That's right. We're going Bible. Yeah. Bible, Bible, Bible. Let's keep going. Then if you think about it from a Christian perspective, what's something interesting that Jesus does throughout his ministry is he is breaking first century norms about women, talking with women, learning from women, having women lieutenants in his movement. And this was something that was kind of unheard of in the first century. The longest conversation Jesus has with anybody in the whole Bible is with the Samaritan woman at the well. And so this affirmation of women as full and equal people is a huge part of the Jesus movement, especially the early church. Pause. First of all, we agree with his last sins. Yeah. That's really important. We totally agree with his last sins, that Jesus did treat women as full and equal people. He did not—equals, but not equivalents. That's a whole different discussion, you know. But totally agree. But let me just say, like, that's quite a leap to go from, Jesus had a long conversation with a woman one time. Therefore, that's quite a leap. Yeah, literally, I wrote it down. I think I had two bullet points, and one was like, yes, and. Yeah, that's right. I guess just like, yeah, like you said, totally agree. Yeah, man, and we need to remember that, too, in terms of how Jesus treated women. But then even going to the Didache and other writings, and the earliest Christians who are the closest to Jesus, by the way, than we are. did not then use that to then justify abortion. Yes, yes. Yeah, I just want to point out, like, A, I would just be like, yeah, man, but, like, Jesus forbade murder. Really, the whole discussion, like, you can have a million emotional situations thrown out, and that stuff, as Christians, we should care. We should weep with those who weep. We should be the ones that, like, that's the reason we give huge amounts of money at Lake Point to crisis pregnancy centers, foster care and adoption, all the women who are victims of sexual trafficking. There's a reason we go all out on that stuff. Our SOAR ministry for kids with special needs, there's a reason we go all out on that stuff. So you can throw out all of the emotional things that'll pull you emotionally. Really, here's the only question. Is it murder? That's the only question that matters. Is it murder? We didn't get to this earlier, but it might be helpful to do it now. Can I just briefly state the historical Christian case in terms of like the reasoning of why we believe this is wrong. Okay. And I actually take this from Andrew Walker, who adapted this from David Beckwith, who wrote a book called Defending Life. So basically four premises. Number one, an unborn child is a member of the human species. So whatever is in the mother's womb, is it either living or dead? Well, it's living. Okay, well then if it's living, it's a living what? Yeah. It's a living human. So an unborn child is a member of the human species. as we gave texts already throughout the Bible in terms of where we see that life begins the moon. That leads to point number two. It is morally wrong to take the life of an innocent member of the human species. Book of Exodus, you shall not murder. Proverbs 6, 16 through 17. God hates the shedding of innocent blood. I mean, you gotta feel the way. He hates the shedding of innocent blood. Number three, abortion takes the life of a member of the human species, which leads to number four. Therefore, abortion is immoral. That's the case. It's that simple case. and again we're gonna move on but we'll keep going back to that all this is but in the same way um there's a reason the new testament talks about and such were some of you yes but you were washed you were cleansed so what i always want to say and i just want to interject it to what like i jan and i pray with women who have terminated pregnancies and they you have the grief that sometimes you know, we'll pray with somebody in the lobby is unspeakable. And what we always remind them is, hey, the death that most defines your life is not the death of your son or your daughter. It's the death of the son of God that cleanses you from all sin. There you go. Yes. And so you need to sleep really good tonight, just knowing the father is pleased with you. So I want to get that in. Let's keep going. That's right. And then the last, I think, story I would go to is the story of Mary. Dude, this is hilarious. Mary is probably my favorite figure in the Bible, the mother of Jesus. and she is an oppressed peasant, teenage girl, living in poverty under an oppressive empire as a Jew. And she has a vision from God that she's going to give birth to a baby who's going to bring the powerful down from their thrones, going to scatter the proud, who's going to send the rich away empty. I mean, this revolutionary song that she sings, it's called the Magnificat. And it's actually been banned by certain authoritarian regimes because it is so radical. But I say all this in terms of the context of abortion because before God comes over Mary and we have the incarnation, God asks for Mary's consent. No, he didn't. Which is remarkable. Go back and read this in Luke. I'm going to read it. By the way, we're pro-consent, by the way. The angel comes down and asks Mary if this is something she wants to do. And she says, if it is God's will, let it be done. Let it be. Let it happen. So to me, that is an affirmation in one of our most central stories that creation has to be done with consent. You cannot force someone to create. Creation is one of the most sacred acts that we engage in as human beings. But that has to be done with consent. It has to be done with freedom. and to me that is absolutely consistent with the ministry and life and death of Jesus All right pause So first of all I just wanna make very very clear all Christians should unequivocally it consent Like, that's like, let me just, but well, what people do on the internet is like, but so you're saying, so I was like, honestly, dude, like Old Testament, I think that forcible rape should be a death penalty. So let me just get that out there. Like, I think, so very, very, very pro consent. but this is a weird thing to say. Paul, why is it a weird thing to say? Well, so he said, go back and read it. So I would love to. That'd be great. Before I said that, can we just stop and like, this is when I read it, when I listen, this is probably the part that infuriated me the most. Like, do you really want to base your theology of abortion on the fact that Mary could have aborted the son of God? That he could have killed the son of God 33 years before everybody else got a chance. Is that really like what you want to base your theology of abortion on? But I can revisit that another time. So let's actually go and read the text like he told us to. So the angel said to her, do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, I'm going to put some emphasis on words because I think you're going to see a pattern. You will conceive in your womb and bear a son and you shall call his name Jesus, shall be a command. He will be great and will be called the son of the most high. And the Lord God will give him the throne of his father, David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever. in his kingdom, there will be no end. And Mary said to the angel, how will this be since I'm a virgin? And the angel answered her, the Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the most high will overshadow you. Therefore, the child to be born will be called holy, the son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son. And this is the sixth month with her who was called barren for nothing will be impossible with God. You skipped the, if it's okay with you, Would this be okay with you? No, I was literally going to stop there. So did you guys hear like any place where God said, hey, if it's okay. If it's okay. So like all these statements are firm. This is going to happen or you shall do this. It just literally made up a Bible. It's wild. Yeah. And then it does say, and Mary said, behold, I am the servant of the Lord. Let it be to me according to your word. And the angel departed from her. So actually, when I was thinking about this, if anything, this confirms. our viewpoint, which is she basically says, I'm going to be obedient. So yeah, she in a sense did give consent to obey. So that question would be, if she had not given consent, what would that have been? Sin. It would have been disobedience. But never in any place of this, you get any, any hint of God saying, Hey, as long as it's okay with you. So here's, so I just want, let me boil this down. Is that the end of the clip? I think we're, I think we're done. So here's what I want to point out. Here's a big idea. Zoom out for that dude, James, synagogue of Satan, James, all of these obscure passages with like loony interpretations are secretly about abortion, but you shall not murder isn't. I was like, that's really, you zoom out, that's what's going on. All of these obscure passages that had this, you know, secret, uh, interpretation that nobody's ever noticed before. Those are about abortion, but you shall not murder isn't. That's your problem. There's your problem. Yeah. A couple questions briefly for you, Pastor Josh, but why are you talking about this? This is a political issue. You're a pastor. Yeah. So what I would say is, no, no, people keep saying that the church is getting more political and I'm like, no, no, the church is not getting political. Politics are getting spiritual. That's my little riff. I say it all the time because I get accused of this all the time. Church getting political. Nope, it's not. Politics are getting spiritual. When the government moved past things like building roads and issuing driver's licenses and teaching math to things like redefining marriage, erasing gender, reframing abortion as quote-unquote reproductive rights, and then indoctrinating everybody's kids into believing those things via the government school system. Hey, the church didn't move. Politics did. And whenever the government moves out of its lane and into the church's lane about things like morality, definitions of life and marriage, it's the job of the church. We go like, we could someday we should like super nerd out on like Kyperian sphere sovereignty, Abraham Kuyper and sphere sovereignty, theology of societal arrangements. But whenever the government moves out of their lane and into the church's lane, it's the job of the church to like, hey man, get back in your lane or I'm going to have to put you in the dirt. And that's what's happening right now. Church is going, hey man, get back in your lane. You don't define what life is, marriage is, gender is. No, that's God's job. get back in your lane and submit to the worship of Jesus. Here's one more. Wait, but Christians are supposed to be nice and you just called them a pastor of the synagogue of Satan. So I would just, dude, Paul referenced it earlier. Jesus said, anyone who causes one of these little ones to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck than to continue. So dude, when people accuse us of being clear, this is somebody who is publicly on the large podcast in the world, influencing Christians towards sin and not just sin, but sin that results in the mass taking of innocent human life. That is not a moment for measured words. Let's be nice. No, no. That's a moment to be like, sit down, shut up, and you are resulting in people dying. So if somebody's like, hey, Josh, that's mean. No, no. What's mean is allowing someone to continue teaching things that if believed will result in death and people going to hell. That's mean. And it's biblical, by the way. Even when you say synagogue of Satan, if people don't realize you're really just referring to a term that's in Scripture. Yeah, sorry. I'm quoting Revelation 3. Yeah. And then also, if you read through the epistles and even look through Jesus, where they get heated and they're not afraid to do things like this, it's when the flock is being attacked and misled. So even like in Galatians, when false teachers are trying to lead them away around the issue of circumcision. Paul literally says, I wish they would just go out the whole thing. That's what he says. Galatians 5, 6, something like that. And so you see like scripturally, anytime the flock is being misled, basically Christian leaders have the responsibility to rise up and speak very pointedly and call it out. Yeah. Carlos, that's why I asked to do this on podcast because again, the number of people who sent that clip to me. And it was people who were like, hey, what do you think about this? They were confused. And honestly, let me just like gently, because there's a lot of pastors that watch this. Part of the reason that a lot of Christians are confused is because the pulpits have not been clear. So like, that's our job. Let's do our job. Jude 1 verse 3, beloved, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once and for all delivered to the saints. that's it man that's it before you finish this i just want to point one other thing out about this guy so um that clip went insanely viral like insanely viral i think joe rogan said he should run for president he did say he should run for president which is terrifying what i want to point out i went and scoped out this guy first of all i think he passed a church of like 11 people it's like i would just you can just tell that's a whole side note like this is a whole different podcast progressive Christianity grows social media platforms, but shrinks churches. I'll just, that is a thing. That is totally a thing. This guy like came on the scene preaching against Christian nationalism. He was like, all these, like these, these politicians are trying to use the Bible to influence their, their policy. And that's evil Christian nationalism. Well, what I want to point out is he's preaching against Christian nationalism, and then he's using obscure, incorrect, and loony interpretations of Scripture to inform his public policy decisions. So you'll see this a lot. Progressive Christians are extremely politically active, like way more politically active than conservative Christians. Someday we should talk about this. The data around the political activity of progressive Christians, vastly more politically engaged than conservative Christians, which is a really interesting whole different thing. But what you'll notice conservative or progressive Christians do is they do Christian nationalism for me, but not for thee. They constantly do that. So they accuse conservative Christians of you guys are doing Christian nationalism. It's not fair for you to bring your personal beliefs into the public square and then they'll walk out and they'll be like, well, Jesus was an immigrant, so we should have open borders. Jesus fed the poor, so we should have unlimited welfare and USAID and universal basic income. Jesus, you saw this two years ago, tons of these statements from progressive Christians where they would talk about, Jesus makes a comment about eunuchs, and we don't have, I don't want to talk about this right now. He makes a comment about eunuchs, and some people were made eunuchs, and some people became eunuchs, you know, by choice, that kind of thing. And progressive Christians who were politically engaged pointed to those like, see, it's okay to be transgender. We should have affirming transgender laws. So my point is the same dude that gets famous preaching against Christian nationalism goes on Joe Rogan and is like, hey, because of my beliefs about scripture, here's what the public policy should be. Christian nationalism for thee, for me, but not for thee. There you go. you