Welcome to Theology.

Throwdown.

We, the Christian podcast community of podcasters, gather to discuss our theological differences with love and charity.

This is a ministry of striving for eternity.

Welcome to another Theology Throwdown where we, those that are members of the Christian podcast community, get together and, well, we start discussing different topics that we may disagree with theologically.

Tonight's topic is, well, rather different.

Not so much theological specifically in nature, although we're probably going to get into a lot of theology.

But CNN interviewed Doug Wilson and there's a lot in that interview that we could end up discussing.

So I will freely admit as the host of this show, I have no idea where we're going to go because I haven't spoken to the, to the others here.

So we're going to see how this is going to go.

It's, it'll be educational, I'm sure, it will be informative, I hope entertaining, probably.

I'm sure it's going to be fun.

So let us start off, I'm just going to go with what we're going to do is first let you, the audience hear all of our voices and what podcasts we represent and then we're going to jump into the topic of tonight.

So I'll start with the Rooted Reason podcast.

Since you were first one in, introduce yourself in your podcast.

Hi, my name is Brandon.

I'm the host of the Root Reason Podcast.

It's a podcast just aimed at practical application of Christian worldview type stuff.

So whether it be devotionals or theological studies, just how from from one layman to another, how we can apply God's word to our life and what that looks like living it out every day.

Okay, Eve, I want to introduce yourself your podcast.

Yes, I'm Eve Franklin and I co host the podcast.

Are you just watching where we discuss movies and other forms of entertainment from a Christian worldview.

Not to rip the movies or Hollywood, but just to show how the Christian worldview intersects or often disagrees with the cultural worldview.

And, and you can catch that those episodes monthly and glad to be here.

Derek, you were next in.

Yeah, I'm Derek Stevenson.

I'm with the Truth Response podcast and we are just a roundtable discussion.

Our goal is to hit topics that pastors sometimes are a little too scared to go towards or maybe people are too scared to ask those questions and bring a little bit of clarity into the chaos of the world today.

Mel.

My name is Melissa Lex and my podcast is thoroughly equipped and the podcast is centered on women's ministry.

It's part discernment ministry, discerning the female teachers within, very popular female teachers within women's ministry and also just trying to glorify God through biblical womanhood.

Wait, are you saying we can't trust all the women teachers that do women's ministry?

Really?

Unfortunately, no.

You can.

I think it'd be easier to count the ones you can trust.

All right, Rebecca.

Rebecca, you're up next.

Yes, hi, I am Rebecca Berschwinger and I am the host of One Little Candle, which is a monthly podcast that dedicates itself to empowering believers to navigate all those cultural challenges out that are out there.

Seems like through the new one every day.

But we navigate those, you know, we examine these issues through scripture and our biblical wisdom and practical tools.

And then what I do is encourage the listener to be the light, be a light in the darkness, in their sphere of influence, no matter where they're at in their life, no matter how big or small it is.

And I am Andrew Rapaport, the host not only of this show, but also Andrew Rapaport's Rap Report.

That is a one hour pre recorded show that which I do weekly dealing with biblical interpretations and applications for the Christian life.

And then I also do a weekly live stream Thursday nights, 8 to 10 Eastern Time.

And that is at apologexlive.com Anyone can come in, ask any question and we usually will have a topic or a guest but we always make time at least in a second hour to answer any questions anybody has.

So with that today, what we want to do, there's three different versions of this interview with CNN with Doug Wilson.

And the, I think the reason CNN did this is a couple fold.

I, I mean let's be honest, CNN is not interviewing a pastor because they want to promote Christianity to their audience.

Okay.

So they were looking for a gotcha piece.

And you know, I think that Doug Wilson, like him or not, he's a lightning rod.

And I think he, I personally think he, he, he plays into some of what they, what they want to get across.

And so what I want to do is there is the 30 minute edition that CNN played on the, on the air.

There is also what I have is a 1 hour and 16 minute extended version of the full interview.

But I want to play for you, the audience, in case you haven't heard any of it so that you're not out of the loop with what we're discussing.

There is a seven or almost eight minute trailer clip of, of what of the highlights.

I'm going to play that, that CNN had put out.

I'm going to play it at 1.5 speed just so that it's a little bit, just so it speeds it up a bit.

I'm telling you folks that because if anyone happens to be, you know, playing on their podcast app faster, you may want to slow it down because some people, well, like myself listen at faster speeds.

So let me, let me share this so that you guys here who are are here can watch as well.

And let's just play this clip from cnn and with Doug Wilson.

Here we go.

Quietly opened here in Washington, just three blocks from the nation's capital.

The Defense secretary Pete Hexseth attended the first service.

The church is part of the communion of reformed evangelical churches and its aim is global Christian domination under a strict interpretation of the Bible.

In this SITUATION ROOM Special report.

My colleague Pamela Brown went to Moscow, Idaho to meet the controversial pastor behind it.

Christchurch senior pastor Doug Wilson makes no apologies for his beliefs on God and country.

I'd like to see the town be a Christian town.

I'd like to see this the state be a Christian state.

Like to see the nation be a Christian nation.

I'd like to see the world be a Christian world.

And now Wilson's controversial views as a Christian nationalist are gaining sway in the nation's center of power with the recent opening of his new church.

And high profile parishioners like Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Is planting a church in D.C. part of your mission to try to turn this into a Christian nation?

Yes.

So every society is theocratic.

The only question is, who's Theo?

In a secular democracy, it would be demos, the people.

In a Christian republic, it'd be Christ.

Well, what would you say to someone watching this, say, look, I'm a Muslim.

Who are you to say your worldview is better than mine, that your God is better than mine?

Well, if I went to Saudi Arabia, I would fully expect to live under their God's rules.

But you said earlier that you want this to be a Christian world.

Yes.

So you want to supplant their religion with your Christian.

Yes.

By peaceful means, by sharing the gospel.

There's a lot of work yet to do.

I believe that we are working our little corner of the Vineyard, Wilson's little.

Corner, a picturesque campus nestled on the outskirts of downtown Moscow, Idaho is growing by the day with thousands of like minded Christians.

Parishioners of his church, known as Kirkers, own and operate several businesses downtown next to liberal Collegetown stores.

If it's true, if it's true, why.

Did he yell Do.

Because of me?

Because of you.

Oh, you have.

There you go.

That's a regular day for you.

That's not unusual.

A big focus of his Christian movement is on a patriarchal society where men are dominant and women are expected to submit to their husbands.

Women are the kind of people that people come out of.

So you just think they're meant to have babies.

That's it.

They're just a vessel?

No.

It doesn't take any talent to simply reproduce biologically.

The wife and mother who is the chief executive of the home is entrusted with three or four or five eternal souls.

I'm here as a working journalist, and I'm a mom of three.

Good for you.

Is that an issue for you?

No, it's not automatically an issue.

Josh and Amy Prince, along with her four kids, moved here from Washington State.

Do you see Amy as your equal?

Yes and no.

In the sense that we're both saved by grace.

We're absolutely on equal footing, but we.

Have very different purposes.

God given.

But do you see yourself as the head of the household?

As.

As a man?

He is the head and.

Of our household, yes.

And I do submit to him.

So, like, moving here was ultimately your decision?

Yes.

That's a great, great example.

Wilson says in his vision of a Christian society, women as individuals shouldn't be able to vote.

His fellow pastors Jared Longshore and Toby Sumter agree.

In my ideal society, we would vote.

As households, and I would ordinarily be.

The one that would cast the vote.

But I would cast the vote, having.

Discussed it with my household.

But what if there's a.

Your wife doesn't want to vote for the same person as you.

Right.

Well, then that's a great opportunity for a good discussion.

There are some who have gone so far as to say that they want the 19th amendment repealed.

I would support that, and I support it on the basis that the.

The atomization that comes with our current system is not good for humans.

And Wilson, a veteran himself, is unapologetic about his view that women shouldn't be in certain leadership or combat roles.

Looking at the leadership page for Christ Church, it's all men.

Do you accept women in leadership roles in the church and government in the church?

No.

Why?

Because the Bible says not to.

Well, that's not what happens in the Bible.

Women do lead all the time.

Progressive faith leader Reverend Jennifer Butler is concerned about Wilson's growing influence.

He is rapidly gaining in power.

He has hundreds of churches established around the country.

They actually literally want to take over.

Towns and cities and they have access to this administration.

Wilson is part of a broader Christian nationalist movement making inroads with the Trump administration.

With a newly created faith office led by evangelical pastor Paula White Cain and people seen right outside the White House entrance praying and speaking in tongues.

We are standing on the soil of the White House and we are declaring your word.

How pre and now, there's a monthly prayer service at the Pentagon initiated by Hegseth, Wilson's highest level connection to the administration.

It's not organizationally tied to us, but it's the kind of thing we love to see.

For his part, Hagseth has publicly praised Wilson.

Now we're standing on the shoulders of a generation later, the Doug Wilsons and the others.

Wilson's influence spans the globe with more than 150 churches.

Lennox Califung moved to Moscow from Africa.

It's really because I wanted to be a part of a community that was doing something, and especially in building Christian institutions.

Are there other black families in this community?

Oh, absolutely, there's a few black families.

Wilson maintains all are welcome to his church.

But he's also not shying away from his past controversial statements on race.

Do you still believe what you said back in the 90s, that there's a mutual affection between master and slave?

Yes, it depends on the.

On which master, which slave you're talking about.

Slavery was overseen and conducted by fallen human beings and there were horrendous abuses.

And there were also people who owned slaves who were decent human beings and didn't mistreat them.

I think that system of chattel slavery was an unbiblical system and I'm grateful it's gone.

What he also wants gone?

Same sex marriage.

Because he thinks homosexuality is a crime.

In the late 70s and early 80s, sodomy was a felony in all 50 states.

That America of that day was not a totalitarian hellhole.

So you would like America to go back to that?

Yep.

Wilson maintains his ultimate goal is to bring about the second coming of Christ through his work and rejects critics claims he's trying to make the dystopian world of the Handmaid's Tale a reality.

I'm not a white nationalist.

I'm not a fascist.

I'm not.

I'm not a racist.

I'm not a misogynist.

How far off do you see a Christian nation like a full on Christian theocracy?

Oh, 250 years.

250 years?

Honestly, that's.

That's what you see.

But you do think it will happen?

Yes, I do.

We're not going to usher in anything ourselves.

We're really genuinely pioneers.

And thanks to our Pamela Brown for that very special report.

CNN, by the way, reached out to the U.S. defense Department to inquire about Secretary Hexsett's relationship with Doug Wilson.

A spokesperson said Hegseth is, quote, a proud member of the network of Churches founded by Wilson, and that the secretary, quote, very much appreciates many of Mr. Wilson's writings and teachings.

End quote.

All right, so that is a clip that we had.

Uh, I think that it gives enough of an overview for you as a listener to, to see several of the different topics.

Um, so I'm gonna, I want to start us off.

I'm going to start off actually with a. I guess just to be completely opening and candid with the audience here listening and the.

My fellow podcasters.

So I have, I have met Doug Wilson.

I'm not friends with him or anything like that.

We had dinner together, actually.

Dinner and, and breakfast, because we happen to be in the same hotel and had breakfast together.

I don't agree with his theology.

However, I will admit that in my, my meeting with him, he was very respectful where I was disagreeing with him.

I appreciated that.

We, we had good discussion.

Anyone who listens to my podcast, you know that I don't shy away from, you know, voicing where I might disagree with somebody.

I'm not gonna play nice just because someone's maybe well known.

So.

But I, I, I don't agree with his theology.

I want to, I want to start with the reason I think CNN did this.

Okay.

There seem to be a couple things.

First, the, you know, as, as was mentioned, you know, Secretary Hessef is, is a member of one of the churches that they planted in D.C. so there's a political aspect to it.

I want to start with the Christian nationalism aspect for us, because this is something that the left has brought.

I, I'm very much against using the term Christian nationalism, because the left created that term to make it seem like all Christians are insurrectionists.

And I think had Harris won the election, they would have continued with that argument.

I mean, anyone who saw this week the Trump administration has now come out with the evidence that the previous administration had been targeting Christians and Christians in a very broad sense.

They put Catholics in that.

We wouldn't say they're Christian, but from the secular view.

So they're trying to group everyone together.

And I think their goal was to say all Christians want to take over the country, and therefore, we could put them all in jail.

And, you know, basically no different than what Nazi Germany did with Jewish people, make them the scapegoat.

So everyone focuses there, and no one looks at what they're actually doing as they take over.

And hopefully, you know, Trump was speaking at the Museum of the Bible this week saying that we need to have religious freedom in this country.

So I want to start with Christian nationalism, and I do not know how any of my fellow podcasters hear what their view is on this.

So I'm just going to go around for each of us and just say, do you agree with the term Christian nationalism?

Yes or no.

And, and then I would ask if, if you agree or disagree, why, like, what, what is it that you agree or disagree with?

I've said I disagree with the use of the term.

I will get into his post.

Millennialism, I'm sure, but I, I don't think that Christ is going to make us a Christian theocracy, so I'm not looking toward that.

But, Derek, I'll start with you.

Christian nationalism, is that something you, you agree with using the term?

You agree with what it means, and if so, what do you think it means?

So I rarely even use the term, to be completely honest.

I, I don't know.

I flip back and forth, to be honest, about the ultimate view point of, you know, legislating morality, essentially, is what that, that comes down to the breakdown, in my opinion.

I think we should, but at the same time, I struggle with the.

Being raised in America, that concept of everybody should be free to, you know, practice what they.

They practice.

And then I don't know.

So I go back and forth.

It's a, it's a. I see points on both sides.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't have to have that discussion, but unfortunately, that's not where we're at.

So are you saying we're not in a perfect world?

Not anymore.

Someday.

Again.

All right, just looking at my, My right, Melissa, you're up next.

As far as using the term Christian nationalist, I think I agree with you.

I do understand, like, it's becoming derogatory with certain false understandings, false presuppositions behind it of, like you said, the Christians wanting to take over the nation and impose their morals on everybody.

Do I consider myself a Christian nationalist?

No.

There's certain things, like, I, I do not.

I understand that the eschatology has a huge emphasis.

It's a huge emphasis in this.

And I would say there are some theological things that I would disagree with another, another person who might call themselves a Christian nationalist.

So I don't like to pigeonhole.

That.

Because my focus is mostly on like the gospel and, and then I, I'm also where it's like to yoking with somebody who may call themselves a Christian but they're not is another issue with me, all under this term Christian nationality, like you had mentioned that they kind of lumped up Catholics.

So I see that there's an issue there.

And that's, I think mainly why I wouldn't call myself a Christian nationalist because it would place me under a certain set of beliefs that would be even in agreement with somebody who might be NAR related or Catholic related, word of faith theology, all that, and of course the eschatology.

But I do agree with the goal of, as I am a Christian and I am a citizen of the United States, to vote and work towards laws that I think would bring justice and would glorify God.

So yeah, it's like a mixed bag for me and I think I agree with the last person who.

I'm sorry, remember his name.

Yeah, Derek.

Where it's a, it's a mixed bag and like, I wish I could say that I agree with all of that and then identify with it, but I, I just, there are certain things that I can't.

So it's worth discussing.

Okay.

Brandon?

Yeah, I'm probably about in the same boat.

I think the term has a lot of baggage tied to it now.

At one time, I don't know, a few years ago when I first heard of it, and it was a very like just simple defin tradition of Christian nationalism, I probably at that time thought, okay, yeah, I could, I could probably agree with that.

But as time has gone on, the amount of baggage that's been attached to it and then I didn't realize it was started actually as like a leftist kind of propaganda thing.

I didn't know that.

Yeah, I think there's just too much baggage tied to it for me to just grab onto it and put as a label that I'm going to use for myself.

Though I do think there are parts of what Wilson talked about in his interview, in the longer interview that, you know, I definitely do agree with.

There's going to be a dominant worldview that is legislating morality.

And right now we live in a secular worldview.

And so in the aspect of, I would prefer that worldview that leads the nation I'm a part of, leads America to be a Christian worldview.

Yeah.

So I guess in that sense, sure.

Because the people I look at when I'm going to vote, when I'm going to vote for representatives or laws or policies, things like that.

You know, I want them to have a Christian basis or a Christian worldview, which I'm sure we all do, because they're, like I said, there is going to be a dominant worldview.

And I think we're seeing the repercussions of that secular worldview just in what's being how our culture is going and how politics is going, things like that.

And so it would definitely be a much better place and nation if it was governed by a Christian worldview and a legitimate Christian worldview, not, you know, that.

That can go off the rails pretty quickly, too, in a bunch of different ways.

Eve?

Yeah, I. I kind of agree with everybody that it's.

It's a term we probably shouldn't be using, makes Christianity into a monolith in our culture.

And unfortunately, we.

Christianity isn't a monolith in our culture.

We have a lot of different sects and denominations and doctrines and theology, and we're a mixed bag.

And, you know, the group of us here, we signed a statement of faith to be part of the Christian podcast community.

And there are certain things that we agree on theologically and doctrinally that make it possible for us to disagree on other things in and still consider each other Christians.

But there are a lot of sects of Christianity that are so far off the theological path that we wouldn't actually consider them to be Christians.

And to lump us all together into one bag and turn us into a monolith that wants to rule the world, I think there's a lot of danger in that because that's not what God wanted us to.

That's not how God wanted us to evangelize the world.

Not through government and not through legislation and not through a global domination.

It's through the gospel and through love.

And so I think nationalism can be good in some situations.

But I don't think you should tie the word Christian to it because that is not what Christmas Christianity is about.

What, what our.

Our role as Christians is supposed to be.

But I, like, as many have said, there's several.

Quite a few things that he said that I, I could definitely get on board with, and a lot of things he said that I disagreed with.

And I thought it was interesting that when she asked him if he was a Christian nationalist, he actually said that it's.

Of all the terms that people have called him, it's probably the most acceptable.

So he didn't necessarily say that he wanted to be called that or that he actually agreed with the Term, it was more like that one's the most acceptable of all of the things that people have called him.

Rebecca.

Yeah, well, until, you know, I received the email about what this episode was going to be about, I had always just assumed that Christian and I, so I probably would have said it one time if someone had asked me, are you a Christian national?

I would have said yes, because I was under the presumption that Christian nationalism basically just meant that you wanted godly laws in effect, you know, in the country, anti, you know, anti abortion and of course, marriage the way it should be.

But doing some research for this episode, I found out Christian nationalism really is about a lot more than that.

So much has been inserted into it.

It's certainly completely different.

I mean, I think it's just something that's kind of a fear mongering that kind of targets.

Even that interview was, you know, targeting those that are really truly ignorant as to what Christianity is about.

Because I'm hearing things about, I'm hearing the terms white supremacy and all kinds of things like that when it comes to Christian nationalism.

I'm like, well, no, then I guess I'm not a Christian national, if that's what that, that means.

But I mean, who wouldn't, as a Christian of course, want righteous laws, you know, who wouldn't want abortion to be obliterated?

And, and again, you know, gender being male and female only and God's definition of marriage, of course, you know, we all want that as Christians.

But I, I, and I guess maybe Christian nationalism, the way it looks to be, would almost kind of be like a form of political idolatry at this point where some carry that out.

Interesting observation.

Yeah, for some, I think you might, you might be right.

All right, so let's, and I don't, I'm going to just put some things out for whoever wants to answer.

Raise your hand and I'll, I'll call on you.

Just so that, because we're not going to all be able to answer all, all the questions because there's so much in this.

We'd be here for about eight hours, especially with the extended version.

But if anyone wants to tackle a question, I mean, a lot of what's behind this, the Christian nationalism and what the CNN was trying to do, it's, it's the, the relationship between Christians and civil government.

And I'm, I'm being careful not to say the church because we would say we, you know, I think that we hold the separation of church and state the way that it was originally meant by Jefferson being that the state will not interfere with the church, which is exactly what they've been doing for decades now.

Right.

Trying to restrict the church.

But they want the church out of government and out of society.

When they say separation church and state.

But anyone who, who wants to tackle, I mean, what should be the proper role for the Christian, you know, for, for, you know, as far as government and our views that we should have.

I mean, should we be as either Eva Rebecca said, I mean, should we be trying to create a Christian nation?

Is that the goal for Christians?

Who wants to tackle that one?

Go ahead, Derek.

So I first want to say like if, if anybody listening hasn't seen the interview, watch the whole thing because I think that, that the little clip that we did at the beginning, it felt more like a hit piece on.

Oh it was than, than the actual interview.

I thought the actual interview.

The.

I watched like half or a little more than half of the 30 minute interview.

I thought that was a little better conducted than, than the, the splice together.

Let me say this Derek, if anyone wants, I can, I can send them a link to the extended version, the hour and 16 minutes so you get the full context.

Because what you'll see even in the 30 minute one is she was trying to get him to answer specific ways and was not happy that he was not doing that.

And yeah, well.

And he handled it really well.

I was impressed with the way he handled the, the questions being tossed at him.

As far as the question of, you know, what's our role?

I think, I mean, I think Jesus said it, you know, like give to Caesar.

What is Caesar's.

I think that we need to play the part in the specific context that we're in.

So us in the United States, we have a certain way we go about doing things that, you know, voting and, and you know, trying to do it in that, in that way there's a certain structure.

And so as far as like.

Our.

Role in that is to go through the proper means to change things for the betterment of all people because the, the truth of the matter is becoming more like Christ or following his commands is better for all people, whether they believe, believe in him or not.

It just, it makes life better in general.

So I would say like pushing, pushing for laws and such that, that are more aligned with Scripture is our, is our role, is our job.

But it's not our job to rise up an army and overthrow the government in that manner.

And I would say that in most cases that would not be the case.

There's A certain way of going about life that Jesus did in his time and the way he taught his disciples.

And I would say that we are to mimic that and love people regardless of our political situation.

So that would be my, my take on it.

And I'll say when you watch the longer the extended interview, she was definitely trying to get him to make it sound like he wants to take up arms and overthrow the government.

And he was said over and over.

And one thing he was good at, I will admit this, he was good at this.

I see Trump does this.

He wasn't giving them the sound bites.

He would agree and then clarify and, and he'd clarify kind of quickly so that you could tell it was clipped if, if they try cutting him off.

But he would, he would say yes, he wants a Christian nation.

And then right after that he would say but it's done through the Gospel.

And, and that's the difference.

When they hear Christian nation, I think they think government overthrow, take over the country using any means because that's what the left is doing.

Right.

So that, that's their mindset.

I don't think in all fairness, like it's been used that way in the past.

I mean we can't, we can't dismiss what the Catholic Church did in the Crusades and we can't dismiss the, the way people have tried to overthrow things in the name of the Christian God.

That wasn't right.

You know, it's, it's not, it's not a one time incident, you know, and it's not, it's not something that's completely foreign by any stretch of the imagination.

But I think that it's our responsibility to, to be just like what he said, you know, like with it's the gospel.

Like we need to retrain people and explain to people that that's not the right way and we need to be quick to denounce it whenever it is being done in an improper manner.

And I think that will go a long way regardless of the views of end times such I think it'll go a long way in, in our world today with, with talking with people.

Yeah.

And if you do watch the extended one he, he actually brings up because there's lots of debate over whether this, whether America was really a Christian nation with it founded on Christian principles.

And he brought he to your point.

He said we were because we were founded by England and, and there was a state church.

We separated from that.

Eve, your thoughts?

Yeah, I think that there, one of the points he made I thought was very Good was he made.

When she said, you want to make it a Christian theocracy?

He was, well, all nations are theocracies.

It just depends on which term which you, what you mean by Theo.

And I think that was a good point because a lot of people think of the U.S. you know, that, you know, you have to, it has to be the civil government has to be secular, it has to be non religious, and it has to be neutral.

But according to scripture, we know there is no position that is neutral, that you're either for God or you're against him.

Your God is either the real God, a fake God, or it's putting man on the pedestal of God.

And right now our culture is putting man on that pedestal.

And so, you know, it really is a matter of which Theo, you know, the nation is following.

So there are some aspects of, you know, his position that I kind of want to agree with and I agree with Derek about, you know, our responsibility as citizens of a, of a representational republic that we should vote our conscience and, and vote our morals and pray to our Savior and our God to influence the hearts and minds of the people in control of our country and that we want to see morals and ethics and that kind of thing at the very top of government.

But I think in the long run, as Christians, we do have to remember that the real thing we should be praying for is the changing of hearts and minds, the revival of the people, and not necessarily dictators dictating from the top how people should behave, but letting the Holy Spirit be active in people's lives, actually influencing their conscience.

Yes.

And I definitely want to get back to the Islam, because that is real interesting dialogue with that.

And because to your point that you were making, he's saying, hey, if I'm in a Muslim country, I'd expect to live under their law.

I don't know that she was ready for that, but there's a little bit more I'd like to dig into with that in a bit, but staying along with this, I mean, a big part of this.

And you know, Derek, you mentioned.

Well, I think both of you might mention that theocracy, right?

So a theocracy would be the, the way Israel was before they had kings, right, Where God was the king, God is the leader.

He's giving the instruction through his word, and that's the law.

And so when we look at a theocracy, we talk about theonomy, if you hear that term.

I do, I, I do have an issue with the way some people use it because they'll say, well, isn't God's law the best?

Shouldn't we take God's law referring to the Old Testament and apply it to America?

That would, in my mind, that's like saying, let's take laws of India and apply it to America.

Right?

It's.

Those were laws for a nation.

Now, I know I might get myself in trouble with some of depending on your view of Israel, but I think that those laws were for the nation of Israel.

They're not.

They weren't for Gentiles.

They weren't for us today.

They were for that nation.

So I don't know that I would agree that we take all of the Old Testament law and, and apply that.

And actually, I don't know anyone's actually saying all of it because they don't want to keep kosher.

So either way, people are picking and choosing.

But, but it is the question of when we talk about a theocracy and theonomy, you know, we would, we would say ultimately God's the ultimate authority.

I think all of us would agree to that.

And so the question is, how do we in a government kind of submit under God's law?

Do we, do we try to get our, our government to submit to the law of God in his word, or do we see those as completely separate, that there's the word of God here and the word of the, the, the law of the state over there.

Who wants to tackle that one?

Boy, you guys are quiet.

Usually, Usually everyone's jumping all over each other and everyone's quiet.

I could just pick people.

Brandon, it looks like you're getting ready to say something, so you, you at least look like you're thinking.

Yeah, so I, I don't think there's a way for there to be secular law on one side and God's law on the other side in a way that as a Christian, I could hold both of those as valid viewpoints.

I think whatever laws I'm going to agree with, whatever laws are going to be put forward by the people in charge are going to be based on a worldview.

Again, kind of was mentioned.

There's going to be somebody in charge.

There's a Theo in charge of every government.

They're all theocracies.

It's just who's going to be the top, the top person or top being.

And for the Christian worldview, obviously it's going to be God.

And so I don't know if there's a way for me to hold like, well, that's the secular law.

And this is God's law and they're both valid in what they offer.

But I'm just going to agree more with God's law.

The worldview that brings forth the secular laws is going to be devoid of truth.

It's going to be insufficient to bring forth good laws.

Any laws that happen to come from a so called secular government society, whatever.

If they are good laws, it's going to.

Because they have stolen something from the Christian worldview understanding on that, whether they recognize it or not.

And so for me it's, that's where I think, again, I wouldn't use the term Christian nationalist necessarily for myself, just because the baggage comes with it.

But that's where I think I could agree if it's a very broad term in the sense of I think our laws should be based on God's laws.

And you mentioned like Old Testament law.

Yeah, I don't know of anybody that's saying, okay, we're going to go down, we're going to list them all and these 600 or however many there were, we're going to use these.

Exactly.

I think it was the guys over at Apologia Radio.

Only Foodmates listen their podcast or any of that.

It's Jeff Durbin and some of those guys in one of his deals he was talking about there was an Old Testament law that they had to put railings across the top of their house so that if anybody falls off of it, they're held responsible because they don't have railing to keep people on the roof of their house.

And he basically was saying, well, that doesn't make sense in the American context because we don't do anything on the roof of our homes.

But the concept or the principle behind it would be like putting a railing around a pool or something where you have responsibility to put certain safeguards in place to take care of your neighbor when they're on your property or extra your house.

And so I think in that aspect I, I would support, you know, God's laws being the foundation for all, all of our laws as long as there was that principled aspect.

Because some of it's just not going to make sense being just transposed from ancient Israel to modern day America.

But I think the principles themselves is what is true about them.

And so that's where, yeah, that's where I would support, you know, like a God's law should be the foundation for our laws if we want them to be good and righteous and, and proper.

Come on.

We all know that the theonomists say that they Want God's law up until they realize they have to give up bacon.

All right.

Yeah, I'm not for that.

If I be a Christian nationalist, I have to get bacon, then I'm, I'm.

Off the train real quick, so.

All right.

A big part of this.

And, and I, I think that it was interesting how Doug Wilson had done this.

He, he brought it back to the founding of the nation because this really is the, the central question, right?

It's the foundation is this, was this a Christian nation?

And it was interesting.

He, he said he, he thinks he could hold himself, you know, with original documentation to debate anybody on it.

I would love to see that debate.

Maybe CNN will play that.

No, maybe not.

They wouldn't want to hear the other side, have, have Doug Wilson's side be heard.

So, so let me just ask this.

Do you guys think that we were, that we were founded as a Christian nation?

And if so, what does that mean?

Or, or were we not?

And then why.

So, I mean, was the, was America a Christian nation historically?

You're saying no, Derek?

Yeah, I would, I would say no, we weren't.

We may have been a, there may have been a large number of Christians that started the nation, but I wouldn't say that we were a Christian nation by any stretch of the imagination.

I think that there was to some degree, even though they wanted the morality that came from Christianity to be, to be solid in our structure, I think that they also wanted the freedom to allow people to have their own perspective.

And so it wasn't forced because even, even to be honest with you, I mean, that's what, that's what free will is.

And we could get into the whole Calvinism versus Arminianism into that whole mess.

But, but that's the whole free will aspect of it is that God wanted us to have, have the choice to, to love him, because that, that means more.

If you're forced to love somebody, you're forced to do something, it doesn't mean as much.

And so I honestly, as far as a Christian nation goes and our founding, I don't think so, but I do think that the founders did put a lot of Christian moral value into the structure of our creation of our nation.

Well, Eve, I think we just found the topic for next month.

Calvinism versus Arminianism.

I don't know if we've done that one.

We have talked about aspects of aspects before.

You should just go for it.

I would actually disagree.

I think our founders, for the most part, were founding us based on a Christian worldview.

And I think that a lot of what they built into the Constitution and into our founding documents was about making Christianity and a Christian worldview dominant in, in the aspect of the country.

But I also agree with Derek that they didn't intend for it to be a forced theocracy.

They did not want everybody to be forced to be a Christian and they wanted to basically make it more of, because most of them were seeing what they had come out of the, the other governments that they had fled to come to states and found.

What they wanted was freedom to believe and to practice the faith the way they wanted to practice it.

They didn't want to be dictated to by a government.

And so they were trying to create a government that allowed Christians to worship freely.

And in order to do that they had to allow pretty much everybody to worship freely.

And so I think that that was their intent.

I don't think if you looked at the original writings and I don't think any of them really were thinking about any other faiths other than Christianity, but they wanted the Christian tent to be a very wide one and, and to allow a freedom to follow your faith without a government telling you that you were wrong or restricting the way that you could go to church.

And so I think there were aspects of the way they founded our country that was definitely Christ, but they had to found it in a secular way in order to allow the, the big tent freedom of, of religion.

And, and that obviously sowed the seeds for a more secular government, if any of that makes sense.

I would say we definitely at a minimum had a heavy Christian influence because you even saw deists who would, who would not be Christian like Jefferson and Franklin who used, I mean they spoke more Bible than most Christians do today.

That tells you what the culture was like, that they had to fit in, they had to know the Bible and, and speak the Bible and they wouldn't have held to the positions of the Bible.

And I, I actually personally believe the reason we give so much attention in our country right now to the two most anti Christian in our founding government, Franklin and Jefferson.

We give them way more attention than anyone else.

I mean we credit Jefferson as if he wrote the founding documents when it was really Adams of devout Christian.

So, but, but I think they want that, they want to push that secularism and push the notion that, that we really weren't influenced or even built upon Christian values or a Christian nation.

So I, I think it, it, you know, like I said in the extended version, Wilson did a good job of explaining that we, we absolutely were founded as a Christian nation, if you.

In the sense that the UK founded the country and there was a state religion.

Right.

And so under Mary, many of the Protestants fled and came to America to, to avoid the, you know, her, her bloody reign.

And so, yeah, the, the, the whole reason so many came to America early on was for religious reasons.

And one thing I think is hard for people is when people get in these discussions, they're thinking in 21st century and not the 1600s, 1700s.

I think the reason are, you know, like she brought up a thing in the longer interview where she and Wilson were talking about, you know, well, God's not mentioned in some of the founding documents.

He didn't need to be, I think, because I think Christianity, you know, was so persuasive, prevalent throughout the, the culture that everybody understood Christianity.

Islam was not.

I mean, this will.

Sorry to Barack Obama who wanted to promote that Muslims really made America.

Islam wasn't very prevalent here in America nor was Judaism.

So it really was the, the Protestant Christians and the, the, the Dutch and, and other Puritans who came to America that really had the major impact.

And you see it in their writings.

They didn't have to explicitly say this is a Christian nation because it took it for granted, in my opinion.

So, so let's.

I think Derek, Derek is gonna probably need to leave here.

So, Derek, do you have anything you want to say before you, before you leave?

I just, I don't disagree with what you guys are saying.

I definitely think that, that we have a skewed view of the past and I would argue that.

That.

But we have a very skewed view of even biblical past.

The passing of time is something we can't conceptualize easily in our day and age.

That I think that are even just a couple hundred years ago they were able to do better.

I, I agree 100 with what you guys are saying on it.

I still wouldn't necessarily call it that, that Christian nation necessarily because of the freedom thereof.

I think that, that they can base all of the things on Christian values because they're true regardless of what, what, what you believe.

You know what I mean?

Like where you're at, they are, they are true to Christianity regardless of what context.

So.

But yeah, and I think once again, I think that the, the longer interview is.

Is way better said than.

Than what it was.

And I think that.

I think that she was a little more fair in her questioning, even though she did have an angle.

I just want to say that like, I think that she did try to Qualify things.

And he snapped back.

But it was, it seemed peaceful, at least in the 37 minute whatever one that I watch.

So.

But I do appreciate you guys letting me, let me join you all and check out the truth response if you get a opportunity.

All right, well, Derek, thanks for coming in.

Let's get more pointed.

Since it was Doug Wilson, I think a big part of his views on Christian nationalism and some of the other things he brought up is his end time views, his post millennial views.

So I'll toss this out to Rebecca because she's been quiet too long.

So how should our whether post millennial, pre millennial amillennial, how much should we see that influencing the way we view law, civil government, things like that, our culture, how to engage with culture, how does our end times view affect it?

It.

Because clearly his post millennialism is a big part of why he holds the views he's, he holds to.

What do you think, Rebecca?

Yeah, because if I'm correct, they said that he said that they were looking to bring about the return of Jesus Christ.

And yeah, when I heard he was post millennial, right away I was like, well, that, that I don't agree with because I don't feel in any way, shape or form that we Christians are not, you know, we're sinners, but we can't bring about a perfect righteous society.

We just, we can't.

And that's, I mean the Bible's clear about that.

That's not going to happen until Jesus returns and he is ruling from Jerusalem.

You know, that's human beings are not going to be able to, to do that.

Only, only Jesus can.

So it definitely would affect your, your thinking when it comes to Christian nationalism, I suppose because you think, if you think you have that kind of power to bring that about, I guess you're going to be very active in trying to bring about, you know, bring that about.

So I have, I have definitely seen where his post millennial theology does, I think does come into play with this.

Okay, so you, you'd be premillennial.

So let me, let me push back a bit and say from a, from Doug Wilson perspective, right, with his post millennialism, he might push back and say, well, pre millennialists and I've heard this enough times, I know this, I don't know if he would say it, but others have that pre millennials, because they just figure, hey, we're going to be raptured, therefore we're not to be involved in, in culture.

We don't get involved, we don't try to do anything as a pre millennialist.

Do you see that, that, that pre millennialists, how do they engage with, do, do they engage politically or with culture?

What do you, what do you think?

Yeah, you do hear that a lot.

That we're pretty much apathetic to things.

You know, they also say that people that have the pre millennial view aren't going to go out and worry about winning souls, you know, because they're good to go.

So they're not worried so much.

And that's just not true.

I mean it's not true from my perspective or anyone I go to church with who have the same, you know, views that I do as far as being pre millennial.

And I'm involved as a pre millennial millennialist.

I'm involved in, in government and things like that to an extent.

I would like to see righteous laws, laws that go along with God's laws.

And I don't think most people who hold to the pre millennial view sit back and put their feet up and just let things, you know, come what may kind of attitude at all.

I think that's false.

No, Melissa, I'm, I'm not sure.

I think you might be Amil, would you be on mill?

I'm still researching.

So today, today you're sort of, so from a sort of AMEL position.

I mean how, how would, how do you think an AMEL position would affect the way and, and Brandon, I don't know your position, so maybe you're on mill and you want to answer it more.

But how, how, how in a mill position would we see there are interaction with culture?

Do we, do we just go oh well hey, you know it's, it's Christ is reigning in heaven and that's where we're gonna go or do we, do we engage with the culture.

We def.

I think as coming to know more about amillennialism in the last, I'd say maybe five years.

I would say I feel like I desired to be more involved than I did yes when I was pre male, but there were other things around that I was under some other false teachings that had an effect.

So I don't think it's just your eschatology into determining how involved in politics you get or in changing society.

I think definitely that people who take an all male stance are deaf.

In fact, I think some of the most body Bakam I think of, I'm pretty sure he's all male.

At least I've heard his revelation study and believe that he's.

And he's heavily involved in society.

And that's where I want to say like this kind of idea that unless you're post mill, you're not so involved.

Like say for me example, I may not be involved in civil things such as politics and things like that, even though I do work for the voting in our area, I do the voting stance in our area.

But I make my contribution as a mother, as a wife and raising up good citizens and teaching them good morals and how to obey those in authority and yet also stand up for God's righteousness and justice and his word.

So I think another thing all millennials understand is that tribulation happens in all sorts of nations.

You see there.

I mean think of North Korea, they're going through tribulation now, and people in Russia and of course those in the Islamic states and the Christians there going under immense tribulation and yet they're faithful.

I think that's where I disagree.

Like if I wanted to comment on your last question to Rebecca about the involvement or the post male issue is that I think post melt has a tendency to take our, our, our faith in what we are to hope in.

As scripture says, the return of Christ and his rule and actual physical reign versus I mean he does rule and reign over all things, but physically one day he will rule and reign over all things.

And that's our hope.

My hope is in that and then so if I become post male or those who do hold to a post.

But I think there's a tendency to kind of poo poo that hope and more focus it on the temporal.

And I think that has an effect on your faith and your trust in what's to come.

So yeah, and you're about talking and your theological ideas and opinions about tribulation and things like that.

So I think it has a lot to effect, which is why I kind of feel like I'm more millennial right now.

Now, two years from now I could be post or premal.

Well, see, you just gave a great reason to be premill.

It takes five years to study Amil.

Pre mill is very simple.

You know.

I was premal.

Oh yeah.

I was the pre mill.

The left behind.

Yeah.

See, you're all confused.

You're just confused.

Yes, I am.

Yes, I am.

I will, I will own that.

And I would love to.

I am still also trying to learn like real.

Well, let's, let's look at.

You mentioned something about pan out in.

The end regardless of what we believe.

Yeah.

So you, you mentioned the, the, the gender issue that came up in this, in this discussion a lot.

I, I personally think, I think that when you look, I mean, Wolf Blitzer wasn't the one doing the interview.

I think they purposely wanted a woman to do this interview so that they could have the discussion on gender roles.

Knowing that at some point, I think she was ready to just say, well, I'm a mother and I'm working.

Do you have an issue with that?

And I think she fully expected him to say yes because she doesn't understand the difference he was making in the gender roles that we have within a family and within the church.

So let's, let's get into that.

One thing I'm going to say, one comment I thought of when watching it, it was she, she brings up the website for his church and shows it's all men.

As if in, in the whole, the whole way she's speaking, it's like, well, there's something wrong.

Like it's, it was like she's trying to get her audience, who's going to be more liberal, to say, oh, look at this guy.

He wants us to go back into the dark ages and go back to, you know, something that was only in our lifetime.

I mean, he mentioned like, when it came to homosexuality, it wasn't all that long ago.

You know, it was Obama, he was president not all that long ago.

And when homosexuality was outlawed in the state, in this, in the states.

So these things that they're pushing are relatively new and they, they wanted to make the issue over gender.

And I think the reason to do it was to make it look like he's out of touch.

But I'm going to say this.

They show a picture of his leadership at his church.

All men.

I don't know a single mosque that would have a woman in the leadership.

And they never criticize mosques or imams for having all male leadership in the UK Right now they're struggling with women in burkas who are spray painting works of art because it's showing flesh, because the person's not in a burqa.

Right.

And so, and, and that becomes the good example.

What I think Doug Wilson was addressing is that you can't have two competing worldviews making laws.

You can't do that with Islam and Christianity.

Secularism.

He used all three.

Right.

This is what's going on in England.

You have people moving into the country and wanting to change the, the foundation of the laws, the theo.

Of the theocracy.

So, Brandon, you've been quiet for a bit.

I'll ask you, you Know, the, The gender roles, this whole thing that he was talking about, the masculinity crisis.

I mean, she pointed out that in the longer version that Doug Wilson wrote a book, remember correctly, the title was It's Good to Be a Man.

And she, she says, what do you mean by that?

And he talks about the fact that the.

The culture doesn't want to teach men how to be men.

They want men to be, you know, feminized and quiet and not be men.

So from your perspective, are.

Are there differences within the genders?

Are we completely.

I mean, you heard how she was wording it, like, as if husband and wife have to be completely equal in every way.

Do you think that that argument that she had is flawed?

Do you think Doug Wilson was right in his analysis there?

Yeah, I think Doug Wilson's right.

And what he's.

I mean, he's representing a biblical point of view on the roles of gender.

I mean, we were created, designed differently by God to fulfill different roles.

It's not.

I think she uses the term to ask a lot, like, if men and women are equal.

And I don't know if that's a. I understand why she.

The reporter asks, asks it that way, but I'm not sure that's the best way to look at it.

Because, yes, we're equal.

Like, I don't see myself as better than my wife or my sisters or my mother in that aspect of, you know, we're human beings that need God's grace, and we're saved by that grace.

And Christ is king and Lord.

But there's just different rules.

There's things like, I think just in my own life, my.

The bathroom ceiling in my bathroom needed to be repainted.

Well, I'm the one on the ladder with the paint bucket getting pain in my eye.

You know, that's.

That's a role that I fulfilled for my wife.

Could she have done it?

Yeah, she could have done it.

Probably done maybe a better job than me, even.

But if it comes to something that, like, if I.

If somebody's cleaning the gutters, I'm the one on the roof, 30ft in the air, digging the junk out of the gutters.

Because if somebody's going to fall off a ladder, it's going to be me, not my wife.

Like, there's just.

There's just natural roles that I think God has designed for us.

And I, as.

As a man, you know, I agree with some of what he said about, like, women in combat rules and things like that.

It's not that I used to be a guard at a prison, at a state prison.

And there were some female officers and they were good officers, like there was nothing against them.

But there's just.

To me, if you're going to be in a situation where somebody could potentially be injured, I would just prefer men to fulfill those roles over women.

And I think it's because it's how we're designed to be protectors.

And that's the role I take with my family and my wife.

You know, I'm the one that's going to be the protector of my home.

Could my wife protect our.

My son?

Well, yeah, of course she would.

And when they're out together, she's going to very well.

But at the end of the day, if we're all there together, it's.

It's my role to like when we're walking down the street on the sidewalk, I try to.

Don't always think of it.

I put them on the inside of the sidewalk and I walk next to the street.

Street.

So if a car veers off the road, you know, hopefully they just hit the in person, which is me.

There's just normal things that I think make sense in the way that we're designed and, and there's things that women do that, that my wife does as far as nurturing and caring for our son and being.

He talks about being like the CEO of the household.

My wife does a lot of things that if she didn't help me do them or didn't take care of them, I might be homeless at the end of the day or be have a beanbag chair and like a TV tray and that was.

Would be it.

But she manages the home to where we can welcome people in and it's something we can be hospitable to others.

So it's just a complimentary role.

And that's why we're designed that way.

You talk about marriage.

That's why marriage doesn't work unless it's a man and a woman.

Because we're two pieces of a puzzle that fit together designed by God.

If you have two of the same pieces, they don't fit together the way they're designed to.

And so I think he answered the question and very well.

And I think you're right.

I think it was a I gotcha thing.

As a woman with a career, she's asking him, well, do you see me as your equal?

And I think he handled it very well, not giving her the gotcha moment, but also explaining what he meant of these are just natural, normal designed roles.

That we have, that God made us that way to complement one another and to build a society.

You know, like Melissa talked about part of her building up the next generation of being a wife and a mother.

Like, she's taking care of these souls, as Doug Wilson puts it, so that her children and her husband go into the world and create a more Christlike world.

Like, that's.

She sees that as part of her role.

And I can promise you, as a woman, she can do that better than I could as a man to be able to connect with other people on that soul to soul level.

She can do that better than I could because that is how God designed her and designed women to fulfill that need in our society.

So it's just a difference.

It's not an equal or better than.

It's just a different role that they have.

Yeah, it was very interesting when they played in the thing, the clip where you're, it made it sound like he's saying, oh, the only thing women are good for is producing babies.

But when you listen to the full clip, he, he presents a very high view of women.

No, they have three or four eternal souls to be nurturing and taking care.

Like he basically was saying, being a mother is a higher thing.

Like, why would you want to lower yourself to putting your kids in daycare so that you can go get a job?

It is really interesting because if you heard what he actually said, he had a very high view of the role of a mother.

And you know, CNN reporter didn't want to hear that because they're, they're in a culture where, no, the woman has to do everything a man could do.

But he brought out very well the fact that she works at cnn and though she may be equal with her male counterparts, she has a boss and he has a different role and she has to listen to what he says because he's the boss, not because he's not equal as a human being.

But there's a difference between humans being equal as one another and having different roles.

And, and they definitely want to hone in on this because they did a bunch of other interviews with different people to try to hammer that down.

And you know, even to the point of saying, oh, they want to prevent women from voting.

And, and I did listen to Fight Laugh Feast when Toby was on.

He's one of the co host of that podcast.

And, and he was saying how they just, they took it out of context.

I, you know, we didn't, we don't have the full thing there of what they were saying.

So we always have to keep in mind that they're editing things down.

Like if you watch the full hour, 15 minute extended version and then you watch that short one, you see that there's a lot more context that that's given there.

And it's, he did make a really, he made a good point with the, the issue of roles.

I, I will admit in that short clip that we played, there is one thing I find very funny.

Do you notice how they were talking about, and they did this in the 30 minute one as well.

They're talking about the fact that he doesn't allow men in leadership.

And he, you know, the men are, you know, they, they just want, you know, men leading and women just being in the background and they're trying to promote all that.

Right.

And now they wanted to shift into the, the fact that Pete Hestraff is attending one of the, these churches and the way they're trying to say, like with the Trump administration, the Christians are taking over.

And I don't think they thought this one through.

And I don't know if any of you picked up on this, but did you pick up or notice the fact that they went from he's all against women's in leadership and then they went to Paula White being in charge or heading up the faith group within the administration, like, huh, I don't think Doug Wilson would be in favor of that.

But, but they made it sound like he's working with Paula White, as if she's like leading him in this charge to, you know, bring about Christian Nation.

And Paula White would have a very different view of Doug Wilson on many issues, including women's role in the church or the gospel or how to make an influence, you know, what kind of impact we should be having on the culture.

So I just thought that was very funny.

Like they didn't figure they want to transition and they missed the point that they went from one where they're like, like he's, he's against all women too.

He's following a woman.

I thought that was pretty entertaining.

But let's, I mean, a big part of it, what they wanted was this, you know, the issue of, you know, the fact that Pete Hestra is attending this church, that there's prayer meetings, there's Bible studies going on.

And again, they switched to that while earlier saying that because when they're talking about the founding of the nation and the extended version, at least Doug Wilson was, was pointing out that these were Christian men.

And you can't separate your, the core values, your ultimate values that, that guide you from everything you do.

And they, they're gonna, they then go into trying to say, well, that here you have Christians like a Pete Hestraf who should just put his Christianity on the side when he's in government.

So the, the question I have is what should be our role then?

Like, like if we're a Christian and we're asked to be in a position like that, does our current law or does the Bible either one teach us that we should separate ourselves, our Christian values from how we lead?

I'm gonna ask this one of Eve first.

I want, I, I want everyone to answer this one.

Well, I find it interesting that when Biden was president they kept making a point that he went to church.

And whenever it's a Democrat who holds their very loose and very legal, a very liberal, liberal views of Christianity, they're allowed to put them forward as being Christians and they go to church and all this kind of stuff.

What they really don't want.

I don't think they mind people going to church or being publicly seen going to church.

I think they are.

As long as you don't believe it.

As long as they don't believe it.

Right.

They're not actually living in, out in the day to day part of their life or it, it has probably a lot to do with what church they go to and, and what they feel like that church is, stands for in I guess the greater scheme of their social agenda.

So yeah, it's not whether or not you go to church or whether or not you're a public Christian, it's what kind of Christian and, and how much that impacts your belief system in, in regards to what the government should be doing in people's lives.

And so if it goes back to the double standard that is always part of our, our governmental system now where they judge the people on one side one way and the people on the other side a completely different way.

They don't apply the same standards on both sides.

But regardless, I think that my position on being a Christian anything is.

I.

Kind of, I gotten on this soapbox when I was in college about being a Christian author.

I think too often we think of being a Christian something like being a Christian author is that we're writing for Christians.

And I honestly feel like we need more Christians who are living that Christianity out into the secular world instead of keeping it preaching to the choir.

Like if you're going to be an author, write books that non Christians will read.

And then you become a witness to the non Christians assuming that you're writing on a topic outside of Christianity or our theology or doctrine or whatever.

But like, if you're a fiction writer, write a fiction book that a non Christian will pick up and read and subtly witness to them in the story instead of being preachers and expecting only Christians to read it.

And I think that that applies to our role in our, in our local and state and federal government and that we are Christians and we are supposed to be in the world.

We're supposed to be seen by the world, and we're supposed to be seen by the world as Christians.

We're supposed to be representing Christ in everything we do.

And if we're going to hold government, then that means we're representing Christ in the way that we hold office in government.

And, and we don't set that aside.

And if we have to set it aside to be elected in a democratic system, then you obviously are living in a society that isn't going to accept you as a Christian and you may not ever get elected.

But I think that living out Christ in the way that he presented himself to the world is going to make us desirable to the world because we hold a moral position and an ethical position and above all else, a loving position that the world is going to crave.

At the same time, we do know from Scripture that the world is always going to hate us because they hate Christ.

And so there is that, that struggle between what we want as Christians and what the world wants against Christianity.

So, yeah, sum it up.

I think if we're going to be in government and we are going to be Christians, then we have to be Christians in government.

Rebecca, you're up next.

I mean, how can we, can we separate our Christian values, our Christian authority from the way we, we govern our life?

No, I don't believe so at all.

And sometimes you hear people say, well, there's the secular, there's, there's the sacred.

But I mean, it's all sacred as a Christian, no matter whether you're at home, whether you're a church, or, you.

Know.

Leading a job in, in government.

I think that, I think the reporter at one point, I think she said something about what did she say?

So it's not enough to just mind your own business.

I think she said that to him and he said, well, no, you know, minding your own business isn't enough.

And when we know it's not.

I mean, you know, biblically, as Christians, we need to live a holy life in word.

We need to live it.

Indeed, Paul didn't mind his own Business.

He.

He evangelized thousands.

He didn't just do it by living a quiet Christian life.

He went into temples and he was in the public square and he taught and he reasoned.

And.

And Jesus himself, you know, he.

He was out there sharing the gospel, speaking truth.

So as Christians, how we lead should definitely be in a way in which they know for sure that.

That we are.

Are Christians.

Does that mean, you know, demanding our own way?

No, but it certainly means sharing, you know, the good news of Jesus Christ and in government leadership, fighting for laws that will not dishonor God.

Yeah.

Nobatos.

I'm going to nitpick at you because you asked, can we?

Yes, we can.

We can.

And I think a lot of people do because.

Because of biblical illiteracy.

I think even some Christians are biblically illiterate, and by the grace of God over sanctification or through sanctification, they will grow out of it.

But ultimately, should we?

No, because Christ is Lord, and he's lord over my life.

He is Lord over this house.

He's Lord over my neighborhood.

And.

And because I have been indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

I don't think the Holy Spirit can lead somebody after they have knowledge and understanding what a biblical worldview is and, and things like that, and that Jesus is their Lord and what he's done, that they can't separate that from their life.

There's just no way the Spirit would lead somebody to separate.

So.

So as a new Christian, maybe you can.

But eventually the Spirit will lead them away from that and convict them.

I. I would.

I would hope.

All right, Brandon, you're.

You're last.

Yeah, it's an interesting question, I think, for a couple reasons.

One, it's generally only the secular side that say, hey, you need to leave your worldview behind when you come into government.

They don't leave their worldview behind when they step into these same roles they're dragging them with.

That's why they tell us, hey, don't check yours at the door.

Don't bring it with you.

And I think the other thing, you know, I do building maintenance.

I don't work in government.

I don't think that.

I don't.

Can't think of anything in my life that somebody said, hey, check your Christian worldview at the door when you come in to work on air conditioners or the freezer or the lights in the offices.

Like, I'm perfectly.

It's okay for me to bring my Christian worldview with me so that I am to work on time.

They can trust me to do a good job.

I'm going to be honest that they're totally fine me bringing my Christian beliefs and worldview with me when it's something that they think doesn't really affect them in that aspect.

So it's interesting that it's, hey, it's only government type jobs or positions of power that they think you should check your worldview view.

And it seems to only basically be the Christian worldview.

Maybe sometimes it's just religious worldviews in general if they get broad enough.

But generally it's, you need to leave your Christian worldview behind.

And again I kind of actually mentioned here I don't think it's possible, I think maybe early on people can try to separate those two things out.

But we're going to make decisions, we're going to support policies, we're going to our work ethic.

All that stuff is going to be based on what we believe.

And to try to separate that out and say, okay, I believe that God has designed men and women in certain ways to be compatible, to work together.

And so I'm going to check all that and say, yep, choose whatever gender you want.

I don't, that doesn't work that way.

People try it.

But there is real no way to check your worldview at the door when you come in to make these decisions because it's ingrained in who you are.

And so, and nobody else does it.

So why should we, you know, especially if we have the true worldview.

Yeah.

So this is, I think we're, I think there's a lot we've.

And maybe just targeted it in that sense that we agree with Doug Wilson's comments because he was really being attacked by maybe, maybe attacks too strong of word.

He was being baited, I think in by the, the reporter.

She was trying to get a narrative.

I think she kept trying different ways.

And the whole goal of it, I think was to make it seem like Christianity is out of touch that Christians want to take over the world.

And one of the things I thought was very interesting, I said I wanted to get back to this and that is his comments about Islam.

He said, you know, here he's, he wants a Christian nation, he wants a Christian world.

And he, he said that but he wouldn't go to a Muslim country expecting to change their laws to be Christian.

He would, he, he was saying he'd go and share the gospel.

And then as, as people become Christian, they would want the laws to change.

But there's a difference there, right?

Because Islam goes to countries to not just to convert to people to Islam, but they, they want to do it by getting the, the, the, the Sharia, the, the Muslim law in place to force everybody.

And so the very things I think she was trying to make it look like Doug Wilson and other Christians who take the name Christian nationalist or even those who don't like to say this is what they're doing, they're, they want to do is what Islam's actually doing.

And this is what Europe is struggling with now as they are being overrun.

And, and if you're don't know some of the, what's going on in the uk, I mean the Muslims are raping women and they're not being held to, to account because it, they're not violating Sharia.

And so Sharia is now taking over for UK law.

We have that here in America in, in certain areas where there's areas where the police won't go in because that's a, that's run by the Muslims.

And this is, this becomes the issue that they, they want to attribute to us Christians what the Muslims actually do while they support the Muslims.

And I think it's an, it's, it's interesting that he had said he wouldn't go, he wouldn't expect to change.

Now here's, here's the thing that where I thought and, and I had fully admit I'm playing Monday night, you know, quarter quarterback or whatever, whatever the term is, where you watch the game afterwards and get to point out everything that could have been done better.

Right.

I will admit that when in that role, even though Doug's a very smart individual, you don't think of everything you could have said when someone says something.

And so I'm not saying this is a criticism to Doug Wilson because I think he handled himself well.

It's just afterwards, hey, we can learn from it.

What could we have done?

And I always look at these things to learn from and I think he could have pushed on her harder to say, would you be okay with moving to a Muslim country and wearing a burka, not changing any of the laws.

And the reason being is if she says okay to that, the flip then is then why do you want to change the laws in America?

Because the laws he brought up about the sodomy laws, the laws for homosexuality and transgenders, those are all recent things.

Those are things that the left has been trying to change.

Right.

I think if he could have gotten her to say, well, she wouldn't want to change other countries laws and yet she's promoting the changing of the laws here because she doesn't like the Christian values that they're based on.

Right.

So I, I kind of think that was one thing that he could have, he could have pushed harder, maybe, and that.

So I'm saying it to say, what can we learn from it?

And that's going to be my question to each of you is from that interview, what can we learn?

I'm always trying to look at that and say, okay, if I get put in this position, because what the media is doing is they're doing a dog whistle to let everyone else know, hey, these are the arguments you should be using.

So we're going to get these different arguments that were in this interview.

And so how can we answer it?

And so I was really thinking, I, that I, I think I would go that route.

I would see whether they would expect.

And I would first put it on me.

Would you expect me to try to push Christianity if I move to Saudi Arabia, or should I accept the Muslim law that's there?

And I think she would have said that as a Christian, I should accept the Muslim law that's there without realizing once she says that, okay, but this country was formed on Christian values, and you want to change those.

I mean, even if you think about it historically, the, the issue of abortion is a relatively new thing.

I mean, that was within my lifetime.

So it's, it's hard to, for folks like, you know, like Derek had said, it's hard to kind of put ourselves in a different context historically.

I mean, I, I know I, I think there may only be one or two of us here that can remember when color TVs came out and.

Well, yeah, the rest of you just are not even old enough because you don't know what it was like with just a black and white tv.

So you may not even remember what it's like to have a tube television with, with vacuums.

Right.

So what for each one of you, the, the final question I have is what could you learn from this?

What was your takeaway from his, his interview?

And, and then you can add on to that anything else that you've wanted to say, but I didn't ask the question.

So I'll start with.

I'm just going to go in the order that we're on the, on the camera.

So, Eve, I'll start with you.

Oh, what could I have learned?

For one thing, I, I would not get involved with an interview of, of that caliber.

I think Doug Wilson was very brave knowing where CNN sits in the culture and what they represent.

And he obviously knew going in that they were going to try and trap him.

I mean, he, he phrased his answers quite well and he knew, he knew what he was going to say and he stuck and he, he kept, he controlled the conversation quite well.

I don't think I would be able to do that.

So I, I think the lesson that I would take from what he said was be very wary who you're going to talk before you agree to something where that conversation is going to go and be very prepared and know what you believe and be able to speak from a very intellectual, intelligent and well documented position.

But at the same time, especially if you're representing Christianity as he was, make sure that you don't lay your Bible down, down, because I think that that's what they expect you to do.

They expect you to meet them on a secular plane with your arguments and you must always use the ultimate authority, which is, which is the Bible and don't, don't lay down your sword in any fight.

So I think the two main things that I would take away is if you're going to get involved in that kind of a situation, just be very wary of where it's going to go and be prepared.

The only other comments that I would have, you guys kind of skipped over the women thing without actually talking to the women in the group.

But.

Oh, sorry, it wasn't intentional.

And that's.

Fine because Melissa brought it up first.

Doug Wilson presented the case for complementarianism quite well and I, I don't disagree with most of what he said.

And you know, being a single woman holding a professional, living a professional life with no children, never being married, I can sort of see, I can sort of see where some women might have a problem with that position.

And I personally don't.

I'm, I'm the oddball, you know, single professional who doesn't vote liberal left.

And I don't identify with the liberal left.

And I always get mad when, you know, they lump me as a, lump me into the liberal left as a, just because I'm single and professional and all that kind of stuff.

But needless to say, I think, and he mentioned like the abolishing the amendment that allows women to vote and I knew when he actually said he agreed with that, that households should vote instead of everybody voting.

I've heard that position from a lot of, not just Christian, but the right exclusively because so many women vote emotionally and vote on the left.

And I actually kind of agree with that.

I would be willing to give up my right to vote if it meant that we got rid of so much of the emotional my body, my choice legalism that's going on in our country today, where women are just making their decisions politically in a very selfish way.

And if.

If abolishing an amendment and losing my right to vote means that we start getting back to, you know, the real reasons why we vote for politics and not selfishly, but for the good of the community and for the good of the country, I would.

I would gladly give up my right to vote.

And I think that's probably a very rare view from a woman's standpoint, but especially a single professional, because I wouldn't even represent a household, so my household would lose the vote.

But, yeah, I think that I agree with pretty much everything he said about women, which I. I think would probably get me blacklisted from some.

Some people.

Anyway, that was the only thing I wanted to.

To come in on that.

Okay, well, moving on to another woman.

Malbatos, you're next.

What.

What could I take away from the.

Interview or anything that you want to.

That you think we haven't covered?

Okay, so what I could take away from the interview, I think I kind of like agree with both.

Both of what you guys said.

Definitely.

I don't think I would ever put myself in that position.

And I most definitely understand that I am not as articulate as Doug Wilson or his daughters, who are very well articulate as well.

So.

But I do think, like, I would if I was put into that position just on the fly, I would ask questions.

I think I would have, like you said, put it back onto them and thinking about, well, you have this double standard that you.

One, one standard for the Christian and not the same standard for other religions.

And the same thing when it came to the men, women type of thing.

You have this standard or ideal of what equality means, and yet you still don't even.

You don't live it right.

Like he did.

He displayed that or argued for that very well when he made the argument about how she works under somebody with authority.

So, yeah, I think I would learn to ask more questions when dealing with somebody who's trying to pin me in the way that she was trying to pin Doug Wilson in the, in the interview.

I.

In regards to new conversations.

Yeah, I decided I will make the statement that I, I honestly did not.

I do not disagree with anything in that longer interview.

And he even.

Which I.

And I've watched Doug Wilson a lot.

I even read, you know, his daughter's books and follow his daughters.

There are some theological things I don't agree with, obviously, but he made.

One of the things I found really interesting was like she posed, what if you were during the Civil War?

What if.

Who would you be fighting for?

Right.

Which side, the north or the South?

And he said he'd be fighting for the South.

But he, he clarified that he would still be an abolitionist trying to point out that the Civil War was not just about slavery.

There was more to it.

And so I found that really fascinating.

And you know, his kind of take on slavery and things like that.

I wish they had gone into a bit more of the difference between slavery and the Bible and what he identifies cattle.

How did he pronounce it?

Yeah, chattel slavery.

So, yeah, I wish I had gone into some of that and that would be a good topic to, I think, to discuss also, but.

Right.

There's so much in that interview.

It was, it was really good to see his, the way he handled it.

And he answered her.

I will say this.

He was, he laughed and giggled at times.

Like on times I would have been like offended and I would have been like, no.

Or looking at her like, no, I don't believe that.

But this, this.

And he's just like, yeah, I believe that this.

And clarified it even more.

So.

Yeah, I picked up on that too.

That was, it's interesting you mentioned that because he was, he came off as more light hearted and she, yeah, she, she, she wasn't willing to laugh or anything like that at it.

Yeah, any.

Anything else.

All right, so we'll move on to Brandon.

Yeah, I think, but one, I probably would not, not probably.

I would not do a interview with cnn.

I don't have the skill set or the expertise that he has and how he can articulate himself.

I would get Trudeau up and spit out and I would look horrible kind of like in here when I didn't even realize.

We didn't ask Melissa or Eva, Rebecca what they thought of that question.

That's exactly how I'd have egg on my face before it was even started.

And it would be terrible.

But I think from him, one thing that I picked up on the interview that from watching the like 8 minute trailer that you showed and like I'd seen that before and then watching the longer interview is I think one of the things he does really well as, as he articulates his point of view is he doesn't beat around the bush a lot or he doesn't have a lot of nuance.

He just says what he thinks.

Like upfront starts with that, and then maybe he adds more detail as he goes on, but he just answers the question directly and then fleshes it out.

Where I think a lot of people.

And I would probably get in trouble in the same respect, is I would.

I'd probably try to nuance it too much to start with, and that would leave all of these clips that they could pull out and make.

Yeah, make me say basically, whatever.

But he is.

Doug Wilson has a skill set that he's very good at.

Just.

This is what I think you're talking about, Melissa.

Like, he would kind of chuckle and say, yep, I believe that, and that means this.

And he would just lay it out.

And I think that took her.

Took the journalist off guard, because a lot of these gotcha questions that would have probably had answers that maybe I would have agreed with, could have been articulated by other people as these little clips.

They could have pulled out and been like, see, they want to do these terrible things, and they hate women, and they do all of that.

But the way he answers questions, they didn't really have the ability to do that too well.

I think it's because he just answers the question directly and then explains it.

And too often, I think people try to parse out too many different things to kind of ride the fence and not step on toes.

And that gets you in more trouble, I think, in the end, because you don't really ever get to what you're.

What you're trying to articulate, and he does a great job of that, so.

All right, Rebecca, you're.

You're up next.

Yeah, I was pretty impressed.

I. I had never heard of the man before.

Before this, but I was pretty impressed with his calm demeanor, his.

How articulate he was and that he did, you know, high.

He.

He held his own, and he definitely had no problem with being transparent.

You know, he was unashamedly transparent, which is good.

But I.

You had a really good point.

To have come back at her with some questions would have been really good.

You know, oftentimes when someone's trying to trap you, that's kind of a good way to make them answer some of the.

Some of the questions.

But my.

My thoughts after watching the interview were kind of.

But the first thought was, you know, I feel like this interview just goes.

It just goes all the way back to Trump because, well, that's what they're trying to do.

Pete, Hag, Seth and everything.

And so it's just another reason to get people fired up about the Trump administration and who was involved in it.

And who was involved in the administration, who they're involved with.

And so, you know, But I have to.

Eve had a good point about the voting.

I didn't think about that.

But all in all, I would personally still have to disagree as a woman about the voting only because I was thinking how there are many women who are heads of households.

They're widow, divorced, single, who I feel should have an opportunity because there are plenty of women out there who are grounded as well, but who is in office does have an effect on their family or their household.

So I did not agree where the men said that.

I mean, like I said, it's fine and dandy having discussing it as a household, but the households aren't all a mom and dad and children.

So I, I don't think it would be very fair to leave that segment of the population out as far as the women go.

But I just kept thinking too, when she was trying to insinuate that, well, especially when it came to Muslims, the religion of Islam that Christians will not coexist with, with Islam.

And, and actually, I see.

I feel like a lot of her questions and comments were really just ignorant, rooted in ignorance, you know, so he's not going to be violent, you know, so are women property?

I don't know.

Maybe she knows better, but I felt like she was kind of ignorant because people don't know what the Christian faith really is all about, and she certainly doesn't.

But the fact is there's truth and there's untruth.

And whether she believes it or realizes it or not, Christianity is based on absolute truth, the truth of God.

And so truth divides.

Islam is not based on truth.

And, and so you're not going to have any kind of coexisting, at least in, in that manner, because as I said, truth divides.

It always has, it always will, and it should.

That's why, that's why Christianity is the, is the religion that's attacked the most.

Like you said, they don't have a problem with the men's roles when it comes to Islam.

They don't question that.

I hadn't even thought about that before when you said that.

But, but when it comes to Christianity, there's a problem with it.

No.

And it all comes down and just.

It's an attack on truth.

Yeah, yeah.

And I guess my.

I, my final thoughts are the, the fact that, you know, I think they were trying to get a certain narrative out there.

I think Doug was very good in how he handled it.

I'll give one last point that we didn't touch on this at all, but, and I don't know any of the background to it, but they, there was something that she brought up about, you know, where she claimed he arranged a marriage with a pedophile or something.

Don't know what the history is.

He ends up, but he ends up just saying everything, Everything you've been hearing about, it's a lie now is it?

I don't know.

Right.

Because I don't know any of the details.

I don't know what they're referring to.

It was a really good way of handling it though.

Right.

He knows they're trying these different things and he wants to stay on the topic of what the Bible says.

She was trying desperately to sling mud and, and this may be a really good thing for us as, as Christians to think about just how he handled it.

Melissa mentioned he, he was, he was still light hearted.

He didn't get upset and defensive in raising his voice and things like that.

Even when she was like she was trying to kind of go after him in a broad sense with his view on women, things like that.

But whatever the issue was with that, it was, it seemed like more of a direct attack.

And his way of handling it was just to focus on the topic of discussion.

He didn't let her distract and move on to some other area.

And we have to remember that that's something else we can learn is when we, when we are talking with unbelievers, they're going to try any, to change the topic any way they can, to attack us any way they can.

Just stick to what the Bible says.

You know, I saw that that's what, what he seemed to do is to just focus in on, on the biblical views and explaining it to her.

And so that, that would be my final takeaway.

So I, that is, you know, we, we, we ended up doing this as someone, one of the podcasters suggested this.

So we, we went and watched the video.

I didn't know if we would be agreeing, disagreeing.

I didn't know anyone's view.

But I think that there were some helpful things we can learn from it.

And look, even though Trump may be president, the left hasn't gone away.

I mean the very people that wanted to outlaw Christianity are still there.

So give them another chance.

They'll, they'll do it next time, probably.

So, so it's time we, we do need to stand up against this culture.

We do need to stand up for biblical principles and, and maybe we need some men like that.

I mean, he, he was saying his church doubled during COVID And it's probably because we have such a lack of real, genuine leadership.

John MacArthur's church doubled, or not doubled, but increased.

I mean, they, they people want to gravitate toward where there's real leadership and people standing up against the world and standing for Christ.

And maybe we all need to learn from that and not shy away and not be too worried about how the world would view us, but more look at what Christ would have us to do.

So that would be my final comments.

And I'll just say that I hope that, I hope that you got a lot out of this, that this was a helpful episode.

Maybe you're Doug Wilson, Wilson lover.

Maybe you're a Doug Wilson hater.

Either way, there were some things we could learn as we go through.

And look at all that was here in this podcast, in this interview.

This is a ministry of striving for eternity.

So join us next time on another theology Throwdown next month.

And please do us a favor.

Share this with your friends, maybe those who like Doug or hate Doug, but share it with someone today.

See ya.