Ep. 231 - Hollywood Rallies For Baby Killing
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
167.31299
Summary
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a Hollywood actress tries to use God to justify abortion. It's as insane as you would expect. Also, should schools teach abstinence or safe sex? How about neither? That's my suggestion. And now the left is coming after Thomas Jefferson. We knew it would happen, and now it is. We'll talk about that as well today on The Matt Walsh show.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a Hollywood actress tries to use God to justify abortion.
00:00:05.340
It's as insane as you would expect. We'll talk about that. Also, should schools teach abstinence
00:00:11.160
or should they teach safe sex? How about neither? That's my suggestion. And now the left is coming
00:00:16.920
after Thomas Jefferson. We knew it would happen and now it is. We'll talk about that as well today
00:00:21.640
on the Matt Walsh Show. So this is exciting. I just happened to see that the band Green Day
00:00:31.500
is writing a book, apparently. You may remember Green Day from the 90s. They're apparently writing
00:00:36.820
a book called The Last of the American Girls and it's supposed to be an homage and handbook for women.
00:00:46.320
Now, how do you think that's going to go over? A handbook for women written by dudes. How do you
00:00:52.860
think people are going to respond to it? Why would a publisher sign off on an idea like that in this
00:00:57.880
day and age? But if publishers will sign off on that, then perhaps I too will also write a handbook
00:01:05.320
for women. And I expect it to be received very well. And it would just be a book of advice and
00:01:13.560
instructions, guidelines for women. That's all from me. And I think feminists would find it very
00:01:19.260
useful, I suspect. So be on the lookout for that. All right. A bunch of, speaking of feminists, a
00:01:25.800
bunch of Hollywood actors are having a humongous hissy fit because of the bill in Georgia that would
00:01:32.220
ban abortions once a heartbeat is detected. And the bill has not been signed yet, but these actors
00:01:40.020
are all pledging to boycott the state. A great, great chat tragedy for Georgia. If they lose these,
00:01:45.720
these people, Mark Hamill and Natalie Portman are the latest actors to sign off on it. And I am being
00:01:51.620
very generous to Mark Hamill by calling him an actor, because honestly, I, I, I, in fact,
00:02:00.660
just recently I tried to, I've never been a, I've never been a star Wars fan myself. And I'm not just
00:02:06.240
saying that now because Mark Hamill is a pro abortion wacko, although he is, and he's always
00:02:10.420
been that. Um, but I've never been a big star Wars fan. I, I don't see the big deal with,
00:02:17.460
with the whole series. Uh, I, I just don't, I don't, it's okay. I don't see it as some groundbreaking
00:02:25.400
thing that should, uh, elicit, uh, religious fervor out of us. But I tried recently to go back and give
00:02:34.260
it another shot. And I said, I'm gonna, you know, everyone loves star Wars. I must be missing
00:02:38.500
something. I tried to go back and watch the original movies and my Lord, I mean, the acting
00:02:45.620
is so terrible, especially on Mark Hamill's part. I can't, it's unwatchable to me. I don't know how
00:02:51.660
people do it. I guess you had to watch it for the first time, I guess, when you were very young. So
00:02:56.920
that you, uh, so that this sort of affection grows for it. And, uh, and so now you have that
00:03:02.940
nostalgia, which causes you to overlook just how, just how absolutely terrible the acting and the
00:03:08.540
writing is in pretty much all of these movies. Um, anyway, that's beside the point. So, uh, Mark
00:03:14.860
Hamill and Natalie Portman are, are the latest to join the protest. Um, Ben Stiller also is, uh,
00:03:20.620
protesting Deborah Messing, Minnie Driver, Alec Baldwin, um, Amy Schumer, Rosie O'Donnell,
00:03:27.060
Sean Penn, Brie Larson, Patricia Arquette, a, a literal murderer's row of people whose opinion
00:03:33.680
I couldn't care less about. Speaking of, although I got to say, I mean, when I found out, you know,
00:03:42.100
that Deborah Messing, uh, is, is, is against this bill, it really made me for a minute. I don't know
00:03:50.520
about these other people, but for a minute, I really did have to rethink my entire position
00:03:55.480
on abortion. I mean, because if Deborah Messing, I mean, this is Deborah Messing we're talking about
00:04:01.000
star of, uh, you know, um, some shows, I, you know, she's a great, huge star of a lot of
00:04:07.100
different, I mean, if she doesn't, if she's in favor of abortion, then there must be something
00:04:10.480
to it. Right. Um, so you've got all these people, but maybe the most irrelevant voice of
00:04:18.520
all is that of, um, Alyssa Milano, who is heading this backlash against Georgia. And she tweeted
00:04:25.120
something a couple of days ago, trying to find spiritual, um, religious, uh, justification.
00:04:32.360
It would seem for her quest to ensure that babies with heartbeats are still murdered.
00:04:38.160
And, uh, I'll show you her tweet. This is what she said. I love God. I believe in God,
00:04:42.900
but I don't believe my personal beliefs of which we can't confirm should override scientific facts
00:04:49.740
and what we can confirm. And then she quotes John 3, 12. If I have told you earthly things
00:04:56.080
and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? Uh, okay. I'm trying
00:05:03.900
to decipher this. Is she implying that abortion is a heavenly thing? Is that, I think that's what's
00:05:08.400
going on here? So this is pure, pure Satanism, of course, which I'm not surprised to hear that
00:05:14.320
coming from a pro-abortion Hollywood actress. Um, but even, so I don't need, I don't get,
00:05:22.380
because it seems that her personal belief is that abortion is good, right? So she says personal
00:05:28.200
beliefs can't override scientific facts. I agree with that. Uh, so her personal belief in the validity
00:05:33.020
of abortion and the legit moral legitimacy of it can't override scientific facts. I agree there,
00:05:39.700
but I don't think she's trying to say that. I think she's trying to say that personal beliefs
00:05:44.660
about the immorality of abortion should not override scientific facts. So is she saying that
00:05:50.080
her personal beliefs are opposed to abortion? I don't know, but let's not get hung up on particulars.
00:05:56.700
Um, I just want to use this tweet as a jumping off point because this, you hear this kind of stuff
00:06:01.060
all the time. And there are two big problems here, aside from the, from the general incoherence of,
00:06:07.240
of, uh, of it, but there's two other problems. First, um, opposition to abortion is not simply
00:06:16.280
a personal belief and it certainly is not a religious belief. Okay. And this, and this frustrates
00:06:23.740
me to no end with the people that say, well, that's just your religion. You're just saying that
00:06:27.560
because you're a Christian, even if I were not a Christian, even if I were not religious at all,
00:06:34.240
even if I had no faith, um, I would still oppose abortion, uh, because it's the murder of babies.
00:06:43.040
And, and, and there's nothing, there's no scenario where I would ever be in favor of that.
00:06:48.180
Um, I didn't learn in the Bible that abortion is wrong. I didn't, I, I didn't have to check the Bible
00:06:57.220
to find out whether or not abortion is wrong. Uh, I came to that conclusion without, without checking
00:07:03.160
it at all. I, I just, I just know that it's wrong. It does. So it's, it's, I don't need to find chapter
00:07:09.060
and verse for that. Um, I can find chapter and verse. I can find biblical justification,
00:07:13.720
certainly for my belief that abortion is wrong, but even if I couldn't, I would still believe it.
00:07:21.920
Uh, even if there was nothing in the Bible, for instance, saying, don't kill people, don't murder
00:07:27.180
there is, but even if there wasn't, I would still be against it. Um, so this is not a religious point
00:07:34.940
of view. I cannot emphasize that enough. And I get really tired of this whole, well, stop trying to
00:07:41.580
impose your religion on me thing when it comes to abortion, because you may as well say that I'm
00:07:47.700
forcing my religion on you by opposing armed robbery and arson and rape. Um, these are fundamental
00:07:54.840
moral issues and any person religious or not is capable of seeing the truth in these matters.
00:08:01.440
Moreover, um, pro-abortion people also like to claim that the Bible, uh, doesn't even really say
00:08:07.740
anything about abortion in the first place. And, and they're right in a way, um, the Bible doesn't
00:08:13.420
specifically mention abortion. It does mention not to murder people, which, which, uh, which
00:08:18.640
really covers that base anyway. So it doesn't need to be specific about, uh, you know, if it says don't
00:08:24.720
murder people, then you wouldn't think that it needs to also specify, uh, yeah, by the way, that includes
00:08:30.440
babies. Um, so, but it doesn't, it's true that it doesn't deal specifically with the practice of
00:08:38.180
abortion. So there's kind of, it, it, it, it, it's the pro-abortion people are trying to have it both
00:08:44.400
ways. Where on one hand, they, they say you're imposing your religion on us. And then on the other
00:08:50.180
hand, uh, they say, well, that's not even really in your religion. Well, then which is it? It can't,
00:08:55.180
it can't, we can't be imposing our religion on you with something that isn't in our religion,
00:08:58.760
according to you. Um, because in that case, if that were true, that our, our pro-life beliefs
00:09:08.000
are not really in keeping with the Bible, then that would mean that we are imposing our moral
00:09:15.740
opinion onto the Bible. And then according to you onto you, but it wouldn't be our religion then in
00:09:24.460
that case, would it? Now, again, that's not true. This, this belief is entirely consistent.
00:09:35.460
Uh, not only consistent with what the Bible says, but it is in the Bible, uh, because it says do not
00:09:42.040
murder, but you're trying to have it both ways. You know, the pro-abortion people, when it comes to
00:09:49.700
their arguments that they make, they're constantly making contradict, self-contradictory arguments
00:09:55.300
with no attempt to even come up with some sort of coherent, cogent narrative. Um, and then the
00:10:04.120
second thing here is that, of course, putting the issue of religion to the side entirely for a minute,
00:10:10.100
science is completely and totally on the side of pro-lifers. And there's just no question about
00:10:16.260
that whatsoever. Um, and in fact, the more and more that we learn about science, the more that we
00:10:25.140
learn about what's happening in the womb, the more that we learn about the development of human beings,
00:10:30.040
um, in the womb, uh, the more and more validity it lends to the pro-life side.
00:10:38.540
The, the pro-abortion side has always been morally untenable, but it was much more tenable
00:10:45.840
50 or 60 years ago than it is now, because we knew a lot less, um, 50 or 60 years ago than we do
00:10:53.620
now. We still knew enough 50 or 60 years ago. We knew enough 500 years. We knew enough 5,000 years
00:10:59.720
ago to know that, uh, abortion is wrong because you're killing a human person. Because what else
00:11:05.660
could it be when a, when a human man and a human woman get together and reproduce, the only thing they
00:11:10.900
can produce is a human. And that human is going to, by definition, be separate and apart from
00:11:15.600
themselves. But, um, as I said, the more that we've learned, just the more credibility it lends
00:11:22.480
to the pro-life case. And, uh, so if you're a pro-abortion person, that ought to make you uncomfortable
00:11:27.560
when you look and realize that, uh, I mean, gee, every single scientific discovery in this area,
00:11:33.840
every single scientific advancement in this area, um, goes against us. Well, that should tell you that
00:11:39.940
something is wrong with your position. Um, all right. So I thought this was interesting from
00:11:48.160
the daily wire. It says a small school district in Michigan is pushing back against those who would
00:11:53.080
alter its sex ed program by incorporating discussions of sexual and gender identity for the last eight
00:11:58.600
years, Allendale, Michigan, a town of roughly 26,000 people has offered a sex ed program titled
00:12:04.060
willing to wait, which holds fast to the benefits of abstaining from sex until marriage. And, um,
00:12:09.940
does not address the issues of gender and gender identity, but, uh, you've got the progressive
00:12:16.860
indoctrinators who now want to introduce that stuff into the program. And so there's that whole
00:12:22.160
debate. And this brings up the, the, the, the safe sex versus abstinence debate. And I know that
00:12:28.560
this is where you probably think I'm going to launch into a whole thing where I defend abstinence only,
00:12:33.080
um, programs, but maybe I'm going to surprise you because I'm not going to do that.
00:12:40.500
I won't defend, uh, I'm not going to defend abstinence only programs. I'm also not going to
00:12:46.020
defend safe sex programs. Um, because here's my point when it comes to sex ed in schools,
00:12:54.320
I don't want teachers talking to kids about using condoms and so on. That's not an appropriate
00:13:05.820
discussion for that forum. I also don't want teachers talking to kids about saving sex for
00:13:12.480
marriage. I don't want either of those things. Neither of those things are an appropriate
00:13:20.000
discussion for, for, for a classroom. Uh, I, I want them saying nothing on the matter at all.
00:13:28.700
That's how sex ed should be handled. Talk to kids about biology, talk to them about
00:13:33.920
anatomy, about human reproduction. These are academic subjects and it's stuff that kids need
00:13:40.180
to learn at a certain age. So yeah, they're going to learn about sex in that sense. Um, but I don't
00:13:47.440
need school officials giving any lessons, any advice at all, one way or another about, about a
00:13:55.760
child's sex life or lack thereof, because it's none of their business. But why have we just taken
00:14:04.620
it for granted that, well, the school's got to say something about this. I mean, the kids are there
00:14:09.900
for a few hours a day. I mean, they got to talk to them about sex, don't they? Why, why do they need
00:14:14.660
to talk? Just stick with the, stick with the academic subjects. I don't need your moralizing
00:14:19.940
one way or another. I don't need your theories about when people should have sex and how they
00:14:24.660
should do it. And what's the appropriate context. I don't need that. Whether you think it's appropriate
00:14:29.380
for teenagers to have sex or whether you think they should save it for marriage. Why do you think
00:14:34.080
that it's your place as a teacher in a school to talk to my kids about it? It's none of your
00:14:40.680
business. So say nothing about it. That's, that's the solution here. Um, I, so no, I'm, I'm not a fan
00:14:50.420
of the absent abstinence programs in school because I don't trust schools to, to make the case for
00:14:55.800
abstinence. That is a very morally complex issue. Uh, and it is a moral issue. Now there's a practical
00:15:03.940
element to it also, of course, where, okay, if you don't have sex right now, then you're not going to
00:15:09.120
get STDs and you're not going to get pregnant. So fine. Yeah. There's that practical, but, but,
00:15:14.000
um, you can't try to simply scare kids away from sex. That doesn't work. So if you try to have an
00:15:20.840
abstinence program that doesn't get into the morality aspect, but it only focuses on STDs and
00:15:28.280
everything, um, well, that's just not going to work because then you're, you're just trying to scare
00:15:33.900
kids by saying, Oh, well, you know, you don't want herpes, do you? Doesn't work. And, um, and it's
00:15:41.740
also, I, I'm not trying to, we don't want to make people terrified of sex. We don't want them to make
00:15:47.320
this immediate where they think of sex. They immediately associate it with, with chlamydia. I
00:15:51.620
mean, that's not what we want to do either. So if you want to effectively make the argument, make the
00:15:57.880
case for abstinence, you have to make a moral case where you're talking about, uh, respect of the
00:16:04.200
human person, the proper ordering of sexual relationships, proper context. Uh, if you're
00:16:10.420
going to give someone, give yourself to someone, uh, you should only do that in a context of love and
00:16:17.200
devotion and all that, you know, all of that is good. All that's true, but that is a moral, um,
00:16:23.860
a very moral thing. And I simply don't trust a health teacher to, to effectively communicate
00:16:33.280
that. Um, so yeah, with my kids, you can leave that to me. I will handle that. I don't need you
00:16:39.040
doing it. And, uh, no, I don't want schools to throw sexual morality out the window either and
00:16:45.980
say, Oh yeah, well, everyone's having sex. So don't worry about it. Here's a condom. No, see what's
00:16:52.240
wrong. What part of this does the school system struggle to understand? It's none of your business.
00:17:01.680
Okay. The kids attitudes about sex, uh, you know, their approach to it, the way families deal with it.
00:17:09.100
None of that is your business. Why would you think that it is just because the kid is sitting in your
00:17:14.700
classroom doesn't make it all of a sudden your business. So let's just leave it alone. Um,
00:17:22.240
and, uh, and then I know the answer is going to be, well, uh, well, yeah, but, uh, but, but parents
00:17:30.180
don't talk about it. And well, you know, parents should talk about it with their kids, but if they
00:17:36.580
don't, um, that's unfortunate, but that doesn't give you carte blanche. Just like you can't just walk
00:17:44.580
up to a kid on the playground and say, Hey kid, I'm sure you're, I'm sure your parents aren't talking
00:17:48.420
about sex. So, uh, so here, let me tell you a few things. If you do that, you'll be arrested as a
00:17:53.840
sex offender, right? Uh, all right, let's see. Okay. I have to show you this, uh, because I just,
00:18:02.480
I just have to. So brace yourself. Um, I'm not going to give any, not going to give you any setup.
00:18:59.580
don't swaddle your baby like that. Uh, you, uh, he will die. Uh, don't, don't tie your baby inside of
00:19:08.520
a pillowcase and roll him around on the ground. Second, any man who chooses to be swaddled as a
00:19:17.260
form of therapy should indeed be swaddled and then should be stuffed into a cannon and shot into the
00:19:24.500
sun with all due respect, nothing personal. I just think it would be best for everyone involved.
00:19:31.640
All right. Um, this is, uh, from Fox news. It says Hofstra university student activists are calling
00:19:42.300
for the removal of a statue of Thomas Jefferson from campus near New York city, because they say
00:19:47.460
that, um, the third American president represents racism and slavery. So this, this statue of Jefferson
00:19:55.760
has already been defaced multiple times and now they want to get it torn down. Um, the only thing I'll
00:20:00.880
say about this is that, uh, uh, you know, I, I am opposed to tearing down Confederate statues. I've
00:20:07.300
said that many times. And I think that one leads to the other. It's not a coincidence that we started
00:20:14.480
with Confederate statues. Then we moved on to this, but this is really sort of a, an entire, a whole
00:20:20.380
different ball game. Um, because at least with the Confederate statues, although I opposed tearing them
00:20:26.200
down, there was an, I don't think it's a very good argument, but the argument that was made in favor of
00:20:33.300
tearing them down was that, um, well, you know, it's, it's not just that these guys had personal
00:20:39.300
flaws. It's that they were fighting for slavery and that's what the war was about. And so we, there's
00:20:46.160
no reason why we should make an effort to honor them for that. Well, I think that's a very reductive
00:20:52.140
and simplistic way of looking at the civil war. Uh, it was a much more complicated thing than that.
00:20:59.860
And certainly the personal motivations of the people that were actually fighting for the
00:21:03.340
Confederacy many times had absolutely nothing to do with slavery at all. Um, but you know, so
00:21:09.520
at least there's that argument. Um, but if we're getting into tearing down statues of the founding
00:21:17.520
fathers, well, you don't have that argument anymore because nobody thinks that the revolutionary war
00:21:22.360
was fought so that the colonists could have slaves. They did have slaves, but that's not what the war
00:21:27.480
was about. So now this really is, um, something where even though these, these men, these were great
00:21:34.660
men who achieved great things, um, they had this serious personal flaw, which is that they supported
00:21:40.900
slavery. And so therefore we're just going to tear down their statues. And if we're doing that,
00:21:45.800
um, then we really are just basically canceling history. If that is now the litmus test, then there
00:21:55.620
are very, very, very few historical figures who would be able to survive it because almost every
00:22:04.520
great historical figure had serious flaws and many of them had flaws in the area of slavery because for
00:22:11.180
thousands of years of human history, almost nobody was against slavery across the world, all races,
00:22:18.260
all genders, ethnicities, slavery was everywhere taken for granted as just a perfectly normal thing.
00:22:26.260
Doesn't make it right. Doesn't mean that, um, it doesn't, it's not a, it's not a full on excuse for
00:22:32.560
those people, but it does put things into a certain perspective. And it does show that, well, okay,
00:22:38.980
if we're doing this, then, uh, you know, we got basically tear down all the statues because,
00:22:43.400
uh, it's gotta be a total now whitewashing of history. And, um, I think that is not only a
00:22:50.820
pointless exercise, but also harmful and absurd. All right. Uh, let's move on to emails. Cause I got
00:22:57.240
a lot of great emails and I won't be able to answer all of them, but, um, I want to give it some
00:23:02.820
time. Anyway, this is from Aaron, A-R-Y-N. It's an interesting spelling there says, hi, Matt. I
00:23:08.300
love your show. Uh, and your religious theology is usually on point, but yesterday you made a
00:23:11.880
serious blunder about God, allowing people into heaven based on their capacity to biblically love.
00:23:15.940
You said that if a person is capable of truly loving their spouse or whomever it may be, but they
00:23:19.880
go to hell, how do you reconcile that? Um, with the fact that there is, uh, supposed to be no love in
00:23:26.860
hell. First of all, Romans, uh, eight, one through seven, it doesn't matter how loving this person is
00:23:33.780
if they are not in the spirit of God through the repentance of heart and forgiveness of sins
00:23:38.480
through Christ Jesus, their acts of love mean nothing. Second, Abraham who had, uh, yet to see
00:23:46.540
the Messiah was justified only by his faith. Also lot who became as wicked as the city around him and
00:23:52.560
offered up his own virgin daughters to be raped was, uh, justified in his faith and saved from
00:23:57.820
death by God in his mercy. Faith is the main point of the Bible. But I got to stop you right there. Um,
00:24:05.340
I, I don't know if I agree with your interpretation of the old Testament, especially, I don't think
00:24:10.700
faith is the main point of the old Testament at all. Actually, I think the main message in the old
00:24:17.060
Testament is obedience. Um, there really wasn't a question of faith. Everybody in old Testament times
00:24:24.360
believed in some kind of God. Uh, there may be a few mentions in the old Testament, a few references
00:24:29.860
to something like atheism, but that wasn't really the problem back then. Um, so everyone just took it
00:24:36.940
for granted that there was a God or many gods. Um, the issue was obedience, which is why all throughout
00:24:44.180
the old Testament, God passes down, I mean, hundreds and hundreds of, of commandments and laws,
00:24:52.060
many of them just very minute and particular. Um, and, and so I think what was the point of that?
00:25:00.860
The point was obedience. It was getting the Israelites, his chosen people to obey. Um,
00:25:07.520
and so that's how I would interpret it. So I don't know. Anyway, I'm not going to, we won't get
00:25:13.520
sidetracked on that. Uh, it says third, of course, an intellectual pronunciation of Jesus is God will
00:25:19.280
have bearing on salvation. Um, for God, it has always been about the heart because if you confess
00:25:24.780
with your heart that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart, that God raised him from the dead,
00:25:28.280
you will be saved. For with the heart, one believes and is justified. And with the mouth,
00:25:31.720
one confesses and is saved from, uh, faith from the heart must be present in order for
00:25:36.480
salvation to take place, which leads to my last point. The problem you described as a loving
00:25:43.440
person being in hell. So you're going to say, okay, so if he can't go to heaven because he never
00:25:48.200
believed in Jesus, then there's still the problem of a loving person being in hell. I would argue
00:25:51.720
this. God is the embodiment and epitome of love. We experience his love and grace, the things which
00:25:57.240
he embodies here on earth as a part of his mercy and kindness in our physical forms. Well, we have the
00:26:01.760
time to accept Jesus's sacrifice on the cross and be saved. Scripture speaks of a circumcision of the
00:26:06.160
heart, which only takes place through surrender. Denying Jesus is not surrender. Uh, once we have
00:26:11.280
consistently denied Jesus, no matter how outwardly loving we may appear, there is no truly biblical
00:26:16.220
love to be found within our hearts because we do not have God's Holy Spirit living within us.
00:26:20.700
Therefore, no truly biblically loving person can be found in hell, especially when you consider that
00:26:25.560
hell is the absence of God's presence. So all good things are absent. So love within anyone would be
00:26:30.880
absent anyway, because the only reason we experience love is because of God. Uh, I do love your show.
00:26:37.640
I watch it every day, but this made me cringe. You're a great guy, brothers. Keep, keep searching
00:26:41.780
for the truth. Um, all right, Aaron, thanks for the email. Thank you for really, um, engaging with my
00:26:49.140
points and expressing your disagreement in a non-pretentious, non-insulting way. Uh, and I mean
00:26:54.040
that sincerely, so I thank you for that. I'm going to skip to the last point you made. Um,
00:27:01.260
I don't want to restate what I've already said the last two shows, but with your last point,
00:27:06.080
I think you really moved the discussion forward and offered a new, uh, thought, uh, on this.
00:27:12.200
So, uh, I don't want to straw man you. I think what you're saying here is, is you're agreeing with,
00:27:17.140
with, with me that someone who really loves, who truly loves, you call it biblical love,
00:27:22.220
true love, biblical love, same thing, right? A truly loving person cannot go to hell, uh,
00:27:27.320
because then you would have love in hell. Hell is the absence of love. So how could it be there?
00:27:30.620
It's not possible. So you seem to agree with me there. Um, but you say that, well, uh, so my point
00:27:40.980
was if love can't exist in hell, then what about someone who doesn't consciously accept Jesus,
00:27:46.380
doesn't consciously believe in Jesus yet does have love. Where do they go? It seems to me that they
00:27:50.840
couldn't go to hell. They would have to go to heaven. Um, and the way you deal with that is
00:27:56.260
you say, well, you, you can't really love if you reject Christ. To reject Christ is to essentially
00:28:00.980
reject love. And so that's how you deal with the problem. I hope I summarized you accurately,
00:28:06.120
accurately there. Well, I think there are a couple of problems with your point. Number one,
00:28:13.180
throughout history, I'm sure you would agree. There have been many people, probably hundreds of
00:28:18.420
millions who never believed in Christ yet did not consciously reject him, um, because they just
00:28:24.160
never heard about him. So from the year 33 until, until today, there have been, as I said, hundreds
00:28:30.140
of millions of people who just never heard about Jesus. Think about everyone who lived in the far
00:28:36.800
East or in the West across the Atlantic and the first few hundred years of the Christian era. Um,
00:28:42.580
they couldn't have possibly believed in Jesus. Nobody told them about Jesus, right?
00:28:48.420
So how could they have known? Uh, therefore it can't be said that they rejected him.
00:28:55.920
And remember, if somebody lived in, um, in, let's say, you know, uh, North America in the year 100,
00:29:03.820
well, that's someone who could not have possibly ever heard about Jesus Christ. And, um, and that's
00:29:09.320
also someone who they're in North America because God put them there. That's someone who was born in North
00:29:15.660
America, uh, which means they were born. It means they were created. That was an act of creation,
00:29:21.180
a conscious act of creation by God. God saying, I'm going to put this person right here, uh, thousands
00:29:28.820
of miles away with a huge ocean separating him from the news of, of Christ. So it really doesn't make
00:29:37.560
sense that God would then say, well, I put you here, but now I'm going to send you to hell because you
00:29:41.540
were there. Uh, that, that, that becomes very hard to believe. So, um, so you don't really account for
00:29:49.980
them and you're saying, well, someone who denies Christ doesn't have Christ. You couldn't really
00:29:54.580
love. So none of those people could love the millions of people throughout history, incapable
00:29:59.940
of loving. Um, but if you allow for them, if you say, well, no, no, no. Well, yeah, they could go to
00:30:07.500
heaven because they didn't ever heard about it. And so we'll make an exception there. Well, if you do
00:30:12.140
that, then you're admitting a couple of things. You're admitting number one, that a person could
00:30:15.900
go to heaven, um, without consciously believing in Jesus. Number two, that therefore they could
00:30:21.540
enter through the door who is Jesus Christ, uh, the way, the truth and the life without consciously
00:30:26.300
knowing it. Um, and so if you're accepting that, then it seems that you're, you're not far from my
00:30:35.000
conclusion, but okay, let's put those cases to the side for a minute. Uh, let's talk about people
00:30:41.540
in modern society, uh, who, who have heard about, um, Jesus and, but yet belong to a different religion.
00:30:50.160
Well, uh, of them, it seems like you certainly are saying that they could not really love even their
00:30:57.200
own children, right? Um, well, I just, I don't think that there's any evidence for that. I don't
00:31:07.980
think that's true at all. Um, I think that it's really quite presumptuous and insulting, uh, to say
00:31:14.680
that non-Christians can't love their kids or their spouse. Uh, now I don't, I know you don't mean it as
00:31:20.040
an insult. I'm not attacking you, but you have to think, how would you take it if a Muslim said to you
00:31:25.480
that you can't love your kids because you're not a Muslim? You would just say, well, that's absurd.
00:31:29.720
What are you talking about? Of course I love my kids. Um, so I absolutely believe that non-Christians
00:31:34.840
can love their children and their spouses and can love anyone. Um, just, just as I can.
00:31:42.600
Remember, Jesus says in scriptures, um, greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his
00:31:51.360
life for his friends. Well, what about a Jew or a Hindu who lays down his life for his country or his
00:31:58.360
wife or his kids, uh, his family, his friends? Jesus says that is the greatest love, the greatest.
00:32:08.240
He didn't say greater love hath no man than this, a Christian lays down his life for his friends. He
00:32:13.420
didn't say that. He says a man who lays down his life for his friends. Now, how could we say then
00:32:19.440
that not only is that? So if we think about a person of another religion who lays down their
00:32:25.800
life, let's say for their family, Jesus seems to say that's the greatest love. But what you seem
00:32:31.820
to be saying is not only is that not the greatest love, it's not even love at all. Well, then what is
00:32:37.360
it in that case? A non-Christian who makes a great personal sacrifice for those he cares about. I mean,
00:32:44.360
even if it's not dying for them, which many non-Christians have sacrificed their lives for
00:32:48.680
those they love many times. Um, but a non-Christian who lives a life of self-sacrifice for those that
00:32:56.280
they care about, if that's not love, then what is it? Uh, and if that's not love, then I don't even
00:33:03.040
know what love is. I don't even, I don't know how we could even use the term anymore because I would
00:33:08.480
say that's the definition of love. Um, love is, uh, is, you know, Aquinas says, said that love is
00:33:18.080
willing the good of the other. And of course, the, the greatest way to will the good of the other is
00:33:23.940
to give your life for the good of the other. And so if someone is willing the good of the other to
00:33:30.480
the best of their ability and of their knowledge and, you know, in the best way they know how,
00:33:35.660
then I would call that love. I read a story, you know, I don't want to, I'm not trying to make
00:33:43.000
this an emotional argument, but I do think we, we should just, when you, you know, it's easy for us
00:33:48.840
when we're talking about these issues to just say, Oh yeah, well, if a Christian does, can't really
00:33:53.180
love and it's easy for us to say that, but let's, let's talk about what we're really saying when we
00:33:57.640
say that. So I read a story a while ago about a mother in Auschwitz, Jewish mother, whose children
00:34:08.040
were being sent to the gas chamber and she could have been selected for, because she was young
00:34:13.500
enough and healthy enough. She could have been selected for labor and maybe survived, but she
00:34:18.060
chose to go to the gas chamber with her kids so that she could comfort them in their last moments.
00:34:24.100
And she decided that her kids were going to have several moments of terror and pain and suffering.
00:34:35.160
And she would rather give up her entire, the rest of the rest of her entire life. She'd rather give
00:34:39.420
that up just so that she could comfort her children in those moments.
00:34:43.180
So are you going to tell me that this mother who went to the gas chamber with her child and comforted
00:34:53.680
her child until the end was then sent to hell for all eternity? Are you going to tell me that mother
00:34:59.820
didn't love her child? If that's not love, let me tell you something. If that's not love, then I don't
00:35:03.940
love anyone. I have no love. And I doubt you do either. Because if that's not love, I mean,
00:35:08.820
if that doesn't qualify, then it's hopeless for all of us. No, I would say that that is the greatest
00:35:20.340
love. And I think that's what Jesus said. So when I read the Gospels and I read about the Lord who
00:35:27.900
said there is no greater love than self-sacrifice, I just don't see a Lord who sends a woman to hell
00:35:33.520
forever, who gave up her life for her child because she believed the wrong thing. I don't see it.
00:35:49.280
But, you know, I understand the attempt at a, you know, I appreciate you're trying to deal with
00:35:55.740
the issue and come up with some sort of solution. All right, this is from Maria, says, Matt,
00:36:02.680
I have appreciated your discussion about the question of whether love can exist in hell. I
00:36:06.080
think the answer is no, it cannot. But I also don't think that anyone who figured out how to
00:36:09.980
love on earth will necessarily go to heaven. Let me explain why. If a person who does not know Christ
00:36:13.860
manages to love in life, that doesn't mean he will carry that with him into the afterlife. It could be
00:36:19.680
that he goes to hell, but his love doesn't come with him, if that makes sense. So rather than his love
00:36:24.680
carrying him into heaven, it could be that he goes to hell without it. No goodness can exist in hell,
00:36:30.180
but even bad people have a little goodness in them. Okay, Maria, that's an interesting thought.
00:36:36.140
I'm not sure if it works, though. First of all, what does it really mean for a person to leave
00:36:41.560
their love behind? Does God conduct some sort of like posthumous spiritual surgery, separating them
00:36:48.840
from their love so they can leave that and go and be damned? And if those kinds of adjustments are
00:36:54.580
being made, why wouldn't God take the good and throw out the bad? That's what C.S. Lewis was
00:37:01.100
talking about in The Great Divorce, that whatever little bit of good is there, whatever little bit
00:37:05.540
of love, God will take that, fam those flames, turn it into a great fire, good kind of fire.
00:37:12.880
That to me makes sense. It makes less sense if God is seizing onto the bad stuff and throwing out the
00:37:18.760
good so that the bad can be chucked into hell. If we're making posthumous adjustments of any kind
00:37:25.960
so that a person can fit one place or the other, it just makes more sense that it would go north
00:37:34.000
rather than south. But the bigger problem is a logical one, I think, is that, so let's say that
00:37:39.260
I go to hell. I hate to make myself the example here, but so just to, you know, frame it here.
00:37:45.740
But let's say that I, God forbid, I'm the unlucky guy here. Okay. Well, I can't, my love for my
00:37:51.780
children can't come with me. My love for my wife can't come with me. My love for my family, for
00:37:55.580
everything, everything that I love, none of that can come. All of that is shed like snakeskin, I guess.
00:38:01.400
And then whatever, whatever other meager good parts of me, there's not a lot, but whatever's there,
00:38:05.840
that all goes too. And then the rest is, is sent to hell. Well then what exactly is in hell? Is that
00:38:12.640
even still me? Can it even be said at that point that I am in hell? I mean, who is that person? Is
00:38:18.500
it, would I even recognize that person as being me? Would I have any, would I, would I have any memory
00:38:22.960
of anything? You've just taken the most essential aspects of my being and chucked them. And then what,
00:38:31.340
so what the heck is down there in hell? And if that thing down there in hell is, is, is hardly even a
00:38:39.240
conscious being, then what's the point of hell anymore? Now it seems like you're getting into
00:38:44.960
annihilationism where really the, the, the person who doesn't go to heaven is essentially just
00:38:49.640
annihilated. Um, I don't believe that, but that seems to be more of what you're talking about.
00:38:56.500
But if I am conscious of myself, if I, if I am a conscious self in hell, then, uh, but then again,
00:39:02.960
how, how could I remain a conscious self after these most crucial aspects of myself have what
00:39:08.680
been taken? Um, it's, so I just, there, there are some logical issues there that I can't quite
00:39:16.140
get around. All right. Let me just do one more. Um, uh, let's see a couple of good, quite, uh,
00:39:27.580
responses from teachers. Okay. This is from Bob and Michelle, uh, two people teaming up on an email
00:39:31.380
says, Matt, in regards to your question about gender-based participation in classes, school
00:39:35.740
classrooms, says my wife and I are both teachers. Um, our combined experience covers just over 30
00:39:41.740
years of grade school, uh, high school, college. We also both run a tutoring business and see many,
00:39:47.400
many students at varying ages and nearly every imaginable topic and subject matter.
00:39:51.840
The following are our collective opinions on the matter. During certain age spans, participation
00:39:56.840
will be, will be weighted toward the boys, uh, ages or grades, eight, I guess, ages eight through
00:40:02.360
12, while at other ages, the girls, uh, 14 through 18. When it comes to certain subjects, geometry,
00:40:08.340
history, phys ed, boys tend to relate more and therefore participate slash question more. When
00:40:12.940
it comes to other subjects, algebra, science, sociology, girls tend to relate more and therefore
00:40:17.480
participate in question more. Also the specific time of any particular year can play a small role
00:40:22.560
for the genders as to their general motivation and attentiveness. However, my wife and I both agree
00:40:27.740
that girls tend to raise their hands, participate in discussion and turn in work projects, et cetera,
00:40:33.620
more. After some discussion with other teacher friends over the weekend, we believe that it's
00:40:38.320
probably a three to two girl to boy ratio. Hope this is of some help. Um, yeah, that is. In fact,
00:40:45.900
I got a bunch of, I don't have time to get into them. I'll have to save them for tomorrow, but I got a lot
00:40:49.080
of responses from teachers as I raised the question yesterday of, uh, do boys or girls tend to be
00:40:55.340
more to participate more and be more excited in classroom and a lot of interesting answers to
00:41:02.080
that. But I think we're going to, we're going to cut it off here and, uh, do all the rest of the
00:41:07.140
emails tomorrow. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Godspeed.
00:41:19.080
I'm Michael Knowles, host of the Michael Knowles show. A 61 year old woman has just given birth to
00:41:28.560
her own granddaughter who was conceived by combining her daughter's egg with the sperm of her son's gay
00:41:33.660
lover. We will examine modern love. Check it out at dailywire.com.