The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 338 - Climate Alarmism Is Child Abuse

00:00:00.000 So here's what I'm trying to figure out. Greta Thunberg has been going around the U.S. and 0.97

00:00:05.700 Europe lecturing everybody about climate change. And this is what environmentalists do, right?

00:00:12.100 They wag their fingers and they lecture and they yell at us. And that's their main thing. And

00:00:15.800 sometimes they do it like we talked about yesterday. Sometimes they'll go into the

00:00:18.300 middle of the street on a work day during rush hour to wag their fingers or, as was the case

00:00:24.320 yesterday, even to wag their butts, you know, is what they were doing in the streets yesterday.

00:00:27.940 They're wagging something, though, to tell us that climate change is a terrible thing.

00:00:33.040 But they always seem to be focused. Here's the thing that I don't understand. They always seem

00:00:37.120 to be focused on the U.S. and Europe. Have you noticed that? That's where all of the focus

00:00:46.180 seems to be. They train their ire and their contempt on us. And that's kind of strange,

00:00:52.620 isn't it? Because, you know, according to some theories, there are actually other countries in

00:01:01.860 the world. Now, I can't confirm this. I can't confirm that there are other countries. I've

00:01:08.540 never been to them. And the flat earthers tell me that the world is a much smaller and flatter place

00:01:14.780 than than you might imagine. So I don't know. But according to my research, there is this place

00:01:21.340 called Asia. Asia exists. OK, and Asia not only exists, but it in fact is by far, by far, by far

00:01:32.500 the biggest problem when it comes to carbon emissions and pollution. As noted in an article in Forbes,

00:01:37.780 China alone emits more carbon dioxide than the U.S. and Europe combined. OK, and it's not just

00:01:46.020 because they have more people either. They do have more people. They've got 1.3 billion people.

00:01:51.520 The U.S. and Europe together have, I don't know, a billion, 1.1 billion. But that extra 0.2 or 0.3

00:01:56.660 billion, that's not going to account for their carbon contributions. They're doing more than their

00:02:01.460 fair share of the work here as far as making the climate warmer. If, in fact,

00:02:07.780 that is what's happening. I mean, the air pollution in China is so bad that their solar panels don't

00:02:14.420 work because there's so much pollution. The light cannot penetrate through the pollution to get to

00:02:20.120 the solar panels. That's how bad it is in China. And not only that, it's not just air pollution.

00:02:24.900 Most of the most polluted rivers in the world are in Asia. The top five, five of the five of the top 0.99

00:02:32.680 five most polluted rivers are in Asia. And that's why a handful of Asian countries, like four or five 1.00

00:02:38.820 Asian countries, are dumping more plastic into the river than the rest of the world combined.

00:02:45.280 OK, you want to know how bad the water pollution in Asia is? I want to take a look at this picture.

00:02:49.940 Look at this picture right here. Here's a picture of this is a picture of the Sitarum River in Indonesia.

00:02:57.420 Indonesia. All right. It's a Sitarum River in Indonesia. And if you're listening right now and

00:03:03.140 not watching and you can't see this, it is a picture of essentially a floating garbage, not

00:03:09.080 essentially. It's literally a floating garbage dump is this river. It's the most polluted river in the

00:03:14.040 world. And by the way, I got that picture from a Houston Chronicle article, which I tell you not just

00:03:22.120 to give them credit, but also because the the the story attached to that picture is kind of

00:03:28.880 interesting. It's a story about an Indonesian fisherman who was out in the river fishing in

00:03:34.260 that river, if you can imagine it. And he thought that he had hooked on a really big fish, but it

00:03:40.380 turns out to be a dead human body. OK, not a joke. So this is bad. This is this is this is very bad.

00:03:47.660 These rivers are very bad. And it's it just makes you wonder why we aren't including Asia 0.98

00:03:55.260 in this discussion. Now, they get mentioned every once in a while. It's kind of like an honor,

00:04:00.920 honorable. They get an honorable mention as as contributors to pollution and climate change,

00:04:06.700 but they're not honorable mention. They are number one. So I say again, OK, when it comes to

00:04:13.800 carbon emissions and water pollution. It's the two biggest climate catastrophes or climate problems

00:04:22.580 that we hear about. By far, the biggest problem comes from Asia. The water pollution thing is so 1.00

00:04:29.980 bad that actually, you know, the United States could could from here on out produce no more pollution.

00:04:37.840 We could we could stop forever using plastic straws, plastic bottles. We could stop with all plastics

00:04:43.900 and we could convert the entire country to the disposable paper recyclable stuff.

00:04:51.000 And it would make almost no difference to the water pollution problem. It would make almost no

00:04:55.900 difference. It would be like a thimble, a literal thimble in the ocean because of what Asia is doing. 0.99

00:05:00.780 Um, so why why aren't they getting not only mentioned more, but why aren't they getting the lion

00:05:09.120 share of the blame when they deserve it? Why is that? Well, I think it's because a lot of this stuff

00:05:16.360 is just posturing and posturing isn't fun and it isn't as politically expedient when you do it in Asia.

00:05:23.840 Okay. Um, can you imagine now, now the, the, uh, optics of a 16 year old child yelling at a bunch of

00:05:36.260 white people, a 16 year old white child, white child yelling at a bunch of white people about

00:05:41.120 climate change. Now with that, the media says, Oh, she's still look at her. She's so courageous and

00:05:46.980 brave. Now, if that 16 year old white girl were to go to Asia and be yelling at a bunch of Asians, 1.00

00:05:52.860 um, now all of a sudden it changes the picture. And so that's why they don't do it, but it really

00:06:04.120 does call into question the basic sincerity of most of the climate alarmists that they are training all

00:06:11.820 of their fire on precisely the countries who are not only not contributing the most to it, but we're

00:06:19.000 also the countries who are at least taking this seriously with Asian countries. It doesn't seem

00:06:24.980 like they're even, it doesn't seem they care at all about this. So if we're talking about raising

00:06:30.340 awareness, we, we, you've got, that's covered here. We've got it covered. We're, we're all aware.

00:06:35.400 And a lot of people are worried about it and we are taking some steps at least,

00:06:39.420 but in some of these Asian countries, particularly China, we haven't even gotten to the raise

00:06:45.100 awareness level yet. So why aren't we over there doing that? Interesting question. I want to talk

00:06:50.600 more about this, but first, um, a word from our good friends at Noom. What if you could use one

00:06:56.700 program for all your health and weight loss needs? No more hunting for training apps and workouts or

00:07:01.000 calorie trackers, meal plans, all that stuff. Uh, plus you get a goal specialist and a community

00:07:05.480 of members to keep you motivated and accountable. So it's like having a workout partner, um, and having

00:07:10.680 that the, the specialists and all of that all in one place altogether, you know, for me, my biggest

00:07:15.260 challenge is eating healthy. Um, that is a big problem for me, staying on task, making the right

00:07:20.420 choices, knowing what choices to make. That's hard for me. And that's why I use Noom Noom. And, and for

00:07:26.940 me, the benefits are not just physical, but psychological because you feel better and it's hard to put a price

00:07:31.520 tag on that. Noom is a habit changing solution that helps, helps users learn to develop a new

00:07:35.980 relationship with food through personalized courses. It's all about, it's all about adjusting,

00:07:40.480 you know, the way you not only eat, but, um, the way you think about nutrition and food based in

00:07:48.260 psychology. Noom teaches why you do the things you do. And it arms you with the tools to break the bad

00:07:53.040 habits and replace them with better ones. You don't have to change it all in one day. Small steps make a,

00:07:57.700 make a big difference. Sign up for your trial today at Noom, N O O M.com slash Walsh. What do you have to

00:08:05.020 lose? Aside from all the weight, visit Noom.com slash Walsh to start your trial today. That's

00:08:10.140 Noom.com slash Walsh, the last weight loss program you're ever going to need. Okay. Speaking of, um,

00:08:18.380 of Greta Thunberg, the 16 year old girl selected by the media, as we've been talking about to be the

00:08:23.080 poster child of, um, of climate alarmism. She was, you know, uh, uh, giving, uh, another hysterical

00:08:31.620 speech on Monday at the UN. And this time she declared that the earth is undergoing a quote mass

00:08:39.840 extinction, which she warns probably can't be averted. We're probably screwed anyway. I know

00:08:45.760 you've probably seen this by now, her, her speech, but I'll play it for you anyway. And then we'll talk

00:08:49.660 about it. Watch this. This is all wrong. I shouldn't be up here. I should be back in school on the other

00:08:58.120 side of the ocean. Yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you? You have stolen my

00:09:08.940 dreams and my childhood with your empty words. And yet I'm one of the lucky ones. People are suffering.

00:09:18.320 People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction.

00:09:28.320 And all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you?

00:09:37.300 Okay. So how dare you? She says, how dare you? You've stolen my dreams and my childhood on one level. I

00:09:43.460 can, I can relate to this sentiment because it's exactly what I said after I watched the Lion King

00:09:47.660 remake. It's exactly what I said to Disney. How dare you? You have stolen my dreams and my childhood.

00:09:54.660 Um, on another level though, as a parent, I, I find this girl very hard to watch. And what I mean is

00:10:03.680 that, um, it's difficult to watch because it's obvious that she really believes her delusional

00:10:11.540 doomsday fantasies. And it's not, and it's not because it's not her fantasies, right? These are,

00:10:19.020 she is, she's repeating what she's been told by the adults around her who should know better.

00:10:24.160 That's what makes it hard to watch. Um, we can have some fun with some of this stuff, but, uh, you

00:10:28.880 can't help, but you can't help, but, but have a little fun with some of the climate alarmism because

00:10:33.580 it's so absurd. But when it comes to this particular girl, um, she, this is, she's a child

00:10:40.780 abuse victim. That's what we're seeing. Now, as the media likes to remind us, Thunberg is autistic and

00:10:47.480 OCD. There's a, there was a daily beast profile done about her and it, um, it, it very celebratory

00:10:55.560 profile of course. And let me read a relevant portion of this profile from the daily, but thanks

00:11:01.660 to the formal diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome coupled with high functioning autism and obsessive

00:11:06.420 compulsive disorder, the now 16 year old Swede has become quite literally the poster child for the 1.00

00:11:11.680 generation that will have to deal with the destruction of our planet. Once she started 1.00

00:11:15.820 receiving multifaceted treatment, Thunberg was able to channel her anxiety into something we should all be

00:11:20.780 concerned about the health of the planet and the science behind apocalyptic warnings of its

00:11:25.240 demise. In October, 2018, Thunberg started having anxiety ridden 3am nightmares, but unlike before

00:11:30.940 they were not about her, the recurring nightmares were about the impact of global warming on the

00:11:35.220 planet. According to the book scenes from the heart, she wrote with her parents and her sister

00:11:38.720 Bietta, who also suffers from many of the same emotional conditions. This time, instead of, instead

00:11:43.720 of holing up in her bedroom, as she did before the treatment, she decided that her anxiety about the

00:11:47.720 climate needed to become everyone else's too. One of her, one aspects of one of the aspects of her

00:11:52.340 complicated diagnosis is obsession. Her family says she wouldn't let the idea go to the planet,

00:11:57.360 let the, the idea go that the planet was burning up and there was ample science to prove it.

00:12:02.900 Okay. So the Daily Beast recounts all of this, like we shouldn't be concerned about it. They were,

00:12:08.880 they recounted kind of matter of factly or even approvingly. But what we're being told is that an

00:12:14.860 obsessive, um, troubled young girl, someone who's, who's been dealing with, let's say recurring

00:12:23.000 nightmares, anxiety ridden. I mean, these are the words being used in the Daily Beast profile.

00:12:31.000 And we're being told that a woman, that a, that a, that a child like that came to believe mistakenly

00:12:37.240 that the apocalypse is upon us. That is a mistake. Okay. The human race is not in the midst of a mass

00:12:45.120 extinction. And it would be nice if some of the brave, courageous media fact checkers would maybe

00:12:52.620 step up to the plate and do a fact check of that because that's just not the case.

00:12:58.080 But that's what she came to believe. And, and, and even tell us, they tell us that she was,

00:13:06.060 you know, she, she, she'd already been prone to this kind of anxiety and, and, and, um, and

00:13:12.220 it's a sort of paranoia about things. Um, but, but, uh, she started to, to, to redirect that anxiety

00:13:20.480 in the direction of, of this, this global warming stuff, which means that it's inevitable

00:13:26.000 that somebody who, you know, with that tendency, when they start to worry about something,

00:13:31.880 they're going to worry obsessively about it. And they're going to worry overly much about it.

00:13:37.960 I, I should know because I have, I haven't been diagnosed with anything, but, uh, but I, I am no

00:13:43.340 stranger to anxiety myself. I'm no stranger to paranoia, not about the climate, but about other

00:13:47.980 things. And, um, and so I should know that, you know, when, when I get it into my head

00:13:52.760 to worry about something, I, I can't worry about it a little bit. For me, it becomes this obsessive.

00:14:00.360 And then I start in my head, I start, I start extrapolating and I build this whole nightmare

00:14:05.900 scenario that I then start worrying about. And I think that's how anxiety works for a lot of people.

00:14:10.800 And it gets even worse if you have an anxiety disorder or whatever else. Um, the point is rather

00:14:17.460 than go to this girl and calm these fears and redirect her in a, in a healthier direction

00:14:25.240 and say to her, listen, yeah, you know, it's good that we want to protect the planet and,

00:14:31.580 and it's good that you want to do, but, but you're not going to die. Okay. The world's not coming to

00:14:36.320 an end. It's going to be okay. Rather than go to her and say this, the adults in her life have only

00:14:40.420 encouraged her paranoia. And now the media is only too happy to exploit her fear in order to stoke

00:14:46.160 even more fear, creating fear with fear. That's the media specialty. This I say again is child

00:14:53.720 abuse. If any grownup in Thunberg's life really cared about her psychological and emotional wellbeing,

00:15:01.560 they would sit her down and they would explain to her that climate change is not going to destroy

00:15:06.660 human civilization. Yes, the climate is changing. Climates tend to do that. Climates always change.

00:15:12.140 They have since there ever was a climate, you know, ever since there's been a climate or an

00:15:16.660 atmosphere on earth, um, it has changed in wildly. It is, it is fluctuated in, in extremes. And it was

00:15:24.940 doing that before there was even a human beings on the planet. So, um, and they would explain that to

00:15:31.700 her and they would explain that, uh, that, you know, whatever role humans have played in that process. 0.81

00:15:37.060 And yeah, we probably have played some role, but it's highly debatable how much of a role we've

00:15:42.580 played. Um, and it seems to me that, that, that in comparison to other things that drive the climate,

00:15:48.960 such as the sun and the cycles of the sun, our role is minuscule. It would seem to me,

00:15:54.820 um, but whatever the case, you know, uh, uh, it's, it's not going to result in the end of all life.

00:16:00.720 Talk of a 10 year, 12 year, 20 year timeline before planetary catastrophe is an invention

00:16:07.560 of politicians and media personalities. This is not how scientists speak. You're not going to find

00:16:12.660 a credible scientist anywhere who will, who will endorse this idea that 12 years from now,

00:16:17.960 the world's going to come to an end. You're not going to hear that. Um, this is what would be told

00:16:24.640 to Greta Thunberg. If, if any of the adults in her life really cared about her. When I was a child,

00:16:31.240 they told us about an imminent future where there wouldn't be any rainforests. Well, now I'm living

00:16:37.360 in that imminent future, a future that I was told would not have rainforests. And there are rainforests.

00:16:42.480 And actually, by the way, the rainforests are doing pretty well. They're on the rebound.

00:16:46.620 Um, sure. There, there was a problem with deforestation. Sure. We don't, we don't want to

00:16:51.420 cut down trees for no reason. We don't want to just, um, you know, recklessly destroy, uh, forests

00:16:59.700 and rainforests. That's true. But the dystopian, the dystopian vision of the world, this vision of a

00:17:07.940 world without trees was, and I couldn't have known this at the time because I was a child, completely

00:17:12.740 insane. So it is possible to say, Hey, listen, trees are good and we shouldn't just destroy them

00:17:18.740 recklessly without also adding, Oh, and by the way, soon all the trees will be gone and we're all

00:17:23.720 going to suffocate. But the environmental alarmists, they always tack on that apocalyptic bit at the

00:17:30.240 end, undermining the validity of their own message and creating unnecessary panic. So once again, I

00:17:36.820 think we have to call this, was it what it is? It is child abuse, not just child abuse of Greta Thunberg,

00:17:42.840 but child abuse of all children who are being told this stuff and are being scared to death about it

00:17:48.860 and are being, are being, uh, you know, traumatized and terrified with these, uh, with these claims of,

00:17:56.140 of, of the end of the world, um, coming upon us. It may be a smart political move to traumatize

00:18:02.800 children this way, but it is morally atrocious. So yeah, go ahead and tell kids to recycle, tell them

00:18:09.500 to pick up trash, to plant trees, all of that. That's all fine. That's worthwhile. That's good.

00:18:14.500 But the hysteria is unjustified and wrong. Let kids be kids. They shouldn't have to wake up every

00:18:21.840 morning with hallucinatory fears about the planet's demise. When I hear about a child waking up at three

00:18:31.220 o'clock in the morning with fears of, of the end times, I don't think, Oh, isn't that nice? How

00:18:38.480 wonderful. I think that's terrible. Uh, that child needs help. That's what I would do for my child.

00:18:48.980 If my child was waking up at three in the morning, my, my, my kids might wake up sometimes with

00:18:52.080 nightmares. If they're waking up every single night with a nightmare about, about, about the end of the

00:18:57.520 world, I would go and try to get them help. That's no way to live. And it's also not true. Okay.

00:19:06.960 It's not true. There, there is no, it, it, that is not a credible claim. We can debate the degrees

00:19:17.420 and, and all of that of, of what, how exactly humans contribute to the problem of climate change.

00:19:24.740 But the pot, the apocalyptic stuff is, is clickbait. It's political manipulation. It's, it's,

00:19:32.000 it's hysteria. It's, it's hype. You know, it's all those things. It's not science. That is not

00:19:36.440 science. All right. Um, one other thing, uh, that's not that important at all, but I wanted

00:19:44.500 to mention it, uh, certainly not as important as the, um, as the apocalypse. A few days ago,

00:19:48.860 it was reported that Marvel is considering, uh, they're casting for their new X-Men movie,

00:19:54.400 I guess. And they're considering casting Denzel Washington as Magneto in the new X-Men film.

00:20:02.300 Magneto is, uh, if you're not, um, if you're not into comic book movies because you're an adult,

00:20:08.620 uh, uh, Magneto is, is one of the villains in X-Men and he's played by Ian, Ian McKellen in, in, in the,

00:20:16.100 the original X-Men movie that came out in whatever, the early 2000. Um, so now they're saying they're

00:20:21.980 going to have, they might have Denzel Washington. And, and this news was, was greeted with applause,

00:20:27.260 of course, by most people, because it's a, it's a, it's a black actor being cast in this project.

00:20:32.880 And really, can I just say, finally, somebody is giving Denzel Washington his big break. I think

00:20:37.860 it's about time. This guy's been at it for so long, playing bit parts, you know, more of a character

00:20:41.860 actor. Finally, he's getting his shot at the big time. And so on one level, I can see how that

00:20:46.600 is cause for celebration. But on the, on another level, this is also, I think a perfect example of

00:20:53.200 the hypocrisy of identity politics because Magneto, although he's a fictional character,

00:20:59.740 he is supposed to be a Jewish Holocaust survivor. And this is a crucial aspect of his backstory.

00:21:05.760 It's not a small detail. This is a big part. Now I'm no X-Men expert, but, um, I think anyone who

00:21:13.380 is will agree with me, right? That Magneto Holocaust, Jewish Holocaust survivor, this is 0.98

00:21:17.580 a really crucial, important, central aspect of his character that speaks to his motivations and

00:21:24.880 everything else. And I think that's how he became, wasn't it? That's how he became Magneto was through

00:21:30.020 some Nazi experiment. I could be wrong about that part. Don't quote me. Okay. That might be non-canonical,

00:21:34.800 but, um, at the, at the, at the very least, it's, it's a big part of his character. I know that.

00:21:39.260 Okay. Um, well, now they're talking about either casting a black American as a German Jew

00:21:50.360 or, which would be totally absurd, or they would be erasing that backstory entirely for the sake of

00:21:58.860 casting a black American in that role. Here's the thing. This is exactly the kind of thing 1.00

00:22:04.520 that if done in the reverse prompts outraged cries of whitewashing and appropriation and the rest of

00:22:11.640 it. I mean, can you imagine, can you possibly imagine if they did a Shaft remake and rather

00:22:19.760 than having Samuel L. Jackson reprise his role as Shaft, um, like he did in the, in the Shaft movie

00:22:26.720 that came out back, you know, in the early two thousands or wherever it was, imagine if rather

00:22:30.960 than, than Samuel L. Jackson, they had some white guy playing Shaft. Can you possibly conceive

00:22:39.860 of the outrage that would follow? I really believe there would be, there would be riots in the street.

00:22:46.300 I really think there would be, I don't, I'm not even exaggerating. Am I wrong? They whitewash Shaft

00:22:52.920 and, and give that role to a white guy. There would be riots. You would, there would be over that. 0.92

00:22:58.880 That's how upset the woke mob would be. Uh, and you can't say, well, it's all about representation.

00:23:07.480 Okay. Tell me how many black characters are there in the, in the, uh, comic books universe,

00:23:12.440 the, the, the film comic books universe compare the number of black characters and black actors of

00:23:19.360 which I think there are many to how many Jewish characters there are. Because I, is Magneto like 0.75

00:23:27.480 the only one as of right now? So you're talking about taking that away, that Jewish character away, 1.00

00:23:35.920 but it's just, it, it, it doesn't, it's of course, why even pointed out at this point, 0.96

00:23:42.160 but it's entirely hypocritical and inconsistent. And it just, look, either this stuff matters or it

00:23:48.780 doesn't, right? Either it matters that we remain, uh, that characters and how they're portrayed

00:23:55.740 remain racially and ethnically consistent for the sake of representation and all that kind of stuff.

00:24:03.320 Either that matters or it doesn't. Now, look, if we're all going to agree that it doesn't matter

00:24:11.440 because these are fictional characters and, and, you know, you, there can be different versions of them.

00:24:17.280 And, uh, the main thing is just to find an interesting actor who can play that role and

00:24:22.060 Hey, maybe changing it up sometimes can be kind of fun just to see what else you could do with it.

00:24:25.920 If that's our attitude, then fine. I'm, I'm all on board for that. In that case, let's do it. I'm all,

00:24:31.280 if that's what we're going to say, then fine, make Magneto black, make, make James Bond into a,

00:24:36.500 into a woman, do whatever you want, you know, make Indiana Jones into a, into a 13 year old Chinese 0.99

00:24:42.700 girl. I, you know, whatever, but then you can't stop there because then also if we take a black 1.00

00:24:52.540 character, make them white, make them Hispanic, whatever, then you can't complain about that. 0.96

00:24:56.820 Right. It's because if that's the approach, if we're all going to agree to that, then I say,

00:25:04.380 great. I think that's perfectly reasonable because these are fictional characters after all.

00:25:09.620 And we all, we all are taking this way too seriously, but what we can't do is say when it

00:25:17.620 pertains to characters of a certain skin pigmentation, that it doesn't matter if you

00:25:23.360 switch them up, but if they have different pigmentation than it does now, see, that doesn't

00:25:27.560 make any sense. We can't do that. That's not, that doesn't work. That's insane. So it matters

00:25:33.800 or it doesn't, which one is it? As far as I can tell right now, what we've agreed on is that it does

00:25:39.100 matter. And so this matters actually, not my, not by my rules, not by my rules, but by the rules

00:25:46.200 that have been established, it really matters. And it is therefore an outrage that they're talking

00:25:51.340 about, um, giving Denzel Washington this role. All right. Uh, mattwallshowatgmail.com, mattwallshowatgmail.com

00:26:00.080 is the email address. We will go to, uh, emails then this is from Scott. And I guess a little bit

00:26:11.580 of background here. We we've been talking about, well, the conversation has developed in the, in the

00:26:16.740 email portion, but, uh, a few days ago, somebody wrote to the show talking about, you know, why do

00:26:24.160 young people leave the church? Um, and, uh, why is it so in some churches denominate denominations,

00:26:30.240 it's as high as 80 or 90% of young people. Um, but no matter what church you're looking at,

00:26:35.180 it is a high percent, a troubling percentage of young people leaving the church. Question was,

00:26:40.320 why is that? I think there are a lot of reasons. One of the answers I gave is that I think there are a

00:26:46.200 lot of young people coming up in the church as they get older, they start to think of difficult,

00:26:53.140 but still very good and valid questions, theological questions, moral, philosophical questions,

00:26:59.460 scientific questions that all revolve around this question around God and Christianity and faith and

00:27:04.220 all these things. And, um, and, uh, because our churches are not dealing with these very serious,

00:27:11.880 mature adult theological philosophical questions. And instead, most churches are just giving you a

00:27:18.340 self-help lectures every, every Sunday. Uh, because of that young people are, you know,

00:27:23.240 they're going on the internet, they're going on YouTube, they're going elsewhere to find those

00:27:27.040 answers. And, um, and then eventually they decide based on the answers that they found that,

00:27:35.400 oh, what, you know what, I don't believe this anymore. And my solution is one solution, you know,

00:27:41.560 not the solution, but one thing we could do, an important step is our churches could start

00:27:46.280 dealing with some of these questions, start, um, encouraging and, and facilitating serious study

00:27:55.020 of not just the Bible, but, but the moral and philosophical questions surrounding faith.

00:28:01.080 Um, and parents should be doing this too with their kids. Uh, and maybe that's one thing we could do

00:28:09.360 to raise up a generation of serious minded Christians who, um, are not going to necessarily

00:28:16.680 have to go to YouTube or whatever to find answers to these questions because they're going to find

00:28:20.860 them in church. They're going to find them in their home. That was my, my thing. And then I got an email

00:28:24.900 yesterday from someone saying that, um, well, I'm totally wrong in what I'm in, in, in my assessment

00:28:30.120 of the problem, because actually if somebody leaves the faith, if they decide at the age of 20 or 30 or 40

00:28:36.020 that they actually don't believe and they leave, then that means that they were never Christian to

00:28:42.080 begin with. Because according to the person that emailed yesterday, it's impossible. If you ever

00:28:48.800 actually really believe in the gospel, then you could never not believe it. You could never make

00:28:55.060 the choice to not believe it. You can never decide you don't believe it. You can't, you believe it,

00:28:58.900 you, you believe that's it. Um, and this doctrine has many names, perseverance, perseverance of the

00:29:05.600 saints, uh, once saved, always saved, you know, various slogans to, but that's the very, the, the,

00:29:10.920 the basic idea. Got a lot of emails about that from people defending this doctrine. And so I'll read

00:29:16.560 just one of them and respond to it. This is from Scott says, Matt, you are unbiblical in your 0.91

00:29:21.020 assessment of someone leaving the faith, especially in your response to the email or who disagreed with

00:29:24.780 you. You used a lot of, I think statements, but not once referenced any sort of scripture in your

00:29:30.440 response. Frankly, it doesn't matter what you think about it or what I think about it.

00:29:34.840 You basically straw man his entire response into shrugging off doubts people have about

00:29:39.580 Christianity, but that's not what he said. You accused him of calling anyone with questions or

00:29:43.080 doubts, a fake Christian. And that's not what he said. He said, those who leave the faith were never

00:29:48.240 believers to begin with. So therein lies the question. Well, that, and that's not, you see,

00:29:51.660 ironically, you're straw manning me. I didn't say that he said that everyone with doubts is a fake

00:29:56.600 Christian. I said that what he's saying is that anyone who had doubts and then comes to the

00:30:01.900 conclusion, I think mistaken conclusion that Christianity is false, was therefore never a

00:30:07.740 real Christian, was always fake. And their entire 20, 30, 40 years experience of being a Christian is 0.99

00:30:13.660 invalid. That's what I accused him of saying, which is exactly what he said. And it's exactly what

00:30:18.540 you're saying. And my point is that among other things, not only is that wrong, but it has the

00:30:24.200 effect of just chasing these people further away from the truth. What do you think it's going to do

00:30:28.460 when you're, when you're telling someone that they're 40 years, when you're trying to read their

00:30:32.540 mind and tell them that what they thought they believed for 40 years, they never actually believed

00:30:37.960 and their whole experience of 40 years of being a dedicated Christian wasn't real.

00:30:42.780 Why should they listen to anything else you have to say? You're trying, you just have,

00:30:46.820 you have no basis to make that declaration. It comes off as extremely pretentious and arrogant. 0.57

00:30:52.460 And, and, and that's my point. Okay. I don't know. I think it's, I think it's a straw man. That's,

00:30:56.680 I am addressing head on your claim. And I'm telling you that in no offense meant, I just think that

00:31:01.960 it's, that it, it, it does come off as, as pretentious and arrogant. Don't take it from me.

00:31:07.480 Okay. Take it from the people who have left the church, talk to them, ask them what kind of

00:31:11.460 response they got from other Christians. And they're going to tell you that they got this a lot.

00:31:15.040 Well, you knew you were never a real Christian to begin with. Again, that is what you're saying, 0.98

00:31:18.760 Scott. You're saying if someone leaves, they were never a real Christian. Isn't that what you're

00:31:22.420 saying? I just read it. And that's what Miles said. And before we even get to whether or not

00:31:27.920 that's true, which it isn't, but talking about, you know, how helpful is that to say to people who,

00:31:35.220 who, who do leave the faith, uh, but maybe could be brought back in. That should be our goal,

00:31:40.980 right. To bring them back in. Is it going to, are you, are we going to do that? If we tell them

00:31:45.240 that their whole experience of 40 years was, was untrue, invalid, illegitimate, not real.

00:31:50.880 All right, let me go back. I don't, I'm sorry to interrupt. I'm going to read your whole email.

00:31:53.900 Um, okay. So, uh, regarding eternal security, this back is back to Scott. Um, the Bible is very

00:32:03.220 clear about it. Second Corinthians 517 describes us as a whole new creation when saved, not the same

00:32:10.980 person. You cannot go back to your previous self if you were in fact saved. Ephesians 1 13 through 14

00:32:17.040 says we are sealed. Some version says guaranteed by the promise of the Holy spirit. Even John 3 16,

00:32:24.220 which everyone knows says those who believe in him have eternal life. There are many others of course,

00:32:30.460 but these are clear to show that one who is saved is marked for eternity. If we can walk away from

00:32:35.280 the faith and lose salvation, then those passages are all lies. We were not made into new creations.

00:32:40.780 We were not sealed and we did not have eternal life. If there is a chance of losing it again,

00:32:44.200 all that said, someone who leaves the faith was never a brother or sister of Christ to begin with.

00:32:50.120 Okay. So that is what you're saying, right? That's, that's what I said. You said, that's what I said.

00:32:53.880 Miles said yesterday. And that is what you're saying. First John 2 19 addresses those who stopped

00:33:00.160 continuing in the faith and clearly says they were never of the faith to begin with. In Matthew 7 21

00:33:05.100 through 23, Jesus also says many will believe they are saved, but they are, they never were. These passages

00:33:10.180 show that salvation is not something we can lose. It also shows that there are many people who may

00:33:14.180 even fool themselves into believing they were born again, but they're not. Those who leave the faith

00:33:17.940 fall into that category. One who has doubts is natural. We all have doubts at some point, but a

00:33:21.640 follower of Christ will understand that their human understanding is inferior to God's perfect ways

00:33:25.400 and the correct answers are out there. Those who, Isaiah 55 8 is what he quotes, or doesn't quote,

00:33:32.260 but references. Those who trust their own understanding over God are showing they are never, they,

00:33:36.100 they never believed him to be the ultimate savior and Lord of their life. One who allows doubts to grow

00:33:41.180 into disbelief was never sealed or it wouldn't have been able to be pulled him away. You mentioned

00:33:45.720 the idea of a 40-year Christian who leaves the faith. Since the Bible is clear on eternal salvation,

00:33:49.560 only two options remain for that individual. Either the person is still saved, even though he rejects

00:33:53.820 and curses God, or the person never understood God, his character, and the gift of salvation.

00:33:57.660 Which one of those is more likely? Christians need to do a better job of addressing questions and

00:34:01.680 doubts when they arise in our own lives or in the lives of those in the church body. The devil will use

00:34:05.340 anything possible to get us to question God's nature going all the way back to the garden.

00:34:09.040 A Bible believer will go to the, to the word with these questions as God has revealed himself

00:34:13.740 to those who seek him. James 4, 8, Psalms 119. Okay. Um, so there's Scott, uh, uh, sorry, Scott, I,

00:34:24.560 again, I don't think I straw manned him at all, or I'm not going to straw man you. Um,

00:34:30.080 he said it's impossible for anyone who once believed to not believe anymore. I find that proposition 0.75

00:34:36.360 absurd. Um, frankly, and, uh, yes, I'm aware that lots of Christians agree with him, 0.98

00:34:44.800 but I think it is a false doctrine. Um, and it does a lot of harm in a lot of ways. That's my view.

00:34:54.480 You say I didn't give any scripture passages. That's true. You gave some, uh, you didn't actually

00:34:59.720 quote most of them. You just, you just threw out the verses, uh, which, which, which is a tactic

00:35:05.560 I notice Christians can do sometimes where they say, oh, the Bible supports me on this. And they 1.00

00:35:09.080 throw out a verse. Well, especially if it's a verbal conversation, you know, the person's not

00:35:13.720 going to sit there and look it up right there. So they have to just take your word for your

00:35:16.380 interpretation of it. I think it's important if you're going to throw out verses to actually give

00:35:19.420 the verses. Um, I think what you're doing here is, is proof texting. Okay. I think you have a doctrine

00:35:28.220 in mind that you want to support. And so you're skimming through the text to find a verse here and

00:35:34.800 there that seems to prop it up. The problem is that any doctrine can be supported that way. Any

00:35:40.640 doctrine, the, the going all the way back to the beginning, go back, go going back to, to, to, uh,

00:35:46.060 you know, uh, uh, think about the, the, the council of Nicaea in the year three 13. Think

00:35:50.520 about the, the Arians who believe that, uh, that, that Jesus Christ was not eternally

00:35:54.700 beyond of the father is not, is not one in substance with a father, but was actually a

00:35:58.060 created being. Okay. Um, did they had, they had verses they could cite. They had a lot of

00:36:04.060 verses they could cite to, to prove quote unquote, that assertion. They could do their own

00:36:10.100 proof texting. I mean, they could go to Jesus saying, why do you call me good? There's only

00:36:13.940 one that's good, uh, God, the father now in a vacuum that would seem to be Jesus distinguishing

00:36:20.140 himself from God, the father and saying he's, he's, you know, God's good. I don't call me

00:36:24.780 that because that's God. That's not me. But once we look at the totality of the gospel,

00:36:29.740 then we, we start to understand that one in context. You see, that's the danger of proof

00:36:33.360 texting. Um, and that's why I'm just, I, and that's one of the reasons why when I, when

00:36:38.440 I address these issues, I, I try to look at it to take a general view of what we're being

00:36:47.140 told in the gospels and in, in, in, in, in, in, in what the, you know, in, in Christian

00:36:52.000 tradition, because I know that if I just, I, I, you can't just take one verse and say,

00:36:56.460 well, there you go, because anyone can do that for anything. You see, that's the problem.

00:37:02.220 You have to, you have to wrestle with that. Um, and this is one of the reasons why our,

00:37:09.000 our, our debates within Christianity never get anywhere because everyone has their two 0.97

00:37:13.300 or three verses, their two or three favorite verses to prop up whatever doctrine they like.

00:37:18.080 And they just, we just throw them at each other like a food fight. And we all go home believing

00:37:22.060 what we believed before. And what we believe, um, is probably not what we learned from scripture

00:37:28.080 study. Now, I don't know, Scott, I could be wrong with this. Talk about presumptuous.

00:37:31.740 This is a presumption on my part. I could be wrong, but I think it's, it seems highly likely

00:37:36.040 that this idea of eternal salvation, once saved, always saved, that you, you didn't get that from

00:37:41.760 scripture study. You were told that growing up and then you were given the verses that supposedly

00:37:47.400 support it. Um, and I, I, I think that's an important distinction. I could be wrong, you know,

00:37:54.140 but I, I think that's where a lot of people get their doctrines. It doesn't mean the doctrines are

00:37:59.240 wrong. It just means that at a certain point you got to go back and look at it again.

00:38:05.580 Now, one thing, um, and here's one thing that, that leads me to that conclusion is that you say

00:38:12.180 the scripture is very clear, but you're saying the scripture is clear about a doctrine that didn't

00:38:18.000 really exist in any significant form in, in Christian tradition until the Calvinist came up

00:38:23.560 with it 1,500 years after Christ was crucified. Now, yeah, it's true that Augustine, you know,

00:38:30.180 uh, had, had what you make said, said a few things that you may call a sort of almost proto version of

00:38:39.540 that, but not exactly. Um, but it is just a fact of Christian history that this idea of eternal

00:38:47.020 security, one saved, always saved. This was not a doctrine that existed in any significant way

00:38:51.780 for about 1,500 years. Um, and it's a doctrine that the vast majority of Christians today and

00:38:58.380 throughout history from the beginning have either outright rejected or never even heard of. Now,

00:39:04.800 doesn't that mean that it, that it isn't true necessarily? No. Okay. It doesn't mean that it

00:39:09.600 isn't true, but doesn't that mean that it probably isn't as clear as what you're saying?

00:39:14.900 All you have to do is look at the history of Christianity. And I think an appreciation of

00:39:20.920 its history will lead you inevitably to the conclusion that this doctrine at a minimum

00:39:25.620 is unclear. So I don't understand when Christians do this. They take some highly contested doctrine 0.99

00:39:34.660 that people have been at arguing about for centuries and they say, it's clear. Well,

00:39:39.960 if it's so clear, then why is everyone arguing about it? Unless you're suggesting that everybody

00:39:44.680 is stupid except for you. And I don't think you are suggesting that, but if you're not suggesting 1.00

00:39:50.520 that, then you have to admit that it's at least possible for sincere and intelligent and faithful

00:39:55.840 Christians to read the same texts you're reading and come to the opposite conclusion. And in fact, 0.87

00:40:02.400 billions of Christianity, Christians from the very beginning have done just that,

00:40:06.300 which means that your conclusion, correct or not, is not entirely clear. So I would just urge maybe

00:40:14.660 for all of us a little bit of humility when we're dealing with these, and I say this to myself too,

00:40:19.900 but when we're dealing with these highly contentious doctrines, especially ones that,

00:40:25.140 as I said, didn't really exist for about 1500 years. You might say they existed because they're in 0.56

00:40:31.820 the gospels or they're in the, you know, they're in the, they're in the epistles, which is mostly what

00:40:35.420 you mentioned. Um, okay. Well, at a minimum, nobody had noticed them for about 1500 years,

00:40:41.420 which would seem to, at least means you should pump the brakes on. It's very clear.

00:40:49.800 Okay. Now, um, so I could, I could, uh, uh, I could throw verses at you too. Um, Hebrews 10 26,

00:40:57.380 for if we sin willfully after that, we have received the knowledge of the truth. There remains

00:41:02.220 no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation,

00:41:06.980 which shall devour, devour the adversaries. Hebrews 10 38. Now the just shall live by faith,

00:41:13.340 but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him, but we are not of them who draw back

00:41:18.760 unto perdition, uh, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul. What I get from verses like

00:41:24.580 this and the dozens of others like it is that a person can willfully draw back after having come

00:41:33.980 to believe. I could say just as well, it's clear. It's right there in the verse, willfully draw back,

00:41:41.140 which seems to tell me you could believe and then willfully draw back because that's what it says,

00:41:45.900 right? Um, there is, there's nothing in those verses that supports one saved, always saved,

00:41:52.100 understood unless you're determined to take the few verses you mentioned, interpret them a certain

00:41:58.340 way, and then interpret every other verse through that lens. But here's the problem. You're interpreting

00:42:05.620 all the rest of the verses through the, through the verse, through the few verses you cited. Well,

00:42:10.160 how do you know that you're not supposed to be interpreting those verses through the lens of

00:42:14.700 the verses that I cited? How do you know that? Now you actually mentioned this. You mentioned

00:42:20.620 Matthew 7, 21. Um, although you didn't quote it, let me quote it. Not everyone that says to me,

00:42:27.280 Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that does the will of my father, which is

00:42:31.500 in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name and in

00:42:36.920 your name have cast out devils and in your name done many wonderful works. And then I will profess to

00:42:41.460 them, I never knew you depart from me, you evil doers. Now this is very important because the way that

00:42:48.300 you interpreted that is that you said what Jesus was saying is that, yeah, there are a lot of people

00:42:52.720 who thought they believed and, uh, and then it's going to turn out that they really didn't, you know,

00:42:56.720 that's not what he said though. That is not what he said. There is no version of this verse that I'm aware

00:43:04.180 of in any translation anywhere ever that says that all of the translations either say evil doers

00:43:12.300 or something like workers of iniquity. That's the King James version, I believe. 0.98

00:43:18.100 So he doesn't say depart from me. You never believed. You just thought you believed.

00:43:23.200 He says depart from me because you did the wrong thing. So he's talking about willful actions,

00:43:30.760 workers of iniquity, evil doers. Now, again, you have your doctrine in mind. You have those few verses.

00:43:38.180 You're interpreting it through a certain lens. So you are determined to interpret that as him really

00:43:43.080 saying that, well, the reason they did the wrong thing is because they didn't really believe.

00:43:47.880 That's not what he actually said though. That's just the lens through which you are viewing it.

00:43:56.920 I think if you take him at his own word, it really seems like Jesus is saying there are people who

00:44:02.080 basically are Christians, but they did, they do evil. And so they're not coming. 1.00

00:44:06.140 But taking Jesus at his own words here, that seems to really be what he's saying.

00:44:15.100 And then there's a lot of stuff like this in Galatians. It is freedom for Christ that Christ

00:44:19.480 has set us free. Stand firm then and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

00:44:25.020 Why are we being told to stand firm? Why are we being exhorted to stand firm if standing firm is

00:44:30.020 somehow an automatic consequence of once having been saved? Why are there so many passages in the Bible

00:44:35.120 telling us to stand firm if we automatically do that with no effort? And then there's this kind

00:44:41.820 of thing like in Matthew. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it

00:44:45.000 away. It's better to lose one part of your body than for the whole body to go into hell. I mean, 0.98

00:44:48.580 that sounds an awful lot like an injunction to believers. It sounds an awful lot like Jesus is

00:44:53.840 saying this to people who already believe. And now he's exhorting you, he's telling you, commanding you

00:44:59.880 to be very careful. And if you're sinning to cut off this aspect of your life or that aspect of your

00:45:05.240 life, which really seems to suggest that you could be a believer and still go to hell.

00:45:13.280 Which also would really seem to suggest that you could be a believer and then stop being one.

00:45:19.300 I mean, why does Jesus, and this is my point about looking at the totality of scripture,

00:45:23.320 why does Jesus spend so much time giving commands and exhortations to believers if their continued

00:45:30.600 belief and thus salvation is already guaranteed? What's the point? It just doesn't seem like there's

00:45:35.660 any point to it. In fact, what's the point about 90% of the Bible, considering that almost all of it

00:45:41.100 is directed to believers and so much of it contains instructions about what we should do to get on and

00:45:48.060 stay on the path to salvation. And this is why I don't want to just throw verses at you. What I'm

00:45:53.760 saying is look at the entire thing. I think your doctrine here has just negated almost all of it

00:46:01.620 because there's no point of it. I'm sure you would say to Christians, make sure you read your Bible,

00:46:06.940 make sure you stay strong in your faith. Why though? You just said it's automatic. Now you might say,

00:46:11.880 well, if you're really a Christian, you'll want to read your Bible. Okay, well, that's totally 0.70

00:46:15.040 different though. I mean, do you think Christians should? Is it something that, not do they want to, 1.00

00:46:19.480 should they? I think they should, but why do you think they should? You're saying that it's

00:46:25.220 guaranteed and you're going to heaven. I mean, nothing's going to change it. Nothing can change

00:46:28.560 it. You can't even change it. So what's the point? I mean, at a minimum, it's, it's, you know,

00:46:33.200 yeah, you could read the Bible or don't. You're going, you're going to heaven either way, right?

00:46:37.760 It's, according to you. And by the way, how did Adam and Eve get kicked out of the Garden of Eden?

00:46:47.940 They believed, didn't they? I mean, no, no, no, no, there's nothing in there, but in fact,

00:46:54.200 there's nothing in there about belief at all. In fact, in the entire Old Testament, there's almost

00:46:58.420 nothing about belief. There's really no emphasis on belief, hardly at all in the Old Testament.

00:47:04.720 it's, it's, it's all about doing what you do, your, your willful actions, starting with the thing

00:47:12.820 that kicked it off in the Garden of Eden. They were in paradise physically. They changed their

00:47:18.740 minds. They lost it. What about Satan? Satan was in heaven. He was in heaven already as an angel,

00:47:26.500 changed his mind. So Adam and Eve can lose paradise. Satan can lose heaven, but we can't change our

00:47:33.680 minds. It's impossible. Does that make any sense? If once saved, always saved is true,

00:47:39.860 then the fall could not have happened. The fact that the fall happened clearly indicates

00:47:46.200 that we can be in Christ on earth, on earth, and then leave. Clearly indicates that.

00:47:57.040 I mean, you could say, well, why would, if you really believe, why would God let you leave?

00:48:03.020 That's a good question. Why did he let Adam and Eve leave? Why did he let Satan leave? That's an

00:48:06.900 entirely different question. All I know is that he does let those things happen because that's,

00:48:11.260 our whole faith is based on that. And then we get to the common sense aspect of this,

00:48:16.460 and I got to wrap this up, but common sense tells us that human beings are perfectly capable

00:48:20.680 of believing something and really believing with all their hearts and then not believing it anymore.

00:48:25.800 You know, you are insisting, not only contrary to scripture, but contrary to the collective

00:48:30.680 experience of all human beings, that we can't change our mind about something like this, yet we

00:48:35.580 all know that we can. You know, and you still haven't accounted for all the millions of people

00:48:41.340 who have changed their minds. They thought they believed when they didn't. I mean, what does that

00:48:46.580 even mean? What does that actually mean? How can you think you believe something that you

00:48:50.980 don't really believe? Can you explain that? How can a person for 40 years thinks he believes

00:48:56.800 something, but then he doesn't believe it? It turns out he never believed it the whole time.

00:49:00.960 He thought he believed it, but he doesn't. Isn't thinking you believe something exactly the

00:49:05.120 same as believing it? Tell me the distinction between thinking you believe something and believing

00:49:11.520 it. I want you to define that distinction. I don't think you can, because I think it's

00:49:15.640 exactly the same. Now, it's one thing to say he thought something was true, and then he thought

00:49:21.580 it wasn't. It's another thing to say he thought something was true, and then he realized he never

00:49:28.440 thought it. I mean, what? Does that even make sense, Scott? It doesn't make sense to me. I literally

00:49:35.460 cannot make sense of that. I don't even know what that means. So that's part of my problem with

00:49:40.120 the whole doctrine is that it seems logically incoherent because you are proposing a state

00:49:49.060 of mind that is impossible for a human. You're proposing a state of mind where you at one level

00:49:54.520 believe something totally and completely, and at another level, not at all. Now, this might be

00:49:58.840 possible for people with split brain syndrome, but for those of us with an intact, fully functioning

00:50:03.440 brain, it doesn't seem possible. So it seems that based on your reading of a few Bible verses,

00:50:10.420 you are discounting every other Bible verse, and along the way, also discounting the personal

00:50:14.280 experience of millions of people and proposing that you can speak for their mental states better

00:50:18.500 than they can. And at the same time, you're suggesting that the human mind can do something,

00:50:23.080 namely accept and reject a proposition simultaneously that I think it really cannot do.

00:50:28.580 So that's my issue. Okay. And I will, I think I've said enough on the topic of this, but I can go

00:50:39.800 for another two hours if you want, if anyone's interested. All right. But I, but I do, I do

00:50:45.920 appreciate the emails and, and I do, and these, these are the kinds of questions. I mean, really,

00:50:49.760 these are the kinds of questions that interest me more than any of this political stuff or climate

00:50:52.840 change. I don't know if you can tell that, but that's why I spend most of my time on this stuff.

00:50:57.880 I just find it a lot more interesting. So I appreciate all of the feedback. Thanks everybody

00:51:04.180 for watching. Thanks for listening. Godspeed.

00:51:27.880 If you want to delve the depths of leftist madness, head on over to the Michael Knowles Show, where we examine

00:51:56.060 what's really going on beneath the surface of our politics and bask in the simple joys of being right.

The Matt Walsh Show - September 24, 2019

Ep. 338 - Climate Alarmism Is Child Abuse

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript