The NXR Podcast - THE LIVESTREAM - Why Leftists Hate Kings

00:00:00.000 Leave us a five-star review on your favorite podcast platform.

00:00:03.960 I get it.

00:00:04.620 It's annoying.

00:00:05.380 Everybody asks, but I'm going to tell you why.

00:00:07.660 When you give us a positive review, what that does is it triggers the algorithm so that

00:00:12.440 our podcast shows up on more people's news feeds.

00:00:16.280 You and I both know that this ministry is willing to talk about things that most ministries

00:00:20.820 aren't.

00:00:21.860 We need this content for the glory of God to reach more people's ears.

00:00:30.000 four to six million people were present at the no kings protest over this past weekend all over

00:00:41.260 major cities here in america now of course what they're protesting is the idea that donald trump

00:00:47.540 is a tyrant that he is behaving like a king and that in our american context we're not supposed

00:00:55.880 to have kings. Now, I was tempted to be present at these protests as well. In my case, I would

00:01:02.100 have been protesting. There's no kings. Donald Trump should be acting like a king, but he's not

00:01:08.180 even behaving close to that. Lord, please, in your mercy, make Donald Trump half the man that

00:01:14.920 my enemies think he is. No, he's not being tyrannical. He's not behaving like a king,

00:01:20.720 not even close. But it kind of got us thinking, here with Right Response Ministries,

00:01:26.780 what's so bad about a king? Now, historically, we know the answers to that question, and we'll

00:01:32.620 cover it in today's episode. There are real drawbacks to a monarchy. And yet, at the same

00:01:38.400 time, now about a quarter of a millennia into this American project, I think what we have to

00:01:45.340 recognize is that although there may be drawbacks to a monarchy there have been massive drawbacks

00:01:51.560 to our absence of a monarch monarchical figure as well that's going to be the topic of our show

00:01:59.080 today tune in now in the chat i see somebody saying is donald trump a saved man

00:02:14.860 I don't think so. I don't think so. I want him to be, obviously. I want him to go to heaven. I want him to know Christ. But every time he opens his mouth in regards to Christian theology and belief, he seems to kind of reveal the fact that he does not know anything about the gospel and the Christian faith.

00:02:39.080 and it also does not help his case,

00:02:41.420 the fact that he is celebrating sand demons

00:02:44.300 in the Oval Office. 0.99

00:02:47.120 I was about to say,

00:02:47.720 when he's not talking about Christian theology,

00:02:49.360 he's probably hosting some type of interest group

00:02:51.840 that's not Heritage Americans

00:02:53.080 for some type of holiday

00:02:54.500 no American in the past has ever celebrated.

00:02:56.960 Right.

00:02:57.260 Neither of them are great.

00:02:58.200 And not just a holiday,

00:02:58.900 but performing religious rituals to idols.

00:03:04.040 I mean, it's a big deal.

00:03:05.260 I tweeted out today,

00:03:06.240 I'm going to say it right now real quick

00:03:07.460 before we get into the topic for today's episode.

00:03:09.580 But I tweeted out earlier today, and I tagged J.D. Vance

00:03:13.800 and saying, look, here's your chance.

00:03:17.620 You say that you're a Christian.

00:03:20.440 This is your chance to make your allegiance to Christ known.

00:03:24.760 1 Kings 18 says that Elijah, he went before all the people.

00:03:29.980 This is at Mount Carmel, this showdown between Elijah

00:03:34.000 and the prophets of Baal, the altars 0.91

00:03:37.080 that they build and calling down fire from heaven. Many of you, you're familiar with the story.

00:03:41.980 But before all this goes down, Elijah, he gathers all the people to come on the sidelines and watch

00:03:47.340 this contest between the gods. And he says to the people, how long will you go on limping between

00:03:54.300 two opinions? If the Lord is God, serve him. If Baal is God, then serve him. And I think of J.D.

00:04:03.560 vance and i think of this hindu celebration in the white house now he wasn't in the room it was

00:04:09.700 donald trump and a bunch of indians bunch of him not steven miller for the record either

00:04:14.220 our guy miller was not in in the room as well um but that still happened in the white house

00:04:19.820 jd vance is vice president of the united states and he claims to be a christian

00:04:25.200 but his wife is hindu and from people that i've talked to behind the scenes because i've heard

00:04:31.920 rumblings and rumors that she may be converted to Catholicism. But as I have explored that and

00:04:38.360 talking to some people behind the scenes who would know, from what I've heard, that is a rumor that

00:04:45.540 is not true. She is still Hindu. She is not converted to Catholicism. So you have a man

00:04:53.720 who is heritage America, vice president, and claims to be Christian, married to a Hindu who 0.96

00:05:01.160 worships false gods, 300 million false gods to be precise. And then the worship of those false gods 0.97

00:05:07.920 is taking place on your watch in the White House. J.D. Vance should come out publicly today and he

00:05:15.940 should denounce the worship of idols that God will not bless in the White House in these United

00:05:23.120 States. We'll see. Will he choose Christ or will he limp between two opinions? In his case,

00:05:30.760 not just the Lord and the Baals, but the God of his heritage, 0.84

00:05:38.160 the God and Savior of his soul, or the God of his wife. 0.58

00:05:43.000 There's a reason why King Solomon, towards the end of his life, fell.

00:05:49.000 It's because he married and took wives from foreign lands who worshiped foreign gods.

00:05:55.320 it's a tragedy um but jd vance he's done some good things but um i remain highly suspicious

00:06:04.040 um claim to love america she literally wrote a book hillbilly elegy where you blatantly say

00:06:11.520 in the book that one of the reasons why you married a foreign wife from a foreign country

00:06:16.560 who worships foreign gods is because of your embarrassment and shame of your own people

00:06:23.760 chat are we back hashtag based uh i don't think so all right let's talk about monarchy ready

00:06:32.700 it's important to remember in politics that the perfect system there is no abstract perfect

00:06:37.440 political system but all of politics is contextual so there are contexts where some things might work

00:06:42.980 and other ones where the exact same system might not work i think of uh norway for example and

00:06:48.080 a very socialized medicine system there now i'm not advocating for that type of system

00:06:52.200 But with a population of 5 million, that's highly homogenous, highly healthy, and low-crime, that type of system for socializing medicine, it's going to look a lot different and be a lot less intrusive and whatever it would be in America than it would be here with 330 million people who are very much so not healthy, very much so very diverse.

00:07:12.820 There are just different considerations when it comes to what political system, what economic system works best for these people. 0.70

00:07:19.460 So what we're not going to say in this episode is across all times and all places, monarchy is always going to be the best form of government.

00:07:27.180 That's not what we're saying.

00:07:28.600 However, what we are saying is that as you look across history and you look specifically at the last 250 years,

00:07:34.240 I think of the French Revolution, that beheaded kings, that there's this strain running through it where the side that's revolutionary,

00:07:41.860 the side that bends towards liberalism and egalitarianism, that they have in their heart

00:07:47.540 a hatred for monarchs, a hatred for kings. It's as if the position itself existing,

00:07:54.520 a king ruling over the land, it burns and chafes at them like kryptonite. It's not a coincidence

00:08:00.360 in 1917, October of 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution, the last absolute monarch. There's absolute 0.89

00:08:07.360 monarchs, so those are monarchs that are not tethered by a constitution. They can essentially

00:08:11.100 do whatever they have the political will to do. Absolute monarchs, constitutional monarchs. The

00:08:16.580 last absolute monarch in Europe, the Tsar of Russia, was deposed, taken out, eventually killed

00:08:22.360 him and his daughters. But it wasn't by Christians, and it wasn't even by Europeans. It was by 0.51

00:08:29.180 Bolsheviks, of which 90% of their leadership was Jewish. It was by communists. Communism saw 0.88

00:08:35.160 the biggest threat to their rise, to their establishment of communism, was a king.

00:08:41.900 I'm going to define monarchy here. This is from a very critical source.

00:08:45.700 The title of the paper is Why Monarchy Must Be Abolished.

00:08:48.440 But I'm going to lay down a definition. I'm going to lay down the most common critique of monarchy.

00:08:52.900 So reading now from Christos Kiryakou, Why Monarchy Must Be Abolished.

00:08:57.340 Monarchy is a form of government that, roughly, dictates that the right to rule

00:09:01.820 is inherited by birth, by a single ruler.

00:09:05.620 But monarchy, absolute or constitutional,

00:09:08.300 breaches fundamental moral principles

00:09:09.920 that undergird representative democracy

00:09:11.860 such as basic moral equality, dignity, and desert.

00:09:16.500 Simply put, the monarchs and their family

00:09:18.820 are treated as morally superior to ordinary citizens

00:09:22.480 and as a result, ordinary citizens

00:09:24.480 are treated in an unfair and an undignified manner.

00:09:28.180 For example, monarchs are respected,

00:09:29.580 enjoy dignity, income, opportunity, and public office, and exalted social status just because

00:09:35.160 of their inherited office, which is due to a mere historical accident of family lineage.

00:09:40.960 Mere historical accident of family lineage. Hence, we have good moral reason to abolish

00:09:46.940 monarchy. And that's kind of his summation, his executive summary of his entire paper,

00:09:51.820 him arguing, again, this is very recent, 2023, very much so a very liberal frame of thinking,

00:09:58.100 hey monarchy at the end of the day it's got to go there's still a few monarchs left in the world

00:10:03.320 today it's got to go because it might cause people to think that there's a hierarchy and

00:10:08.580 some people are better than others and we can't have that you're telling me people some people

00:10:12.920 by their birth might have a different higher social station than others crazy abolish so

00:10:20.700 monarchy there are still some monarchs left but listen to what basically happened this is world

00:10:24.420 war one and world war two and it needs to be seen that these are kind of the the turning point that

00:10:28.080 as this all turns on, those basically mark the end of monarchs as we knew them in Europe.

00:10:32.800 Reading now from Solomon Larty, the decline of monarchy in the 21st century, he says this,

00:10:37.380 almost half of the countries in the world with monarchies disappeared in the 20th century.

00:10:41.360 In the middle of the century, the total of 59 monarchies in the world existing at the

00:10:45.400 start of the century, only 28 remained.

00:10:47.880 More than 50% of monarchies were changed into republics in the second half of the century,

00:10:52.340 northern and western Europe, as well as Japan.

00:10:54.120 saw the stable development of parliamentary constitutional monarchies. Sweden, Denmark,

00:10:59.700 Norway, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and the Kingdom of Thailand were

00:11:02.960 constitutional monarchies with very few power-granting elections that were all passed down

00:11:07.900 to lower political administrative institutions. And one of the key things to note here, for example,

00:11:12.940 England has a monarch. We did an episode a while ago, the state must correct the church. And there

00:11:17.820 actually is a head of the state. And when he's installed into his office as king, he's given a

00:11:22.500 charge to protect the church, and that would be the King of England and the Anglican Church.

00:11:26.520 But as you'll notice here, these guys, they practically have no real power left. So we're

00:11:31.040 not even just talking about the title itself. We're also talking about everything that comes

00:11:35.720 with it, that even the so-called kings we have today that formally would wear a crown and formally

00:11:41.140 be installed, formally charged with protecting of the Church of England, functionally, practically,

00:11:46.760 they do next to nothing or worse are the rubber stamp to allow progressive reforms to happen

00:11:53.380 and so you really have you've had especially I would say leading up to about 2020 you've had a

00:11:58.400 dearth of great men certainly those lacking the title of king but even those that maybe had the

00:12:04.280 title of king or were in some type of executive position like our president lacked even the power

00:12:10.020 granted to them to do anything I don't know about you I would say things have not been we've talked

00:12:16.640 about this before, we've been on a decline for a good couple hundred years. And I would say the

00:12:21.940 last 50 has been especially worse. And I would never pretend as though we've been in a decline

00:12:26.700 and here's the one thing that did it. Here was our fault. Here's the error. Here's what all boils

00:12:30.860 down to. We got rid of kings. But I don't think it's a coincidence that the man who is called

00:12:36.380 to emulate virtue, to stir the people to goodness, it's crazy the way some of the reformers talked

00:12:42.720 about the kings, listen to Samuel Rutherford. He said, a king hath a political resemblance

00:12:47.980 to the king of heavens, being a little god, and so is above any one man. John Calvin said,

00:12:56.460 when good magistrates rule, we see God. When good magistrates rule, we see God, as it were,

00:13:03.040 near us and governing us by means of those whom he hath appointed. The good king in ancient times,

00:13:09.740 he stirred the will of the people to something greater. He himself was better. And I don't think

00:13:17.020 I don't get the sense that it was, uh, I'm great. And I have all of these, all this nobility and

00:13:22.480 all this prowess and all these resources. And if you work hard and apply yourself, you can be this

00:13:27.340 too. But there's something in the heart of man that looks to a great man and says, I'm not going

00:13:31.160 to be like him. The men in Richard, the Lionheart's company, they're always going to recognize, yeah,

00:13:35.200 this guy he's a better fighter than us but it's an honor to be in his company it's an honor to

00:13:40.160 serve under him and i would die for that man i don't think it's a coincidence as that died that

00:13:46.020 we have now a managerial state we have the rise of feminism we have safety first and we have i mean

00:13:52.680 think of donald trump as a great example a dearth of great men a lot of us thought trump was the

00:13:57.560 great man right 2016 2018 2020 it's becoming increasingly clear that he's not it doesn't

00:14:04.480 look like J.D. Vance will be either. We've lost our great men and we lost the king along with it.

00:14:10.040 Yeah. Yeah. And maybe it's for the best that we don't have kings because we don't seem to have

00:14:16.080 anyone fit to be a king today. And maybe in God's mercy, that might change. But let's spend a little

00:14:22.800 bit of time just so that people understand the disclaimers to our position, because there are

00:14:27.480 some um let's spend a little bit of time just addressing some of the drawbacks and uh the

00:14:33.800 pitfalls of monarchy right so one it's obvious that i think has to be mentioned is that if you

00:14:41.040 have a bad king um then you're you're in big trouble right you have a bad king and a monarchical

00:14:47.680 system uh then there's really uh virtually zero checks and balances um not now even then not

00:14:55.440 entirely because uh even with you know absolute monarchs in the past uh the ultimate check and

00:15:01.660 balance is still the kingdom the people right there is a rich heritage of the people rising up

00:15:08.900 at various times in various places and killing a king that's who disposed the czar that's who

00:15:14.500 disposed the kings in france the people they were sick of him he didn't rule well they were done

00:15:18.580 yeah you were a bad king uh you eventually got taken out um so there was you know uh just a

00:15:26.220 even if it wasn't formal or baked into the system it wasn't on paper it's not in any constitution

00:15:31.380 it's still just a reality of nature uh that the people uh if they're all against you then you

00:15:38.300 know then the king ultimately is powerless he uh he really no matter what form of government you have

00:15:43.280 your rulers, be they presidents or council members or kings or parliament or whatever,

00:15:51.260 your rulers really only have as much power as the people allow for. At the end of the day,

00:15:56.580 it's not even just legislation and laws, but it's political will. And that political will

00:16:01.640 is ultimately governed by the people. What is the will of the people? So yes, there was always

00:16:09.000 an informal check and balance to even an absolute monarch in the sense of the people being able to

00:16:17.060 quite literally physically overthrow him, either banish him or death. But aside from that, at least

00:16:23.900 on paper, in an absolute monarch, there was no real check and balance. And perhaps some of the

00:16:30.160 greatest examples that we could point to without even just looking at history over the last couple

00:16:34.660 thousand years, we can look at the biblical history in the Old Testament with Old Covenant

00:16:39.820 Israel and the kings that they had. And we know that under that system, it was pretty much a

00:16:45.920 ratio of two, three, four bad kings to every one good king. And whenever there was a bad king

00:16:53.300 in the land, the people suffered. And it wasn't just, you know, it's like, well, how come we don't

00:16:59.680 have all these examples of Israel, you know, turning against their king when they had a bad

00:17:03.540 king? Well, because the king, often his will, his devotion, or lack thereof, it shaped the people.

00:17:12.440 And so when there were bad kings in Israel who would exalt high places to false gods,

00:17:17.380 the Asherah poles, the altars to the Baals, when these things would take place, a lot of times the

00:17:24.140 people would not ultimately rebel against the king because their hearts and minds would be shaped by 0.65

00:17:29.600 the king and they would follow him into idolatry, into compromise, and Israel would fall underneath 0.69

00:17:35.780 God's curses rather than his blessing. And sometimes that would lend towards ultimately 0.73

00:17:41.440 captivity and bondage by another nation until the people ultimately would repent. And then God would

00:17:48.160 spare them and save them and raise up a deliverer, whether it be one of the judges or whatever it

00:17:54.000 may be or even a foreign king that God used in a providential benevolent way like Cyrus and they

00:18:00.980 would be released and able to go back to their land and and rebuild you know the temple and the

00:18:09.040 walls and Jerusalem and their kingdom and so the point is that there are obvious drawbacks but I

00:18:17.260 think what we've overlooked is you know the argument that we're making today is not that

00:18:21.420 why don't we have a king? What could possibly go wrong? I think we have enough biblical examples

00:18:27.680 and historic examples. Everybody knows good and well what could go wrong. I think the argument

00:18:34.420 that we want to make in today's episode is not that the drawbacks of monarchy are a boogeyman

00:18:44.180 or overemphasized, because I think they're obvious and I think they're real, but rather that

00:18:50.220 what I think we've missed and neglected is the massive significant drawbacks to the absence

00:18:58.420 of a king. I think that's what we need to address in today's episode. There's a comment that I want

00:19:05.020 to hit. He's commented a few times now. This is JMG. If we can go back to the top of the chat

00:19:12.980 and look at his first comment jmg he said uh keep going up towards uh it's i think his very first

00:19:24.480 comment there it is he said meritocracy plus democracy is good at all times for all peoples 0.88

00:19:33.500 oh wow quite retarded uh jmg i feel for you and i it really really really pains me to have to 0.84

00:19:42.040 publicly humiliate you like this, but my friend, you need it. Meritocracy plus democracy is good 0.97

00:19:49.620 at all times for all peoples. No, no, it is not. Not at all. Mostly not so much because of the

00:20:02.480 meritocracy, although we could go into problems even with that. But the democracy portion,

00:20:08.640 Um, what I would say is that, uh, that, that second piece democracy completely undoes the

00:20:16.460 first piece meritocracy, uh, democracy by its, its innate definition, um, eradicates

00:20:27.180 even the mere possibility of a meritocracy what democracy allows for, or not just what

00:20:34.680 allows for, what it ultimately mandates is a race to the bottom. That's what democracy does. It

00:20:42.080 brings down the entire polis to the lowest common denominator. It says that those who don't have 1.00

00:20:51.600 merit and that therefore don't deserve higher positions and stations and vocations in society,

00:20:59.720 that they have an equal say in the country so what do you do right so you're saying well it

00:21:07.160 should be meritocracy plus democracy well what do you do if 50 percent of the population plus one

00:21:13.900 happens to be lower right they have more vices than virtue uh they have uh they they have less

00:21:24.460 intelligence and gifting and capacity when it comes to work contribution vocation that's

00:21:31.440 productivity yeah but they still are the majority right so so what what you're assuming there to say

00:21:39.000 that it that it's good for all people at all times right that's that's the part that's most

00:21:44.260 insane about your comment um that what that implies is really just um well it's really just

00:21:52.140 a lack of theological understanding of total depravity. And I think this is kind of what I

00:21:56.760 want to get at is it was that theological understanding for many of the founders of

00:22:05.500 our nation that caused them to have such an aversion towards kings. Well, like if power

00:22:12.580 corrupts, then absolute power corrupts absolutely. Okay, but to think that because of total depravity

00:22:21.960 no man would be fit to be a virtuous king so what we'll do instead is we'll make every man king

00:22:28.080 right that that makes no sense at all right it's not total depravity for one individual and it

00:22:34.240 happens to be the monarch and everybody else is going to be virtuous if total depravity is true

00:22:40.380 then it's true for every man then it's it's true for the populace not just the monarch and so the

00:22:47.800 problem with this idea that meritocracy plus democracy is going to be this eternal, constant,

00:22:55.200 positive good for all people and all times is that democracy and meritocracy are actually at

00:23:03.220 all times opposed to one another. We can't have meritocracy because of democracy. I would point

00:23:13.280 to 2020 and 2021, kind of the high watermark of progressive leftist policies and wokeness and BLM

00:23:22.640 and all these things, I would look at that and say, that was the complete reversal of meritocracy.

00:23:29.060 It was, give me this, give me that. Why? Because you're the best man for the job? Because you earned

00:23:38.240 it because you worked harder than others? No, because I'm oppressed. No, because I've been

00:23:44.760 mistreated. No, because I'm just loud and obnoxious and demanding. Okay, well, that's the exact

00:23:55.140 opposite of a meritocracy. Well, how did we get there? Well, we got there through democracy. We

00:24:01.900 got there because enough people felt that way and raised their voices loud enough, made enough

00:24:09.020 of a racket to where, you know, well, the majority at this moment seemed to be saying this and voting

00:24:17.620 in this direction. And so all of a sudden you had Ivy League colleges, universities doing the

00:24:26.100 opposite of a meritocracy. They were banning certain qualified, overqualified individuals

00:24:32.100 from admission to their schools on the basis not of meritocracy, but on the basis of them simply 0.50

00:24:40.220 being white, you know, and in many cases also Asian. So I think that democracy and meritocracy, 0.85

00:24:48.840 the idea that, well, if you just have both working in tandem, then you're good to go.

00:24:54.460 That's the best system, you know, on God's green earth.

00:24:57.620 No, you just picked two things that are diametrically opposed to one another.

00:25:02.420 You cannot have meritocracy with a raw, true democracy.

00:25:07.880 You can have some democratic elements, but that's not what we, we don't have a republic,

00:25:13.280 right?

00:25:13.520 I know we do on paper.

00:25:14.980 It'd be nice if we did in reality, but you have to understand this.

00:25:18.000 We do not have currently in the United States of America, a constitutional republic.

00:25:22.980 We don't.

00:25:23.780 we have a raw democracy, and it's the very thing that every single one of our founders

00:25:28.960 decried and detested. None of the American founders had a single positive thing to say

00:25:36.520 about democracy, at least a raw, true democracy. But the moment that we extended the vote

00:25:42.660 to everyone, to everyone, then we got a true, raw democracy. We got universal suffrage.

00:25:51.000 And then we coupled universal suffrage, which was already troubling enough.

00:25:57.300 And we coupled that with not just everyone in the country gets a say, but then we coupled it with

00:26:03.200 poorest borders. So now everyone in the world gets a say. And we coupled it with foreign interests

00:26:11.260 and lobbying. So not just every individual in the world can come in and immediately get a vote

00:26:18.000 and get a say, but even those who don't come in, entire entities, like APAC, they can get a say.

00:26:25.920 And I think that brings us to another benefit of a monarchy. So the obvious drawback of a monarchy

00:26:32.040 is what if you have a bad king? And we know that throughout history and throughout biblical Old

00:26:36.960 Testament history, there will be plenty of times where there is a bad king. So we can't sit here

00:26:42.540 pretend that that's not a reality. It is. But in terms of some of the benefits, right now when I

00:26:50.420 think of all the foreign interests, all the corrupt, dirty money in our elections here in

00:26:58.700 America, you can actually tie that in many ways to the fact that we don't have a king. Because we

00:27:05.940 have raw democracy, universal suffrage, and elections where people can vote for stuff.

00:27:12.800 That's what it is. If anybody can stand up on their soapbox and rally 50% plus one of the

00:27:20.400 population of any town or any state or our country as a whole to say, we want stuff. It's not about

00:27:28.180 who's the most virtuous. It's not about who's presenting the best policies. It's about who

00:27:34.660 will give me someone else's stuff and all you have to do is convince half of the populace plus one

00:27:40.740 to be on board with that and so then then what you get and because of elections so not just

00:27:46.780 universal suffrage not just raw democracy but elections in and of themselves what you have is

00:27:52.960 you basically have the economic mode of capitalism applied to politics right it's no longer about

00:28:02.340 virtue and policies it's about visibility many people will simply go and vote for the candidate

00:28:08.160 that they've heard of right so then the question is who can raise the most funding right because

00:28:13.860 in terms of um familiarity right i've oh i i saw an ad on tv or oh i got a mailer or oh you know

00:28:21.680 i saw him on my favorite podcast or like that's atlanta uh kamala harris when she launched her

00:28:27.300 campaign she was bringing all sorts of rappers out on stage right so the advertisement was we're

00:28:31.560 gonna have a free concert with these rappers that you've heard of also here will be kamala harris

00:28:35.600 georgia was a swing state boom thousands and thousands of people oh yeah i know her the thing

00:28:40.240 my favorite thing is these are not just rappers who did this out of the goodness of their heart

00:28:43.840 they were paid right and you're allowed to it's legal um so so then what it comes down to is uh

00:28:51.160 every every election is literally just a capitalistic battle of who can raise the most

00:28:57.540 money and then when you're trying to raise the most money well then you're going to take every

00:29:02.740 single dollar that you can and be racking your brain 24 7 of how you can get more funding and

00:29:08.780 at a certain point you've eaten up all the funding that's available in your country in in your

00:29:14.560 district or wherever the election is whether it be local or national and so then you look beyond

00:29:19.360 that so now you're looking to foreign lobbies you're looking to apac you're looking to you know

00:29:25.480 different foreign political groups to come and fund you for their interest. So now you're not

00:29:34.920 even representing the interest of the people that you're campaigning to govern, but other people

00:29:42.360 in another nation that may actually even be, whether it be a hot war or a cold war, but another

00:29:47.920 nation that at some extent is probably even opposed to your people. And yet you're now making

00:29:54.600 promises to them in order to get their funding because the battle of an election at the end of

00:30:00.840 the day is just a battle of money it's literally i mean almost i would say the vast majority of the

00:30:06.540 time there are some exceptions but the vast majority of the time the candidate that wins

00:30:11.200 is the candidate that was able to get more funding yeah that's it and i mean with monarchy you have

00:30:17.600 the obvious drawback when it's a son who takes over for his father yeah what if he's a bad son

00:30:21.460 What if he's a bad son?

00:30:22.420 But in the case of our elections today, for example, for president, the literal way he

00:30:26.540 has to win, you mentioned the financing side, but it's also, I have to appeal to the broadest

00:30:31.600 coalition of people possible.

00:30:33.200 Right. 1.00

00:30:33.380 I have to appeal for gays for Trump. 0.99

00:30:35.000 I have to appeal to, you know, Indians for Trump.

00:30:37.720 Trump, I mean, how many times was he like, we're going to get the African-American community.

00:30:41.260 So by virtue of what you have to do to win an election, you have to go out and do your

00:30:46.100 best to placate, appeal to hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of special interest groups.

00:30:51.080 to build a coalition and tie your own hands behind your back not just appeal to but make promises

00:30:56.840 right and and so yes you have like the different communities that you just mentioned and another

00:31:01.940 one would of course be um jewish families i think of the adelsons who gave 100 million dollars

00:31:08.000 100 million dollars to trump um and then what do the adelsons want to do this particular jewish 0.60

00:31:14.480 family oh they want to build a casino uh right right in dfw that's going to um increase crime 0.97

00:31:22.360 drunkenness um it's like it's going to give you a hundred million dollars but they gave you a

00:31:28.120 hundred say anything exactly they gave you a hundred million dollars and so are you going to

00:31:32.160 stand in their way no are you maybe even behind the scenes going to try to do something uh push

00:31:37.840 some of your weight in their direction in favor of what they're trying to do even though it's not

00:31:43.520 good for the people? Yes, that's the constant temptation. And so with the king, okay, maybe

00:31:49.700 it's a 50-50 chance. Virtuous son, not virtuous son. And I would even say, and we'll talk about

00:31:55.120 this in the second segment, there's reason, nobility, the blood of kings, there's a reason

00:31:59.860 it might be a better chance than that. But say 50-50, good king, bad king. With that type of

00:32:04.880 system, the chance of a virtuous man getting through, it has been over 100 years since I

00:32:10.280 would say, in this country, we have had a true, virtuous, outstanding Christian man. Like even 0.99

00:32:16.220 Ronald Reagan, I mean, privately, I think a moral, upstanding guy. He came out later on. He did a lot

00:32:21.500 of damage, but he recognized. He said, hey, no-fault divorce. Yeah, that was an L. I took it.

00:32:26.040 But the dude, as far as mentioning Christ in messages, in speeches, very minimal. We're

00:32:31.860 talking over 100 years since this system. And I mean, this crony capitalism has been around for

00:32:36.920 a while so we're talking over a hundred years that this system is probably not produced just

00:32:41.480 about anyone virtuous so even on its worst day monarchy it can give you a bad apple but the

00:32:46.940 chances right are better and just to steal man uh our opponents you know the the devil's advocate

00:32:53.480 that may be listening you said 50 50 and you know i think that's probably pretty generous even

00:32:58.720 looking at so like even looking at israel at a time when uh god was regularly uh speaking to

00:33:05.400 the people and speaking to the king uh audibly through prophets right divine revelation and

00:33:12.020 accompanying that just in case they were like well i don't know if this is really a prophet

00:33:15.440 from the lord accompanying and validating the audible voice the infallible voice of god through

00:33:20.780 the prophets validated by signs and wonders right so at that time right that's that's that's a pretty

00:33:27.840 good deal um even at that time i would say it was uh not 50 50 but probably more like 25 percent of

00:33:34.900 the time good king 75 percent bad right right so uh this time in prose new covenant that's pretty

00:33:42.900 powerful right uh i i will write my law on your hearts i will cause you to walk i think of ezekiel

00:33:48.760 36 um and we do have yes we have many many unbelievers in these united states but we do have

00:33:55.920 many people who by god's grace are regenerate with new hearts new creatures in christ jesus

00:34:01.460 so that's one benefit but let's just say that okay well maybe old covenant is real

00:34:07.860 it was a unique time and so maybe their their percentage their statistics would be better

00:34:13.920 75 percent of the time a bad king 25 percent good and so let's say for us maybe it's 90 10

00:34:19.520 well i would say that's still 10 percent more often of having a good governance right and a

00:34:26.600 godly civil magistrate than the current system that we have i don't think it's possible in our

00:34:30.760 current system. See, that's what I'm trying to say is I'm not trying to say, hey, if you have a

00:34:34.660 monarchy, there's no dangers and you'll never have a bad king. No, I'm willing to say nine out of

00:34:39.980 10 times you'll have a bad king. But I think 10 out of 10 times through a raw democracy and

00:34:45.880 universal suffrage and what we currently have, 10 out of 10 times, you're going to have crap leaders. 0.98

00:34:52.540 And didn't always used to be this way. Think of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, 90 minutes, 0.97

00:34:57.140 It's hours-long debates.

00:34:58.880 Only men were voting at the time.

00:35:00.260 I think it only would have been white men.

00:35:01.960 So you're sitting down with the men who are making the decisions,

00:35:04.840 and they're giving opening statements that are an hour long.

00:35:07.720 Here's what I think about government.

00:35:09.040 Here's what I think principles should be employed.

00:35:11.060 Like we used to have where the merits of the argument,

00:35:13.840 one, you do not have Lincoln going up, and he's like,

00:35:15.660 and I'm sponsored by Coca-Cola, and I'm sponsored by Amazon.

00:35:19.080 We had a time where men, because the executive branch,

00:35:22.080 it was the attempt of the founders to bring together

00:35:24.440 some of the best of aristocracy,

00:35:26.320 some of the best of the Roman Republic,

00:35:28.100 and some of the best of monarchy.

00:35:29.480 They understood that a George Washington-type figure

00:35:32.260 could bring the people to better themselves.

00:35:35.140 So it's their attempt at kind of fusing it together.

00:35:36.940 And there was a time, all that to say,

00:35:38.580 and defend America's founding,

00:35:40.160 there was a time where good men had a chance

00:35:43.160 to argue on the merits,

00:35:44.600 to argue on the basis of their virtue,

00:35:46.560 and to be heard by good, God-fearing men

00:35:48.580 who would then go on to vote for them.

00:35:50.340 We're simply recognizing the reality,

00:35:52.440 hey, that was in the mid-1800s,

00:35:53.760 and that hasn't existed for 100 to 150 years.

00:35:57.660 That's what I'm saying.

00:35:59.040 Amen.

00:35:59.840 Ironically, there's somebody who their handle is new king,

00:36:03.560 and they have two comments here I think are worth reading.

00:36:06.440 One said, but a bad king could do so much bad.

00:36:10.860 That's true.

00:36:11.660 That's what we're covering right now.

00:36:13.640 Their second comment says, Jesus is king, so why not throning?

00:36:18.900 I think what he's saying is why not enthrone him?

00:36:21.620 and then he said lex rex yes that last part right there lex rex um i i want to i want to

00:36:29.860 mention that just for a moment lex rex uh meaning uh the law is above the king rather than the king

00:36:35.300 above the law and i think it is worth noting that uh under the monarchy of old covenant israel

00:36:42.620 you did have i think kind of a hybrid between absolute monarchy but also a constitutional

00:36:49.000 monarchy there was a constitution and the constitution was the law of moses um and and

00:36:54.900 the king was held in check um not necessarily formally by a formal military power but he was

00:37:03.700 held in check at least in terms of not vote but voice and a voice even without a vote can be

00:37:09.720 powerful through the prophet right isaiah um i think of elijah you know with king ahab you know

00:37:16.500 going to the king, speaking to the king. It is not lawful for you to do this. It is not lawful

00:37:22.600 for you to do that. Fear God, thus saith the Lord, dot, dot, dot, dot, dot, dot. And so my point is

00:37:29.260 that I think that through ministers, the church staying in its lane, right? So the church not

00:37:36.820 legislating, right? Not bearing the sword, but the church preaching as a voice, not a formal

00:37:43.100 governing power, but an ecclesiastical voice that speaks to the king. I think that you could have

00:37:51.320 a dynamic of that. And in terms of the constitutional aspect, you can have a law

00:37:59.680 above the king. You can have certain legislation that every single man in the kingdom, including

00:38:06.160 the king himself, is bound to, and have that legislation, that law above the king, be the law

00:38:11.940 of the lord um there actually is a way of doing that and uh and that law just like ezra you know

00:38:19.120 he comes and he's kind of the priest he's he's uh in that you know in the sphere of the church and

00:38:24.660 then you have you know others like like um um what is his name uh zerubbabel tough name uh zerubbabel

00:38:33.360 rebuilt the rubbabel uh but zerubbabel and also then later nehemiah right they're both kind of

00:38:39.580 in the civil magistrate sphere and that earthly civil kingdom. But Ezra is in the ecclesiastical,

00:38:48.100 the sacred church kingdom. And Ezra, he's the one who they build, ultimately, they basically,

00:38:54.960 they build a literal platform. They're building a pulpit and they dust off, you know, they recover

00:39:00.840 and dust off the law of the Lord, the law of Moses. And he reads it to the people and the people

00:39:07.020 are weeping underneath the conviction of the Holy Spirit, and that ultimately informs the

00:39:12.780 civil magistrate, your Nehemiahs, your Zerubbables, that they need to do what's right. Ezra is, you

00:39:20.120 know, he's not ultimately the political leader. He's the priest. But you have priests and politicians

00:39:27.280 in a good kingdom, priests and politicians working together, each in their various sphere,

00:39:33.180 not overlapping. So the politician isn't administering word and sacrament, and the

00:39:38.960 priest is not legislating civil law. But the priest is speaking the word of the Lord to the

00:39:45.540 politician and shaping and binding his conscience. And the politician is then responding to that and

00:39:52.900 leading in a lawful manner, in a godly manner. So Lex Rex, I guess my point is, you know, you're

00:39:59.940 saying um well no king but christ and we have christ and and that's enough and you know a bad

00:40:07.360 king would be really bad though so we shouldn't have them and but then you put right there in

00:40:11.320 there lex rex and i guess what i want to point out is that last little piece lex rex is kind of

00:40:17.420 ironic because uh law above the king still implies that there is a king right and so um so if if

00:40:25.700 that's the argument is uh well we think that there should still be a law above the king

00:40:30.580 well i think wes and i would both say amen we're fine with a law being above the king but what we

00:40:36.480 currently have is um that the one law in america is that you can't have a king and the the seems

00:40:46.620 as though the the implication of that has progressively gradually snowballed to being um

00:40:52.820 Well, the law is not a law above the king, but the law is that you can't have a king.

00:40:57.540 And over time, by not having a king, we have come to a point where we now also don't have a law.

00:41:04.240 And I find that to be incredibly.

00:41:07.780 We don't have either.

00:41:08.800 Yeah, we don't have either.

00:41:09.780 To say, I think for this segment, people always love to bring up when Israel wanted a king and God was telling them, no, he warns them about it in Deuteronomy.

00:41:16.740 But one of the reasons, and you'll remember all the nations around them had kings.

00:41:19.860 For sure, monarchy is the state of nature.

00:41:22.820 So all the kingdoms around them had kings, and Israel was going to ask for a king.

00:41:26.780 But one of the things that Israel was supposed to be was a city on a hill and a shining light.

00:41:31.300 And so God says, I'm not going to give you a king because my goal for you is to be a people that are governed by my law.

00:41:37.080 So all the nations would look up.

00:41:38.820 They would have their kings.

00:41:39.760 They would have their monarchs.

00:41:40.980 They would look at this one nation.

00:41:42.200 They would say, man, what's so unique about them?

00:41:44.580 They don't have kings like us.

00:41:45.860 They're not run like us.

00:41:46.980 What is it that makes them different and prosper and flourish and so ferocious in battle?

00:41:52.080 Oh, they have the law of God given them directly.

00:41:54.900 And Isaiah says, why don't we go and be and come up to Israel

00:41:58.560 and learn from them because they have God's law.

00:42:00.640 So God's prohibition on kings for the old covenant in the Old Testament

00:42:04.900 was saying, guys, I want you to be different.

00:42:06.960 Not because these things are inherently bad, but I've called you, set you apart, 0.98

00:42:10.240 like the priests of Levi, you know, that certain tribe. 0.97

00:42:12.860 I've set you apart for something different.

00:42:14.720 Now Israel rebels against that and says, nope, we don't like that task that you gave us.

00:42:19.620 We don't want to be the city on hell.

00:42:21.000 We wouldn't have a king like everyone else.

00:42:22.320 And God gives it to them, has some downsides, has some upsides.

00:42:25.460 I think of King David, ultimately they served as a type of Christ.

00:42:28.780 But it was not at all a, hey, it's not ideal to have a king.

00:42:32.120 It's not a good thing whatsoever.

00:42:33.380 I'm telling you not to do it.

00:42:34.600 It was much more so, I've set you apart for a specific purpose for you to model my law.

00:42:38.940 Right.

00:42:39.260 Think about it like this.

00:42:41.120 If Israel, in the mind of God, it seems as though what he was saying is, 0.98

00:42:46.140 I don't want the other nations, I don't want Assyria and Egypt and Babylon 0.99

00:42:49.800 to look to you in your seasons of success 1.00

00:42:54.020 and for the glory to go to your king.

00:42:58.120 Like God is jealous, his name,

00:43:00.560 the scripture says, for his name is jealous.

00:43:03.440 God is jealous for his glory

00:43:05.100 and he will share it with no man.

00:43:07.340 And so God didn't want the other nations

00:43:09.600 to look and see Israel in its prosperity and blessing

00:43:13.520 and to attribute that accomplishment to their leaders.

00:43:19.800 their king. Rather, he wanted people to look to Israel and say, oh, there's not any one man that

00:43:26.160 we can point to as the premier ruler or leader or monarch who would be responsible for this

00:43:34.740 immense prosperity and blessing. The only thing that we can point to is not a person, but a

00:43:42.900 principle, a law. And the law, this principle, comes from God. Wow, Israel is superior

00:43:50.520 because their God, not their king, but their God is superior to our gods. That was the goal. That 1.00

00:44:00.660 was the reasoning. And then in terms of the drawbacks, just to mention briefly, when God

00:44:06.940 speaks through the prophet Samuel as Israel is, you know, demanding a king to be like the other 0.77

00:44:12.820 nations. Number one, God doesn't just denounce Israel's desire for a king. He particularly is

00:44:21.460 denouncing Israel's desire to be like all these other nations, right? That was the big moral 0.96

00:44:27.900 failure, is that they wanted to be like all these other godless foreign nations. But then when God 1.00

00:44:34.460 speaks to the king and does lay out some downsides that's clear in scripture um here are some of the

00:44:40.520 downsides here's here's at least two that um that are specifically mentioned by name one is uh god

00:44:47.400 speaking through samuel says to israel if you have a king he'll take 10 percent in taxes

00:44:54.320 west how much do we currently pay in taxes oh my goodness depending on your tax bracket 20 to 30

00:45:01.000 okay so so according to god's word infallible um audible words spoken through the prophet

00:45:09.980 inscripturated in the bible um the thing to to watch out for with a king is that we might have

00:45:18.000 in our current state um far less taxes than we currently do okay so then i'm not really worried

00:45:26.240 about that and then the next one is also if there's a king he'll uh he'll conscript your sons

00:45:35.320 in war in battle enlisting them in his armies um do we do we send sons and daughters to war right

00:45:48.080 now well at least we do it for our nation's interest oh we do it for other so so so if you

00:45:55.340 have a king, right? I mean, think about this. Let's just be logical for a moment. The big warning

00:46:00.060 from God through the prophet Samuel about a monarch in Israel was if you have a monarch,

00:46:06.880 he'll take your sons and send them in battle to defend your country. We currently have our sons

00:46:15.060 and daughters sent into battle to defend other countries. Looking at you, Ukraine, looking at 0.92

00:46:22.260 you, Israel. Also, if you have a king, he'll tax you 10%. We don't have a king. We're taxed 20% to

00:46:29.600 30%. So I'm going to need somebody, because there's Christians who would push back and say, 1.00

00:46:37.320 we can't have a king. Why? Because the Bible warns what will happen with a king. Yeah, 0.98

00:46:42.300 but the warnings of the Bible is that what would happen with a king would be better than what we

00:46:47.600 currently have happening now without a king. Something to think about. Let's go to our first

00:46:51.920 commercial break and we'll be right back when it comes to your financial future are you planning

00:46:56.900 forward or backwards from your desired results what type of financial culture do you want to

00:47:03.240 create for your family and for your children's children we are not called to be wise as doves

00:47:10.320 therefore simpleton planning simply won't cut it joe garrisee helps families develop and implement

00:47:17.560 a long-term culture of excellent financial management. He starts with your goals, your

00:47:24.200 tithing plan, your retirement, and the legacy that you want to build for your generations.

00:47:30.300 And then he works backwards to build a real actionable plan to get your family on track.

00:47:37.220 Now, many of my personal friends have benefited from the financial wisdom of Joe Garracy that he

00:47:43.200 shared for their specific situations. Do you want to work with someone who strives for alpha

00:47:49.340 with your investing, hates taxes, and brokers insurance? Start planning smart. Call Joe

00:47:57.100 at 615-767-2555. Again, that's 615-767-2555. Or you can find him by going to backwardsplanningfinancial.inm.com.

00:48:18.660 Again, that's backwardsplanningfinancial.in, as in Nancy, m, as in ministries, dot com.

00:48:28.360 The silver is mine and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts.

00:48:34.160 Yet your retirement dollars keep shrinking daily as Washington prints money out of thin air.

00:48:41.240 Genesis Gold Group aligns financial guidance with godly principles when others serve only profit.

00:48:48.660 Their faith-centered approach to gold IRAs stands apart in an industry that has forgotten what true stewardship actually means.

00:48:58.540 Why gamble your family's future on Wall Street's paper promises?

00:49:03.500 Your 401k and IRA deserve better protection.

00:49:08.420 Genesis Gold Group transforms your vulnerable retirement accounts into physical gold.

00:49:14.100 something real, something tangible, something that God created with inherent value. Their

00:49:21.360 faith-driven experts walk you through every step, helping you shield your life's work from the

00:49:26.940 financial storms up ahead. No high-pressure tactics, no hidden fees, just guidance rooted

00:49:33.840 in timeless principles of sound stewardship. So the decision is simple. Watch your retirement

00:49:40.580 evaporate through inflation or secure it in God's precious metal. Take action now. Go and visit

00:49:48.240 rightresponsebiblegold.com. You can visit today for your free book, The Bible and Gold, and join

00:49:56.860 the thousands of believers who sleep soundly knowing their future is anchored in something

00:50:02.420 unshakable. Again, that's rightresponsebiblegold.com, safeguarding your legacy with God's

00:50:11.300 timeless treasure. I want to shift this discussion of kings over to our American context. We're no

00:50:19.980 strangers to the fact that, obviously from the protests this weekend and from others,

00:50:23.720 Americans are very much so opposed to the king. And you have to remember that King George at the

00:50:27.760 time america suffered incredible grievances under him the colonies if you read the declaration of

00:50:33.160 independence it's some 25 grievances and what they'd been doing is the king was supposed to be

00:50:38.120 their shield from parliament so parliament was levying taxes parliament that's what i was going

00:50:43.000 to say real quick like king george sucked but um at the same time to be fair um the thing that 0.80

00:50:49.340 sucked about king george wasn't necessarily him the king himself directly oppressing uh the americas 0.93

00:50:55.160 but in many ways it was him not standing in in guard in protection of the oppression coming

00:51:04.080 from parliament exactly so even in that case you still have an entity a governing entity outside

00:51:12.600 of the monarch doing the majority of of the dirty work so even in america's founding history it's

00:51:19.780 like what's the problem here uh the king wasn't strong enough right right parliament if parliament

00:51:26.600 didn't exist there wouldn't have been all these grievances about troops being quartered about the

00:51:30.980 levying of taxes about the refusing to pass laws like that's actually when you go through and read

00:51:36.140 them we did this in an episode earlier this year when you go through and read they were saying like

00:51:39.960 hey uh the legislator can't pass laws because they're not in session some of that was the king

00:51:44.620 wouldn't call it but it all had to do a lot with the red tape that a huge governing body like

00:51:49.540 parliament is wrapped up in and so the point is the americans appealed again and again to king

00:51:54.900 george very respectfully again and again they said oh king you have a duty yeah we're your subject

00:51:59.880 we're loyal to the crown they didn't disparage him they made a deal yep they made a deal he gave

00:52:04.660 a word and their deal was not with parliament it was with the king so they appealed to him again

00:52:08.740 and again and finally after a certain point where he ignored them which i think they were in their

00:52:12.920 right to do they said listen we're going to declare our independences we are assuming from ourselves

00:52:17.820 the just powers among the nations,

00:52:19.900 we're asserting ourselves as equal.

00:52:21.660 And there's that famous line

00:52:22.600 in the Declaration of Independence.

00:52:24.240 We hold these truths to be self-evident

00:52:25.840 that all men are created equal

00:52:27.460 and are endowed by the creator

00:52:28.400 with certain unalienable rights, et cetera, et cetera.

00:52:30.680 And what they were talking about, of course,

00:52:32.060 was looking 250 years down the corridor of time

00:52:35.600 that Haitians who have immigrated illegally

00:52:39.240 to the United States

00:52:40.560 would have an equal vote to heritage Americans.

00:52:43.240 John Hancock is penning this.

00:52:44.440 He's just thinking of Haiti.

00:52:45.440 he's like all men all created equal and we'll get to that that's what they meant for sure

00:52:50.340 but baked into our bones then so we then formed uh in the uh so you had the anti-federalists and

00:52:56.140 the federalists we formed a government we laid out a constitution we laid out a bill of rights

00:53:00.220 to protect american citizens from the injustices that they had received but the point is that in

00:53:04.940 our dna from our founding 250 years ago at this point is a very anti-king's mindset and we just

00:53:11.340 walked through the history of it, we understand where that came from. But unfortunately, it has

00:53:15.940 come with baggage. So in addition to, hey, in America, no kings. In America, nobody is above

00:53:21.880 the law. What has unfortunately come with that, and we have to be honest, and especially at 250 years

00:53:26.700 when this mindset is doing incredible damage to us, to be honest that Americans also have with them

00:53:31.800 a detrimental anti-authority streak. I'm going to read from Alexis de Tocqueville here a short quote.

00:53:38.180 Remember, he's the French statesman who comes to America to observe democracy in action.

00:53:44.000 It's his famous book, Democracy in America, and he says this,

00:53:47.720 In America, the family, as he clarifies here,

00:53:50.880 the family in the Roman and aristocratic signification of the word does not exist.

00:53:55.780 He says, In America, the family, as it was known in the ancient world, does not exist.

00:54:00.240 As soon as the young American approaches manhood,

00:54:02.880 the ties of filial obedience are relaxed day by day.

00:54:06.180 master of his thoughts he is soon master of his conduct essentially saying uh in the past there

00:54:12.960 was a certain type of familial duty that one had a duty to his fatherland a duty to his country

00:54:18.500 but america for better or for worse even in the 1800s he's saying no uh they don't actually feel

00:54:25.240 that sense american man turns 18 20 years old duty they don't have that sense it's atomistic

00:54:31.240 already, even then, imagine how much more today, but even then, he's basically saying

00:54:36.180 it's individualism. It's too atomistic. And you see this in the denominations that flourish the

00:54:42.300 most in America. Baptists. Baptists and Methodists. They don't have an Episcopal structure. They don't

00:54:47.500 have a Presbytery structure. There's no hierarchy. They don't have hierarchy. And probably at the

00:54:53.340 core of this, we mentioned all men are created equal. Here's the one thing when it comes to

00:54:57.300 kings, especially a kingly line. You think of the czars in Russia. You think of certain nobles in 0.88

00:55:03.160 Europe. What happened was the sons would rule, right? This is King Henry VIII. He's like,

00:55:08.320 I have got to get a son here. I will literally become Protestant to annul my marriages, to marry 0.85

00:55:12.980 a woman that will give me a son. But in that, all right, my son's going to rule. And then Lord 0.84

00:55:18.660 willing, his son is going to rule. And his son is going to rule. There is a baked in assumption

00:55:22.620 that his sons will be better fit for ruling.

00:55:26.420 At an individual level, all men are created equal. 0.77

00:55:30.020 No, actually, they're not.

00:55:31.580 The product, the offspring of 300 years of access,

00:55:35.580 even just practically, we've done an episode on genetics,

00:55:38.100 even just practically, the best of nutrition,

00:55:40.820 the best of tactical training,

00:55:42.680 the best of education, speaking multiple languages.

00:55:45.660 He's probably been married to a noble woman.

00:55:48.560 Not just for King Henry and his one person,

00:55:51.280 and his one generation.

00:55:52.680 Now we're talking about a lineage.

00:55:54.500 Hundreds of years.

00:55:55.340 Hundreds of years of a particular family

00:55:57.940 being masters in various realms and arts and science

00:56:04.680 and saying that, yes,

00:56:07.280 we think that multiple subsequent generations

00:56:10.380 over the course of centuries

00:56:12.040 of mastering this, that, and the other

00:56:15.100 and superior nutrition, all these,

00:56:18.380 is going to produce a higher stock of people right um that's that's not absurd by any stretch

00:56:26.000 i mean even if you look at like grok or chat gpt and look at america and and try to account for

00:56:32.220 uh you know in the last few years iq has actually fallen um but if you look you know historically

00:56:38.120 and back up from 1910 to 2010 iq average iq of america has actually gone up and when you ask

00:56:45.360 grok liberal grok to account for this it mentions education and nutrition as the two biggest

00:56:52.500 contributors uh okay if in 100 not not 1000 but 100 years so thinking probably three four

00:57:02.220 generations in three or four generations um improved nutrition and a higher uh regiment

00:57:10.980 of education can take IQ, I believe it was one full standard deviation up, right, for the general

00:57:18.980 populace across the board, average IQ for the nation, then what would happen in a particular

00:57:25.560 family if that one family has the highest, the highest rigor in education and training and

00:57:34.680 nutrition and this, that, and the other, then yeah, then that family, at the end of the day,

00:57:41.580 God still has to save each individual person, right? So God would have to, you know, God save

00:57:46.860 the king, right? God would have to save that son as he did his father. Otherwise he would turn out

00:57:52.440 to be a terrible king, but in every temporal and natural sense, which does matter, it does need to

00:57:58.460 be accounted for. In every temporal and natural sense, you're talking about a particular family

00:58:03.760 that is not just your blue-collar everyday man.

00:58:06.760 It is a particular family that is superior.

00:58:11.060 And we have to be okay with that.

00:58:12.600 And here's the thing.

00:58:13.320 People get bothered.

00:58:15.240 Look, I'm not advocating.

00:58:16.820 I'm not saying that I'm that guy.

00:58:18.760 I'm not saying my family.

00:58:19.740 I'm not saying the weapons.

00:58:21.000 I'm saying I believe in the promise of God.

00:58:22.880 It won't be me.

00:58:24.240 It won't.

00:58:25.020 And I have multiple, whether it's an illustration

00:58:27.980 and a sermon, multiple occasions

00:58:29.860 where over the past few years,

00:58:31.160 I've made the point I'm making right now,

00:58:33.200 i'm not talking about myself but do i believe that there are certain individuals somewhere

00:58:40.160 out there who are better than me they're smarter they're healthier they are more virtuous

00:58:49.280 they're more classically trained and educated yes and those people typically do not just appear out

00:58:59.840 of the ether you can look to their parents and get a sense of oh i see right well i mean think

00:59:05.260 of the old adage right the apple doesn't fall far from the tree right that i mean that is is you

00:59:12.020 know is that true is it at least maybe there are exceptions i'm sure there are but is it at least

00:59:17.320 generally true well if that's generally true then why wouldn't we want to say look here are some of

00:59:24.440 the best families in our nation. And we want to set them up in positions of leadership and power

00:59:34.200 rather than just anyone being able to come in at any time. And if they can appeal to the basest

00:59:41.100 appetites of the lowest sector of our population and get enough funding from foreign lobbying

00:59:48.220 groups to back their campaign then all of a sudden they become a ruler right so it's like well if you

00:59:55.320 have a king a monarchy you might have a bad king well if you don't it turns out that you'll have

01:00:00.580 muslim somalian women marrying their brother in order to gain citizenship and in one generation 0.81

01:00:07.500 being in congress i need someone to explain to me how that is better because i'm not seeing it 0.75

01:00:15.000 we don't have a king we have an auto pen i is there most kings would not be as bad as the four

01:00:21.520 years we had of biden well democracy at the very least the people but a king was a king

01:00:26.100 what what if what if he locked people in their homes the months on end what if we had a king he

01:00:31.920 might he might actually shut down churches right if we had a king like what what if he what if he

01:00:38.440 forced curriculum in schools with pornography you know if we had a king what if he shut down

01:00:44.400 Transgender activists to the lawn of the cast. 0.99

01:00:46.920 Right.

01:00:47.520 What if he actually, you know, taxed people 10 percent?

01:00:52.380 Oh, we currently have 30.

01:00:54.060 What if he locked people in their homes?

01:00:55.580 What if he actually forced people to inject a foreign substance into their bloodstream?

01:01:01.400 What if, like, guys, it's like, what are we even talking about?

01:01:04.540 Right.

01:01:04.860 And bad kids.

01:01:06.420 Like Henry VIII, that man loved to drink and he loved to party.

01:01:09.600 he was not going into people's homes forcing vaccines forcing curriculum like even some of 0.84

01:01:15.840 the worst examples we have and there's bad ones now i will say women like bloody mary have done 0.75

01:01:20.900 some of the exceptionally bad ones but even the exceptionally bad kings that ruled badly often

01:01:25.620 the reign was short i think of julian the apostate as emperor early on in rome he was a pagan

01:01:30.860 worshiper in private we talked with the other paul about this but the the populace was so christian

01:01:36.160 He had to keep it in private.

01:01:38.040 So at worst, yeah, you've got a pagan emperor, 0.94

01:01:40.440 but the populace is still Christian. 0.99

01:01:41.740 He has to keep it in private. 0.63

01:01:42.680 Think about the Pharisees.

01:01:43.920 There's so many times it says they sought to kill Jesus

01:01:46.580 but could not because of the people.

01:01:50.680 There were moments, even in Jesus' own ministry, 1.00

01:01:53.480 where it's like wicked Jewish rulers 0.99

01:01:58.000 who want to conspire and kill Jesus, who eventually do. 0.95

01:02:02.320 But for three years before in the province of God,

01:02:05.460 it was his appointed time, God himself sovereignly kept Jesus protected. But God,

01:02:14.000 who stands above in the ultimate, highest sense, works through human means. He works through

01:02:19.880 temporal means. He works through agency. And so at the top level, why didn't Jesus get put to death

01:02:26.540 sooner? Well, because God is sovereign and he didn't allow it to happen. That's a true answer.

01:02:31.140 Another true answer, though, is through what human means did God protect Jesus until it was his time.

01:02:37.660 Through the populace, through the people, through the people.

01:02:41.980 So whether it's God through the people holding a king in check or holding the Sanhedrin in check,

01:02:49.220 God can always work through the people, and he can do that in virtually any system, any system.

01:02:56.020 So if we're just saying, well, we don't like the king because there's not enough checks and balances.

01:03:00.300 Well, okay, but a raw democracy doesn't have checks and balances either.

01:03:06.380 And at least with a king, the king can protect.

01:03:11.320 The big fear, I think, with the king is what's going to happen to the peasants?

01:03:16.240 But right now, let's just be honest.

01:03:18.960 It's not the peasants who are ultimately in danger.

01:03:23.920 It's the families of nobility.

01:03:27.160 if we're using like a feudal lord system

01:03:29.020 and the equivalent in our modern American context,

01:03:32.340 the peasants are doing just fine.

01:03:34.460 We're importing peasants by the millions, right?

01:03:37.220 And the peasants are getting trillions of dollars

01:03:41.520 from the people who actually work.

01:03:44.760 November 1st, food stamps, they might not though.

01:03:48.680 And so, and let's be honest,

01:03:50.120 we were talking about this before we started recording, right?

01:03:52.820 Because of the government shutdown,

01:03:54.400 that news has just surfaced

01:03:55.840 that if the government shutdown doesn't end

01:03:58.180 before November 1st,

01:03:59.160 then you're not going to get welfare benefits.

01:04:03.220 And so in our American context,

01:04:04.940 what's going to happen?

01:04:06.080 You won't get welfare benefits,

01:04:07.300 so a lot of people are going to have to go out

01:04:08.880 and get a job, right?

01:04:09.900 Wrong.

01:04:11.020 It means that Target and Walmart

01:04:13.740 are going to have to beef up their security

01:04:15.200 because theft will go through the roof.

01:04:18.420 I mean, nobody's actually come out and said,

01:04:19.820 if I don't get my EBT stamps,

01:04:21.740 I am going to steal groceries.

01:04:23.820 Nobody's actually posted,

01:04:25.060 thousands of people thousands of mostly black people have said if i don't get my welfare 0.64

01:04:29.900 i will rob they've said it yep i will rob this store i will rob my thanksgiving dinner that's 0.80

01:04:35.580 i'll take it from you if i don't get it from the government give me stuff right so and that's what

01:04:40.440 that's what our current system gives you universal suffrage with raw democracy

01:04:45.440 means that meritocracy is oh democracy plus meritocracy no if there's democracy there can't

01:04:52.260 be meritocracy and in our current system what we what we have is uh if you can get enough people

01:04:59.540 to be lazy or immoral or whatever it is if you can get 50 of them plus one in your country and

01:05:07.760 if you don't have the numbers it's like well most of the country actually is hard-working and 0.97

01:05:11.020 virtuous oh we can fix that we'll import from the third world right and don't you take no for an

01:05:16.200 answer until slowly over 60 years on the heart seller act until now oh now we've changed the 0.99

01:05:21.160 demographics now we have our 50 plus one and now with the other 49 over the coming years we will

01:05:27.760 through elections and through legislation we will vote and vote and vote until we vote away all of

01:05:33.140 your stuff that's democracy that that's what we currently have and i'll be honest i i can't

01:05:40.560 picture any monarch that would be as threatening as the system we currently have yeah old books

01:05:49.200 used to recognize this too i was reading earlier this year king arthur to my son before bed and it

01:05:53.580 often when it introduced a knight it spoke of his parents and it tied the lineage to their right to

01:05:59.420 rule i think of aragorn and boromir at the very end of his life uh he's promising him that he'll

01:06:04.080 continue his fight and he says you know i don't know what strength lies within my ideology oh

01:06:09.480 i'm sorry what strength lies within my friendship oh no i don't know what strength lies within my

01:06:15.100 blood the whole arc of the lord of the rings it's not as though the fellowship is there

01:06:18.480 and there's kind of a question well who's going to be king of gondo over this there's one man

01:06:23.960 the blood of numenor runs through him that's right there's only one person who's fit to do it

01:06:29.220 and it's and it's not just uh one person who's allowed to do it it's only that same one person

01:06:34.820 who is the only one who is allowed to do it by tradition and by law is also the only person who

01:06:40.260 in terms of merit would be fit to do it because there's something about his lineage that doesn't

01:06:45.800 just make him permissible but it also makes him able it actually makes him able and you look at

01:06:51.800 talking is you know brilliant um one of my favorite catholics gk chesterton would be another

01:06:57.160 but talking is is brilliant in the sense that he kind of perfectly marries um two worlds uh

01:07:05.600 thinking of you know a more modern world but then also an old and ancient and more traditional world

01:07:11.880 and so Tolkien has the unexpected hero right the unexpected hero so it's like uh at the end of the

01:07:19.040 day who who really you know saves the world the known world um middle earth uh well it's you know

01:07:26.340 a wizard or it's no it's a hobbit and even beyond that it's uh at some level it's not just Frodo

01:07:33.100 um but it's you know it's Gollum it's it's a hobbit that's been corrupted for 500 years his

01:07:39.140 mind poisoned by the ring and he inadvertently you know ends up saving all of middle earth and

01:07:45.180 so so there is this unexpected hero you know theme throughout the book but at the same time

01:07:53.180 that I think it's it's key to remember that the hero is unexpected in one sense and yet completely

01:08:01.980 expected in another and what I mean by that is like backing up from the Lord of the Rings to

01:08:06.360 the Hobbit. And so now thinking, Frodo, you know, he comes from the line, he's the nephew of Bilbo,

01:08:12.060 so the principle would remain the same. But look at Bilbo for a moment and the Hobbit.

01:08:17.900 Bilbo is unexpected in the sense of just that he's a Hobbit. But he's not just any Hobbit.

01:08:26.000 He's a Hobbit who is, you know, the son of a Took, right? And the Took family is unique among

01:08:32.480 all the hobbits in the sense that they have certain members of their family that were hobbits

01:08:38.900 by nature and were quiet and homebodies and domestic. But the Tooks were a unique family

01:08:44.460 that had more than one individual throughout their lineage, their ancestry, who were prone towards

01:08:50.280 risk and adventure. And there was one particular Took in the lineage of Bilbo, who was, even though

01:08:57.420 he's a hobbit, so all hobbits, relatively small, but he was so large that he, you know, Tolkien says

01:09:04.380 that he could ride a real horse, right? Because the hobbits would ride ponies because they were

01:09:08.300 so small. And my point is, that's not a coincidence. So even when Tolkien picks a hero,

01:09:15.140 on the one hand, he picks an unexpected hero, right? Not among wizards, not among men, not among elves,

01:09:20.980 but hobbits. But even though he chooses a hobbit, he picks the most expected hobbit that you could

01:09:27.060 in the sense that he picks a hobbit from a noble ancestry, right?

01:09:33.240 And so whether it's Aragorn or whether it's Bilbo and then, of course, Frodo,

01:09:36.940 at every level it's, oh, you know what?

01:09:40.500 And then lines like what you quoted,

01:09:42.200 I do not know what strength flows through my blood, a quote from Aragorn.

01:09:49.140 Tolkien understood meritocracy, efforts, human agency, choices, will,

01:09:55.460 but then above it all he also understood lineage providence sovereignty like the whole time with

01:10:03.580 the ring there's a sense of making the right choice with noble characters uh and yet there's

01:10:10.000 also providence at every moment that this person just the timing happens to be perfect you know

01:10:17.220 and so it's it's there's there's there's um there's will and agency and yet there's also

01:10:23.180 fate and destiny and and i think that we it's not a coincidence that in our american context

01:10:29.280 not only have we rejected monarchy as a political form uh what what have we also done theologically

01:10:35.620 well we've rejected um we've rejected calvinism we've rejected monergism we we've at every level

01:10:43.080 we've uh it's not just politically but it's theologically and it's culturally like what

01:10:47.920 we've ultimately uh rejected is well they actually used to say this in the founding of our nation we

01:10:55.960 have no sovereign here what a self-own i mean right there was a time where it's like well the

01:11:03.000 the verdict hasn't come back in well it's come back in now we have no sovereign here and so what

01:11:08.340 do we have instead um we have gay furries we have drag queen story hour we have blue-haired 0.75

01:11:17.580 feminist priestess in our churches we like i think i prefer a sovereign i think i'd prefer it 0.94

01:11:25.920 yeah if you could just to kind of sum it all up if you get could get most americans i would say

01:11:30.620 oh no king you put them in a corner and you gave them truth serum and there are valid reasons i

01:11:35.120 mentioned at our founding with king george there's other arguments to be made but most americans you

01:11:40.480 put them in the corner you give them truth serum why is it that you hate the idea of the king

01:11:44.500 because i hate the idea that there's someone born and they are more fit than me by virtue of their

01:11:50.560 birth that's it to rule and i we just need to be honest the majority of us 99 of us we were to be

01:11:57.160 ruled men must be governed now some will rule over families rule over churches be lesser magistrates

01:12:02.820 the higher magistrates, but I would say specifically in America, what is it about us

01:12:07.080 that hate kings? We hate the idea that there are those born that are superior to us to rule.

01:12:13.120 You're absolutely right. It's because we're liberals. And I've said it many times, I'll say

01:12:18.600 it again. Liberalism is the reigning dogma of our day. And if liberalism was the car,

01:12:24.540 the engine that drives it is egalitarianism. It is a forced, unnatural, and unbiblical 0.97

01:12:32.900 flattening of every distinction, because distinctions necessarily create disparity,

01:12:40.080 and disparity implies and ultimately mandates hierarchy. We hate hierarchy, therefore we must

01:12:48.840 get rid of disparities, which means that we ultimately must not acknowledge distinctions

01:12:54.220 and flattened distinctions to create a totalizing egalitarian society

01:13:02.000 where everyone is equal and the only way to have ultimately equality 1.00

01:13:07.240 is to force androgyny to where we achieve equality 0.93

01:13:13.360 because we've forced sameness.

01:13:16.440 Everyone is equal because everyone is the same.

01:13:18.940 Anyone who's brilliant, anyone who's talented,

01:13:21.980 Anyone who stands out, who has some kind of attribute, be it virtue or be it gifting, that would cause them to stand out and be distinct, we have to shackle them.

01:13:33.900 We have to suppress them in order for them to be the same as everyone else so that we can ensure that they would be equal to everyone else.

01:13:42.880 And when you think of what would be the driving—so liberalism, the heart of that, right, being egalitarianism.

01:13:49.340 but then when you think of like, okay, what's the, the car is liberalism, the engine is

01:13:53.820 egalitarianism, what's the fuel now? Pride. C.S. Lewis had a brilliant quote, a friend of Tolkien,

01:14:00.860 close friend. He said, pride is perhaps the most difficult sin to see in ourselves and yet one of

01:14:07.860 the easiest sins to detect in others. And so perhaps the most effective way of detecting

01:14:17.520 pride in ourselves, because it's hard to notice in yourself, is to see how bothered we are by the

01:14:24.880 pride that we think we see in others. In other words, what I've noticed is that a truly humble

01:14:31.020 person, even if he is surrounded by the company of arrogant fools, because of his humility, 0.97

01:14:40.760 the pride in others who surround him bothers him far less the people who are most prideful 0.98

01:14:48.800 are usually the people who are most bothered by what they perceive to be as pride in others

01:14:55.300 and and so what i'm saying is that this idea of you're not better than me you think you're

01:15:01.440 better than me you think that there's hierarchy you think that there's superiority what you're

01:15:07.360 dealing with there is not a humble person. What you're dealing with there is a very arrogant

01:15:13.180 person. And in most cases, you might say, well, if they're really that arrogant, wouldn't they

01:15:19.120 embrace hierarchy and just place themselves at the top? That's what you would expect, but that

01:15:25.480 wouldn't require arrogance alone. That would require a person who is arrogant, but also happens

01:15:32.400 to be competent what we have in our country is people who are incredibly arrogant and also at 1.00

01:15:39.840 the same time even they are aware of the fact that they're arrogant but also incredibly stupid 0.99

01:15:45.620 so the reason why you have people uh not saying well i actually do like hierarchy but i just 0.97

01:15:52.000 should be at the top but the reason you don't see people arguing for that very often is because 1.00

01:15:57.100 they're stupid. They're unintelligent, unimpressive, not gifted, not virtuous. And so the best that 1.00

01:16:07.540 they could hope for is the flattening of all distinctions and the full embrace of egalitarianism

01:16:12.440 because they know that they're not fit to rule, that they're not fit for anything. So they're not

01:16:19.860 even attempting to argue for hierarchy, but simply self-serving hierarchy to place themselves above

01:16:26.440 others because they know that they wouldn't even be capable of being above others. You have

01:16:33.020 arrogant people who often sadly happen to also be the least impressive people. And at this point

01:16:42.460 of time, I think we have a country full of such individuals. And so liberalism is the perfect

01:16:51.000 solution in their minds and the full embrace of egalitarianism, but all of it fueled by pride.

01:16:59.840 So this idea of no kings or this idea of even, you know, let's put it into theological terms

01:17:07.040 for a second. I am a Baptist and I think there's something to this doctrine, but I want to be

01:17:12.560 honest for a second. I have seen people say the priesthood of all believers. I've seen people say

01:17:18.580 it in such a way that it's true and it's rooted in scripture. And what they're doing as they

01:17:24.660 quote this phrase, theological phrase and biblical phrase, the priesthood of all believers,

01:17:30.680 is they're doing something that honors the Lord, something that's virtuous and true.

01:17:34.880 And yet I have seen people assert the priesthood of all believers just as many times, if not more,

01:17:42.340 far more, where it's what they're doing, what they're attempting in asserting this concept,

01:17:50.360 this principle, the priesthood of all believers, is simply the ecclesiastical Christian version

01:17:55.860 of the liberal asserting egalitarianism. And there's no discernible difference whatsoever.

01:18:02.500 my point is it is ingrained in our American bone. It's in our soul. It's written in our

01:18:12.700 history, in our origin, in our whole ethos is basically defined by a sense of rebellious

01:18:21.360 pride. We Americans are a rebellious people. We destroyed kings, destroyed hierarchy,

01:18:29.940 destroyed distinctions. We destroyed it in the ecclesiastical realm. Raw democracy.

01:18:39.260 Oh, but the church, it'll have a sense of order. Nope. Congregationalism. At every level,

01:18:45.800 we literally said, the world that God made, we hate. And I'm just kind of sick of it.

01:18:52.520 I'm sick of it. I've been so convicted over these last two years as the Lord, I believe,

01:18:58.020 by the power of the Holy Spirit revealing this to me.

01:19:00.720 And I've just realized like every day I have to wake up

01:19:03.420 and the Lord just reminds me,

01:19:04.640 Joel, you're a lib.

01:19:06.580 You're a lib.

01:19:07.860 Hey, Joel, you think you're based? 1.00

01:19:09.540 You're a Baptist. 0.70

01:19:12.060 Joel, you think you're based?

01:19:13.740 What's your church polity?

01:19:15.400 Congregationalism? 1.00

01:19:16.520 Yeah, you're gay. 1.00

01:19:18.080 And I'm just having to sit with that. 1.00

01:19:20.880 I'm just having to own that.

01:19:22.380 I'm having to actually reflect.

01:19:24.740 And it's painful to realize, 0.95

01:19:26.000 man i've been deceived at every level at every level i've embraced gay effeminate prideful 0.87

01:19:34.860 rebellious liberalism i've done it in church polity i've done it in civil polity i've done 0.85

01:19:41.380 it in ideology at every single level i'm a gay lib and by god's grace i'd like to not be

01:19:48.160 so all right great we'll head to our second commercial break and then handle uh the super

01:19:53.340 jets that we got okay hey friends gray toad tallow is a family business making skin care the way that

01:20:00.500 it should be simple and clean the company began as a personal mission to find healthier more

01:20:06.560 affordable solutions to common skin problems without the chemicals that are found in most

01:20:12.120 products today now that search led to crafting balms from grass-fed grass-finished animals that

01:20:19.140 were naturally rich in vitamins and healthy fats, which is exactly what your skin craves.

01:20:25.620 These balms fight dryness, they calm eczema, and psoriasis, along with other stubborn skin

01:20:33.960 issues, without containing all the nasty toxins. Gray Toad Tallow offers everyday soaps, balms,

01:20:42.120 and beard balm for men. To experience some of their products, grab a balm sample pack.

01:20:49.120 Each batch is made with care in their home and shipped directly to their customers. For skin

01:20:55.940 care, the way that God designed, natural, clean, and effective, visit graytoedtallow.com. Use code

01:21:05.180 WRITE15 for 15% off your order today. Again, that's graytoedtallow.com. And if you want 15%

01:21:16.020 off, then add the promo code WRITE15 today. America is a country that was founded for the

01:21:23.120 purpose of allowing Christians to do their duty before God and not to have their consciences

01:21:26.580 ruled by the doctrines and commandments of men. Reese Fund exists in order to see the Ten

01:21:31.080 commandments properly applied, not just as a plaque on the wall, but to actually be used in

01:21:35.860 business as though they're commandments from God that we're supposed to obey. Our goal is to find

01:21:41.300 businesses and to buy them and to build them up. We want to find manufacturing businesses and use

01:21:47.520 them to make sure that we can maintain our capacity to do things here. Reese Fund, Christian

01:21:52.720 Capital, boldly deployed. Okay, super chats. We've got a lot of them today. I just want to start by

01:22:00.320 saying a couple things number one um thank you guys so much uh it really it means the world to

01:22:06.140 us and um our our biggest you know i don't want to just say it for the super chats because that's

01:22:11.820 the moment that we're in right now um i want to be honest here um the biggest thing that keeps us

01:22:18.160 on the map keeps us in the fight is uh the financial support from all of you but the biggest

01:22:23.960 thing is um our donors yeah super chats matter immensely immensely um but the biggest thing

01:22:31.400 though because i it's not fair if i say man this guy gave you know 50 super chat that matters thank

01:22:37.020 you um but i'm just going to be honest the reason we're in the fight is because um you guys giving

01:22:44.720 50 super chats and also um a few guys who will remain anonymous uh writing you know twenty

01:22:51.500 thousand dollar checks so those guys thank you thank you thank you you know who you are uh so

01:22:58.680 those anonymous donors who are um who are actually signing up for things like top guys that's a huge

01:23:06.060 thing guy those are guys who support us a hundred dollars a month and are given uh special access

01:23:10.680 and there are guys who want in that we won't let because it's it's um like we are daily interacting

01:23:16.240 with them and so they have to be vetted and uh trusted but our top guys um from the bottom of

01:23:21.800 our heart thank you our um our big donors anonymous donors thank you um but the next in line i would

01:23:28.700 say kind of like third tier but it really matters is our super chat guys and so all of you guys um

01:23:34.780 the last this whole week uh so far the last couple episodes our our super chats have gone to the next

01:23:41.240 level they're full good questions like lots of super chats generous um great comments great

01:23:47.420 questions so thank you so much all right let's start at the bottom first bottom uh do you want

01:23:55.300 to go ahead with austin sure okay so this is from austin gondor and uh he writes in he gave a 50

01:24:02.300 super chat very generous thank you austin he said i don't usually catch you live but i'm praying for

01:24:08.060 you and your family. I'm getting married in three days. Awesome. Congratulations. My fiance and I

01:24:14.440 love your ministry. All right. I'll be honest. Usually it's, I love your ministry and I really

01:24:21.740 enjoy it whenever my fiance or wife gives me permission to watch, which is something I enjoy

01:24:27.840 like Gollum in privacy in the darkness. Right. So the fact that your fiance is watching it with you

01:24:34.480 and enjoys it. You've got to keep her. That's awesome. He said, she is very based. By the way,

01:24:40.780 I was the one who super chatted on Elijah Schaefer on his show a while back when I was on the show

01:24:47.520 too about wedding rings. So I remember you. That's great. Thanks for following us over here on Right

01:24:53.260 Response. We really appreciate it. Austin's like, my wedding's coming up in three days,

01:24:56.740 but I got to pray for Joel. God bless our guy. All right. Answers in Scripture also sent $50,

01:25:03.560 dollars very kind and he said long live the christian king good job men i spent 17 years

01:25:10.600 in public school to learn my place in life was to serve a nameless deep state government that is now

01:25:16.660 fully corrupt many such cases give me a king so at least i know who to love or hate that right

01:25:21.920 there that last line give me a king so see that's the thing it's like well we don't want a monarchy

01:25:26.900 because that might be bad what if the king is evil um yep that can absolutely happen but i i really

01:25:31.980 feel like once again rush duty coming in in the clutch uh it's not whether but which um so it's

01:25:38.600 not so much that uh why i really really really think that we should have a king and we currently

01:25:42.960 don't i feel like one of the strongest arguments i would make is um i'd like to have a formal king

01:25:49.000 um instead of the the kings that we do have we do currently have kings except instead of one

01:25:56.320 who's named who we can hold accountable um who we can see uh we have all these faceless nameless

01:26:04.560 kings who are dictating policy they're dictating taxes they're george soros was a big funder of

01:26:11.300 the no kings protest where does he live what are his goals he's a king he is a king right uh even

01:26:17.620 like donald trump it's like well and i'm not saying he's a king i wish he'd be a little bit

01:26:21.940 more of one um it's like well donald trump is a king no but uh donald trump in in many ways

01:26:28.060 in large part uh won this last election because another king threw his weight behind him namely

01:26:35.440 elon musk uh through elon musk and his funding and his presence and his influence uh so we have

01:26:43.600 kings i mean during the the 2020 election right mark zuckerberg just said uh you know what hunter

01:26:51.100 lap uh hunter biden laptop story no just suppress gone yep like that's that is a fiat dictate

01:26:58.860 that's it that is a a kingly and in this case an evil wicked unjustifiable kingly order so we have

01:27:07.260 kings uh but instead of it being unaccountable kings protect because they're not even um in the

01:27:14.980 civil sphere but rather in the private right the private sphere of you know capitalistic economic

01:27:21.800 sphere with no recourse right no no avenue of accountability i'd rather have um a political

01:27:29.220 visible king where the people have some form of recourse than to have you know dozens of unnamed

01:27:37.640 shadow kings shadow kings who are protected uh by our sacred you know capitalism and many of them

01:27:47.420 beholden to other interests other parties and even other nations right yeah so good point

01:27:54.180 all right this dude rocks i'll give this one to you five dollar super chat great supporter great

01:27:58.700 guy he said it seems like scripture doesn't say women can't be deacons what is your take

01:28:04.160 it isn't a leadership position after all god bless friends yeah so i would say that women

01:28:09.900 can't be deacons and i do think that scripture says that uh but i will say this uh this dude

01:28:14.400 rocks has been an incredible consistent supporter of the show appreciate him very much and uh and

01:28:21.140 the individual behind this account emailed me uh just last night encouraging us and so i'm very

01:28:26.660 very grateful and appreciative of you and so none of this is um i'm not going to put you in your

01:28:33.340 place or anything like that. It's a perfectly fine question. I know what you're saying.

01:28:40.200 Scripture is not as explicit in the way that it forbids women from being deacons, but I do believe

01:28:49.660 that Scripture forbids women from being deacons. But I will admit it's not quite as explicit

01:28:54.780 or clear as the prohibition on women being elders.

01:29:00.860 That said, if you look at both Titus and 1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, 1 Timothy 3,

01:29:06.800 you have the qualifications for elders, and you just have one section,

01:29:11.960 and it starts with he. 0.99

01:29:13.440 He must be husband of but one wife.

01:29:16.660 In the case of deacons, thinking of like 1 Timothy 3,

01:29:20.460 this is where guys, I think, get confused,

01:29:22.300 and I think this is where this dude rocks.

01:29:24.780 is coming from. In the case of 1 Timothy 3, you have one section for elders. He must. He must be

01:29:32.060 the husband of but one wife. But then you have two sections for deacons, and it gives the

01:29:37.280 qualifications for a male deacon. He must be this, that, and the other. And then it gives this

01:29:43.600 subsection, another section, where it says, likewise, women. Now, this is what he mentioned

01:29:51.500 elsewhere. I saw it earlier in the comments. He was quoting 1 Timothy 3, likewise women.

01:29:58.760 In the Greek, it can, I admit, it can translate as either wives or women. But I do believe that

01:30:07.080 in that, so you have to look at context. Remember that Greek is a less specific language on purpose

01:30:16.060 because it was meant to be a universal language primarily to do with commerce

01:30:21.980 and the ability for multiple different peoples who all spoke different native tongues

01:30:29.020 to be able to gather in centralized economic hubs and centers.

01:30:38.400 And so you have people from Assyria or this person from Babylon

01:30:41.640 who all speak different languages in different locations

01:30:45.520 coming together in a centralized hub and being able to trade and do commerce. And so it was just

01:30:53.660 kind of a more rudimentary, basic language that didn't have as many specific terms,

01:31:00.960 not as many specific terms. So the Greek, sometimes you have one Greek word that could

01:31:08.760 actually translate to be multiple different other words, like in the case of wives or women. I do

01:31:15.420 think that the context is wives, I'll give you a couple of reasons why. Number one, if it's women, 1.00

01:31:20.980 then basically the assumption there, and I think this is where you're coming from, this dude rocks,

01:31:26.680 is you're thinking, well, you have one list of qualifications for male deacons, and then likewise

01:31:32.220 women, if you're not reading it as wives, I think it should be wives, but if you're reading it as

01:31:36.720 women, likewise women, then what you're implying, what you're assuming is male deacons have one set

01:31:42.980 of qualifications. And then there's also such a thing as female deacons. But what you have to

01:31:49.160 admit, because you look at what it says for women, and I think it's wives, it's a different 0.94

01:31:54.680 set of qualifications. And it's not just different, it's less. It's less. So just open it up, look at

01:32:01.220 1 Timothy 3. You have multiple different characteristics, tenets, that have to be met

01:32:09.920 in the case of a male deacon, and then you have about half that amount or even a third of that

01:32:15.580 amount for, if you're assuming that it's women and not wives, for female deacons. And so what

01:32:21.640 you would have in the scripture, if you think about this logically, is you would have God

01:32:28.000 sanctioned, biblically approved affirmative action, essentially saying, same role, deacon.

01:32:36.140 when a man fills that role, he must be this tall to ride the ride. When a woman fills the role, 0.64

01:32:44.020 she can be less. And so you, I mean, you would be essentially hamstringing the church. You would be 1.00

01:32:52.000 saying, you know what? We want to have both male and female deacons. In the case of our female 1.00

01:32:56.640 deacons, they'll be less qualified. It'd be like a Matt Chandler thing, except not with race, 0.96

01:33:01.520 but with gender instead, right? 0.81

01:33:04.080 Well, I'll take, you know, the seven female deacon

01:33:06.960 over the eight male deacon, right? 1.00

01:33:10.700 Instead of the seven African-American 0.65

01:33:12.440 over the eight Anglo-American,

01:33:14.520 his notorious, you know, saying.

01:33:17.740 So I don't think that that's what God's doing.

01:33:20.560 I don't think God is saying, you know what?

01:33:22.960 You can have a male or a female deacon.

01:33:25.380 In the case of a male deacon,

01:33:27.020 he's gotta be really qualified. 0.93

01:33:28.260 in the case of a female deacon, she can be less qualified. But that's how you would have to read 0.99

01:33:32.960 it if you read that as women, female deacons, rather than, oh, here's simply the qualifications 0.99

01:33:38.080 for not a female deacon, but the wife of a male deacon. Now, the counter to that argument is that

01:33:46.220 people would say, well, if it is qualifications not for female deacons, women, but rather the

01:33:53.240 wives of male deacons, then how come there are no qualifications earlier in 1 Timothy 3 for the

01:34:00.460 wives of elders? Why qualifications for the wives of deacons and not qualifications for the wives

01:34:04.940 of elders? And my answer to that, as I've studied the issue, is I believe that there's something

01:34:11.420 about the nature of the role of a deacon that will necessarily and naturally include

01:34:19.320 the co-ministry of his wife in a much larger capacity than the role of elder. Because the

01:34:28.500 role of elder is a ministry of the word, and the role of deacon is a ministry of mercy. I'll say

01:34:34.860 that again. Primarily, the role of an elder is a ministry of the word, and the role of a deacon

01:34:40.900 is the ministry of mercy. This is where you have the inauguration or the origin of deacons and

01:34:49.140 Acts chapter 6. That's another. This is a descriptive. It's not prescriptive like 1 Timothy

01:34:53.720 3. It's a descriptive text. But there's something to be said for the fact that in one of the few

01:35:00.440 descriptive texts that we have for the office of deacon, they say, bring us seven men.

01:35:07.340 Not seven people, not seven women, but bring us seven men filled with the Holy Spirit and endowed

01:35:13.620 with wisdom who are fit to perform this task. And what is the task? Well, the task is a task

01:35:19.120 of a ministry of service, a ministry of mercy, that the elders and the church there at Jerusalem

01:35:28.640 at the time were being overrun and overwhelmed by the need of widows. And not just the practical

01:35:35.800 need in terms of charity and service for widows, but also the need for counsel and mediation,

01:35:44.580 because there was a conflict arising between two different groups.

01:35:49.180 The Hebraic Jews and the Hellenistic Jews were at each other's throats,

01:35:55.000 opposed to one another because they were claiming that one of their groups,

01:35:59.680 the widows among one of their groups were being overlooked in favor of the other.

01:36:04.400 So what you have is you have conflict resolution, you have counseling, mediation,

01:36:10.140 and the service of this ministry of mercy and service and charity

01:36:15.880 towards actually feeding those widows.

01:36:17.980 And I don't think these seven men were appointed

01:36:19.800 to simply carry bowls of soup to widows.

01:36:23.400 I think that the church would do that,

01:36:25.660 that multiple people would serve as volunteers in the church

01:36:28.240 to actually execute this service, this ministry.

01:36:33.240 I think the seven men, the reason why one of the qualifications in Acts 6

01:36:37.040 is that they're endowed with wisdom and the Spirit of God

01:36:40.480 is because they were going to oversee this ministry,

01:36:43.880 which involved more than just a whiteboard and mapping out paths to different tables

01:36:48.120 to carry soup the most efficiently,

01:36:50.760 but actually conflict mediation and counsel as well

01:36:55.280 between two different sects of the church,

01:36:57.780 groups that were growing in enmity toward one another.

01:37:03.820 And so seven men, not people that could be men or women, but seven men filled with the Holy Spirit.

01:37:12.220 Now, all that back to the argument I was making a moment ago.

01:37:15.120 So one, you have a descriptive text in Acts chapter 6 that says men.

01:37:18.840 Two, that descriptive text in Acts chapter 6 doesn't just speak to the qualifications.

01:37:24.860 You must be a man and filled with the Spirit and endowed with wisdom.

01:37:27.760 but also it describes not just who can fill the role, but the nature of the role itself.

01:37:35.140 And the nature of the role involves wisdom and counsel, but it also is very much a role of

01:37:40.500 service, practical service. And when it comes to practical service, this is something that

01:37:47.040 a wife is going to partner with her husband in at a much greater capacity and much higher frequency

01:37:55.000 than the role of, if the role is, for instance, a ministry of the word. And just to put it into

01:38:02.100 practical terms, if you have a deacon in the church, a male deacon, and his role is to care

01:38:07.800 for the poor through practical, physical acts of service, his wife is going to partner with him in

01:38:16.680 that at a high degree. Whereas for me, as an elder, a pastor, minister of the word in my church,

01:38:25.000 there are many things that I do, but my chief functions is preaching the word and administering

01:38:31.760 the sacrament. In which case, my wife, who is very qualified if we're speaking of just mere

01:38:37.500 virtue and character, but my wife is not partnering with me in preaching and baptism

01:38:45.520 and the Lord's Supper. And so I think that the reason why you have a list of qualifications for

01:38:51.800 the wives of deacons and an absence of a list of qualifications for the wives of elders is because

01:38:58.620 implicitly we're meant to assume that the wife of a deacon will partner with her husband in that

01:39:04.660 ministry to a higher degree and a greater frequency than the wife of an elder will partner with her

01:39:10.320 husband because the nature of those two roles in the church the nature of the role of an elder

01:39:17.860 is primarily, predominantly dealing with the word and sacrament, whereas the nature

01:39:23.400 of the role of a deacon is primarily practical acts of service and charity. And it's simply

01:39:32.020 implicit that a wife would function in charity and service at a much higher level than she would 0.70

01:39:40.920 with preaching and administering sacraments. So I don't think, because the counter-argument playing

01:39:47.620 the devil's advocate, they would say, well, if this is this subtext for the qualifications of

01:39:53.540 deacons, if it's read as wives of male deacons instead of women being female deacons, well,

01:39:58.900 then that seems to exalt the role of deacon above elder because deacons are such a high role that

01:40:06.000 there's qualifications even for their wives, but elder must be a lower role because they don't

01:40:11.700 seem to have any explicit qualifications for their wives listed at all. That's kind of the way

01:40:17.520 that people would argue it. And I would say, it's not because deacon is above in terms of

01:40:24.260 hierarchy, elder. It's not because of the degree of those two roles, deacon being above elder,

01:40:31.660 but the nature and manner of those two roles. Deacon is very practical. Elder is very spiritual.

01:40:40.020 Deacon is service and charity. Elder is word and sacrament. And I think that's the argument

01:40:46.380 that I would make. I also saw one other comment from you in regards to Phoebe. She is mentioned

01:40:51.920 as a deacon or deaconess. Again, this is where you have to understand the nature of the Greek

01:40:58.960 language. One word being able to translate in many ways, just like the Greek word could translate

01:41:07.060 as women or wives, so too the Greek word can translate for deacon. It could be speaking of

01:41:13.460 deacon in terms of the formal ordained office of a deacon in the church, an ecclesiastical formal

01:41:20.040 office, or deacon in the informal, more organic sense of just meaning a servant. And so I think

01:41:27.740 that what the scripture is speaking in terms of Phoebe is simply saying that she is a wonderful

01:41:33.440 servant of the Lord, not capital S formal ordained servant deacon in the ecclesiastical capacity of

01:41:41.620 an officer of the church but simply the way that all christians should be servants so i think uh

01:41:48.680 the scripture is simply commending her as a wonderful lowercase s servant a christian servant

01:41:56.140 but not capital s ordained office of deacon so timothy keller hardest hit yep timothy keller got

01:42:05.640 real cute with uh qualifications of deacons while being a pca minister who is bound by the

01:42:12.340 westminster standards that strictly forbid female deacons the book of common order i believe it is

01:42:17.460 forbids a laying out of so it's laying out of hands to men so what they did is they appointed

01:42:21.780 deaconesses if i remember correctly that's right but didn't lay hands on them right so they would

01:42:25.960 be they were deacons so they would say well they're not actually ordained so they're installed

01:42:30.040 they're appointed they're designated but they're not ordained but then what they did that was even

01:42:35.240 further and atrocious is in the spirit of fairness they're like well we can't ordain women and still

01:42:41.460 be in the pca um holding to the westminster standards so we won't ordain women but what 0.81

01:42:47.260 we'll do is we'll stop ordaining men in the spirit of egalitarianism so so they didn't lay hands on

01:42:53.980 women but they did call them deaconesses and they did appoint them without ordaining them and to

01:42:59.620 make it fair they stopped ordaining and laying hands on men so they had unordained but appointed

01:43:06.000 male and female deacons in a true egalitarian spirit it's positively subversive very bad

01:43:12.840 dapper dan sent five dollars thanks dan i reject democracy because i reject naturalistic thinking

01:43:18.960 and democracy is just an evolutionary theory of politics it's also very jewish yeah well said

01:43:25.960 Elliot White sent $5. Thanks, Elliot. What is the best advice you have for a state representative? My father is one. This is a good question. We should do an episode sometimes on the different kind of roles in the culture war. So you have the propaganda, and that would be guys like us. We're not hiding our power levels. In fact, if anything, we're a little too out and about, too forthcoming with them.

01:43:47.220 So you've got troops on the ground. These are the guys that attend your young Republicans. They donate. They vote. They're active. They doorknock. Those guys hide their power levels. You have guys providing the rhetoric and the propaganda. They're giving instructions. But then you have a much smaller subset and those are the politicians. And it's hard to get a hold of them. And it's even harder to get them to take your positions, to listen to your side, especially in their position. They have a difficult time pushing the Overton window because you push it too far. You're basically going to be voted out the next election.

01:44:14.500 the question is my father's a state representative what would your advice be

01:44:17.780 i think practically it would be live on the right edge of the overton window

01:44:21.460 not outside of it with the outside the overton window we are outside the

01:44:24.700 overton window let let your it wouldn't work for a state

01:44:27.140 representative podcasters be outside the overton but as much as you can

01:44:31.140 where it's acceptable you're not risking your job push the issue on this

01:44:35.260 all right so like a uh anti-semitism there's been a couple even in texas

01:44:39.400 bills that come forward defining it this out of the other

01:44:42.120 eh, I'm going to go ahead and vote no on this.

01:44:43.780 You don't need to get into all the reasons why.

01:44:45.600 You don't have to go out and, you know,

01:44:46.900 cite for a Thessalonians, you know, 0.98

01:44:48.540 oppose God, kill the prophets. 0.97

01:44:50.720 You don't need to do that to say, 0.99

01:44:51.860 hey, I think this sets a bad precedent

01:44:53.220 as far as chilling free speech.

01:44:54.520 Enemies of all mankind.

01:44:55.920 Don't need to bring that up.

01:44:56.900 Yeah.

01:44:57.660 Live on the right edge of the Overton window.

01:44:59.540 Hey, this happens to be true.

01:45:00.980 Say it in ways that are normally friendly.

01:45:02.740 And I think those guys have a ton of opportunity

01:45:04.880 to make a real difference,

01:45:06.580 but they will lose that opportunity

01:45:08.480 if they're in the center,

01:45:10.520 not pushing it at all.

01:45:11.400 or they're too far outside and basically written off.

01:45:14.340 Yep, agreed.

01:45:15.400 Okay, this dude rocks again.

01:45:16.720 He said, Joel, as a Nephilim theorizer,

01:45:19.780 I am not a theorizer.

01:45:20.920 I'm a Nephilim believer.

01:45:22.840 You should look up Gary Wayne.

01:45:25.080 I listened to him interviewed by Encounter Today

01:45:28.740 over the Genesis 6 conspiracy book.

01:45:33.180 I'll look it up.

01:45:33.740 Never heard of him.

01:45:35.100 All right.

01:45:35.580 All right.

01:45:36.060 Will Nelson sent $5.

01:45:37.460 Thanks, Will.

01:45:37.840 We all know well installation of democracy worked out in Iraq and Afghanistan.

01:45:44.420 Well, you know, there's this wonderful place in Africa where they took our Constitution and carbon copied it, and it's flourishing.

01:45:50.700 It's doing great economically.

01:45:52.540 Oh, wait, that didn't work so well.

01:45:54.720 We've mentioned it before.

01:45:55.720 It's the people that really make a political system.

01:45:58.640 That's right.

01:45:58.920 democracy there are times actually where a greater majority of people voting when you have a good

01:46:04.860 moral christian intelligent people that actually could work much better than even a republic or

01:46:10.820 an aristocracy with a bad people it depends a lot on the people in this case iraq and afghanistan

01:46:16.800 yeah not the people doesn't work for it yep um that that's the thing i've said it before i'll

01:46:22.560 say it real briefly but um people look at the american experiment and they say well you know

01:46:27.740 for a while it worked out really well and arguably better than any country in the world look at the

01:46:31.480 prosperity look at the blessing look at the success that's all true um but i think what you

01:46:36.380 have to recognize is one we did not have a raw democracy that came later through universal

01:46:40.740 suffrage what we had in the beginning was a constitutional republic um and so you had you

01:46:45.600 know um you had the populace voting but not every sector of the populace you had those who were of

01:46:51.960 a particular stock and representing not just individuals themselves but representing households

01:46:57.540 You had head of households who were voting.

01:47:00.860 In addition to that, so one, not a raw democracy, but a constitutional republic.

01:47:06.360 Secondly, even that constitutional republic, in large part, the reason why it fared so well is because it did not simply hang in midair.

01:47:14.940 It's not that it came out of the ether.

01:47:17.660 That constitutional republic came from the people, a particular quality, caliber of people.

01:47:24.740 And where did those people come from?

01:47:26.200 Oh, well, they were forged over the course of about 700 to 900 years

01:47:31.640 from a Christian monarch.

01:47:33.700 They were Europeans who were ready for self-governance

01:47:38.260 because if you just got the right form of government

01:47:41.460 and the right constitution, it would work with any people.

01:47:44.700 No, they were particular people that that form of self-governance

01:47:50.260 and self-representation worked for them

01:47:53.140 because they were a high-caliber people.

01:47:56.200 And they were a high caliber people that came about over a long, grueling process of men being governed for generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation.

01:48:09.780 And after centuries, their progeny, their posterity were finally fit for self-governance, right?

01:48:18.960 So that doesn't just happen.

01:48:20.780 So the idea of like, well, let's just go back.

01:48:23.260 I don't think it's linear, right?

01:48:25.140 I don't think it's a sliding scale where it's like a Christian monarchy goes to an aristocracy,

01:48:30.640 goes to a constitutional republic, and then devolves into a raw democracy. And if we want

01:48:36.100 to right the ship, we just need to go back one setting, you know, from raw democracy to the

01:48:41.440 constitutional republic. No, I don't think it's linear. I think it's circular. Unfortunately,

01:48:47.740 I'm not even saying that I like this. This is not what I'm prescribing. This is what I'm predicting.

01:48:51.820 what i predict is that this is not a line but a circle and that the only way on is through and

01:49:01.140 that you have to circle back around that once you lose the constitutional republic and what i mean

01:49:07.120 by that is the people who are fit for the constitutional republic and devolve into the

01:49:13.840 most base of of appetites and the lowest common denominator and flood your country with a bunch 0.93

01:49:21.800 people who are not the descendants of 700 to 900 years of a Christian monarchy, then I think 1.00

01:49:32.220 what you have to do from that point is go all the way back around. You have to then move from 0.85

01:49:40.200 this raw democracy, universal suffrage, lowest common denominator, back to a stiff hand.

01:49:48.220 um i again it's what i'm predicting not necessarily prescribing uh but i i historically i don't really

01:49:56.260 i can't think of any examples where um a nation uh of of our size about 200 million added an

01:50:05.840 additional 100 million right so 50 percent of their founding stock from the third world and 0.66

01:50:13.140 different places that are not christian and worship demons right thinking of you know muslim

01:50:20.060 nations hindu nations you know and and and devolved and and propagandized for over half a century 0.83

01:50:28.960 with uh just media slop and degeneracy and all these kinds of things and atheism taught in the

01:50:37.120 public schools indoctrinated and educated in the ways of secularism and all these kind and then

01:50:42.840 just turned the clock back. I can't think of any example like that. Constitutional Republic worked

01:50:49.880 because we had the people suitable for it. We no longer have those people by design, very

01:50:55.700 intentionally. We imported people who are not fit and we took the people, the founding stock that

01:51:01.960 were fit and their posterity and denigrated them. And so now I feel like we're kind of back at phase

01:51:09.520 one right we want a clean house we want to you know get everyone ship shape um men must be

01:51:16.520 governed i think we're back full circle yep depper dan sent another five dollars he said

01:51:23.460 monarchy makes bad leaders more detrimental that democracy makes bad leaders more often

01:51:28.660 it was a good way of saying it that's a good way of saying it yeah all right justin holt he gave

01:51:34.120 It's $10. Thanks, Justin.

01:51:35.380 He said, you guys see Michael Knowles and Allie Beth Stuckey

01:51:39.620 talking about dispensationalism in Israel, moderately based.

01:51:48.440 Read the title of the episode.

01:51:49.680 Maybe, maybe. I'll have to see it.

01:51:51.920 It was on his recent episode, Make America Pregnant Again.

01:51:57.380 I'll have to check it out.

01:51:59.080 I appreciate Knowles.

01:52:01.080 i think moderately based would be a fair label for him um not nearly as based as he could be

01:52:07.760 michael knowles there's so much potential right the the uh the the blood of uh nobility runs

01:52:16.320 through your your valiant veins yeah that's i mean you've got this monarchical catholic

01:52:23.120 italian right there's greatness there's greatness there um so i i think that knowles has potential

01:52:28.820 to be unfathomably based. 0.68

01:52:31.940 If he can get off the Israeli wire plantation, 1.00

01:52:34.760 that would be absolutely vital. 1.00

01:52:38.160 But moderately based in the meantime,

01:52:40.600 I think is probably fair.

01:52:42.980 I struggle to use that descriptor,

01:52:46.460 moderately based, for Ali Bestucki.

01:52:49.380 To me, it's an oxymoron on the face of it 1.00

01:52:54.220 to have a woman in a pantsuit 0.95

01:52:58.140 dressed like a man um you know speaking publicly with another man influencing and leading and this

01:53:09.160 one talking about having more kids that's just i remember a while ago uh michael knolls and her

01:53:14.120 they were doing like a drinking game but even that combo was a little bit like what are we doing here

01:53:18.980 let's have the men sit down and fix this problem right yeah so i i struggle with that but um but

01:53:23.980 who knows uh maybe knolls had some good points all right all right this dude rock sent twenty

01:53:29.160 dollars he said would it be biblical for the president of the u.s to take executive action

01:53:34.240 to directly amend the constitution to explicitly name christ as sovereign over the country knowing

01:53:39.360 that he's potentially breaking the law to do it and he sent a five dollar follow-up to clarify

01:53:44.360 in this hypothetical he would be circumventing the normal processes to do so taking an executive

01:53:49.180 direct action circumventing norms and i saw a comment that was not a super chat where he said

01:53:53.860 I'm essentially asking, can you break the law to name Christ is King?

01:53:58.160 Yeah.

01:53:58.760 Yeah.

01:53:59.480 Yeah.

01:54:00.300 He who saves his country violates no law.

01:54:03.780 And the law of the land is only valid insofar as it mirrors the law of God.

01:54:10.240 So any current law on the books that forbids the public allegiance of a nation

01:54:20.200 to the lord jesus christ uh is a illegitimate law and so um i wouldn't even see it as law-breaking

01:54:28.860 not in the eternal or ultimate or any valid real sense um and and the the alternative what we

01:54:38.460 currently have i don't think this is the first amendment and it's an authorial intent but the

01:54:43.300 way that it's interpreted and applied today freedom of religion um john mccarthur even said

01:54:51.300 this and john mccarthur was you know i mean he was not um you know necessarily a magisterial reformer

01:54:58.820 in his you know political uh doctrine but even john mccarthur said freedom of religion freedom

01:55:05.420 of religion is just freedom of idolatry so true king rest in peace king right um so i i agree so

01:55:14.040 like i mean what law would you be violating well you you'd be a law violating a law that uh insists

01:55:21.740 that foreign peoples should be able to publicly worship foreign gods um that's a law that was

01:55:30.600 made to be broken, and God would honor the breaking of that law. I do think you could also 0.99

01:55:36.120 frame it. So we asked, would it be biblical? Would it be practically wise? That is a whole different

01:55:41.580 other field. So day one, you come in, you're like, I want to have the most opposition, the most

01:55:46.060 difficulty, the biggest no king's protest ever seen. Day one, I'm going to declare it. I'm going

01:55:51.240 to declare martial law. Maybe that's not the most tactical, but in principle, maybe it's the last

01:55:55.880 day of your term in office, but in principle, we're saying biblically, yes and amen. Yeah.

01:56:00.600 okay green raptor sent two dollar super chat said we've forgotten the no king but christ

01:56:08.500 motto um no we haven't forgotten it i think we're just struggling to believe it

01:56:15.000 so well aware uh that there's no king but christ in the ultimate eternal sense um but i i just i

01:56:25.600 struggle to make a biblical argument for why there can be no earthly kings who ultimately are

01:56:35.600 submitted to the one true highest king, Christ. And one of the biblical arguments I would make

01:56:41.280 actually to go against no king but Christ is the fact that Christ, one of his names,

01:56:47.360 is king of kings the the mere fact that jesus is king of kings implies that there are such a thing

01:56:56.700 a valid thing as earthly kings for jesus to be king of and so um yeah no king but christ

01:57:05.560 uh i got a lot of good friends who would support that we have a sponsor who would support that

01:57:12.100 i know what they mean i think the heart is in the right place so i'm not going to disparage

01:57:17.200 them. It's probably something I can't remember, but I've probably even echoed that sentiment a

01:57:23.080 couple of years ago myself. But as I'm thinking about it more and more, I'd make two arguments,

01:57:29.340 one from scripture, king of kings. I think that's a decent argument. And then one I would make from

01:57:36.320 history and history being, you know, ultimately subservient to scripture, but still a legitimate

01:57:42.280 authority not not an infallible authority as scripture is uh but uh an authority nonetheless

01:57:48.540 and the argument i would make from history is kind of similar to the argument i would make

01:57:53.160 against dispensationalism i would say uh dispensationalism i think is wrong on on the

01:57:58.800 merits in terms of its exegesis of the scripture but it also should be held as highly suspect

01:58:04.520 just simply due to the mere fact that it's novel like do we really want to assert that the church

01:58:11.760 the universal church of Jesus Christ,

01:58:14.780 the lowercase c Catholic church,

01:58:18.160 for 1,850 years since its inception,

01:58:24.940 completely missed this valid, true biblical doctrine

01:58:30.000 and then finally figured it out in the last 150 years.

01:58:36.300 And that's an argument that I've made

01:58:37.960 and many of you would agree with and say

01:58:40.260 one of the arguments against dispensationalism is the fact that it's so novel. And what that

01:58:46.700 implies is that the Holy Spirit's leading and guiding and preservation of the doctrine of the

01:58:55.180 church utterly neglected one whole swath, one whole realm of biblical doctrine for almost two

01:59:06.260 millennia and so what i would say is now applying that to kings um is is it is it wise and is it um

01:59:18.940 reasonable and probable to argue that um that the church of jesus christ because it wasn't just like

01:59:29.200 one nation like england but that the church of jesus christ in multiple countries multiple nations

01:59:35.200 in multiple time periods for approximately 1,700, 1,800 years

01:59:45.100 just missed this doctrine, right?

01:59:49.720 I feel like if we're going to say one of the reasons,

01:59:52.900 it's not the only reason,

01:59:53.740 but one of the reasons we're suspicious of dispensationalism

01:59:57.080 is the fact that it came about so recently,

02:00:00.340 then I feel like by the same standard, equal weights and measures,

02:00:03.420 we should be suspicious of it's one thing to say i don't think in this political context this nation

02:00:10.420 at this time the monarchy is the most suitable form of government that's fine right if we're

02:00:15.780 just arguing about which form of government for which country in which time period is best

02:00:22.220 that's perfectly reasonable but that's that's not what green raptor and others would assert

02:00:28.160 What they would assert is that there is an airtight universal principle in Scripture for all places and all times to never have a monarchical, any kind of monarchical, whether it be constitutional monarchy or absolute monarchy, form of government.

02:00:45.240 And I'm just saying that's a pretty wide universal swath.

02:00:52.640 And you would have to historically, right?

02:00:55.960 So biblically, king of kings.

02:00:57.220 I think that says something. But then historically, you would have to say that virtually universally, the church in dozens of nations over the course of dozens of centuries, at least a dozen, dozen and a half centuries, missed this clear biblical universal prohibition.

02:01:19.100 and if that's the argument

02:01:22.660 it's like well actually it was always there all along

02:01:25.060 and we just realized it in the 1800s

02:01:27.160 then

02:01:28.460 as the orcs would say

02:01:31.220 in Lord of the Rings

02:01:31.880 meat is back on the menu

02:01:34.300 dispensationalism is back on the menu

02:01:36.060 right

02:01:36.840 this dude rock sent $5

02:01:40.460 if you're conflicted in your position on church

02:01:43.300 structures I think referencing back to what you said

02:01:45.140 about congregationalism

02:01:46.220 what's the answer a catholic-like protestant high church god bless good show yes i think that is the

02:01:52.260 answer um i don't think you have to be catholic uh we have many catholic friends but we have you

02:01:56.960 know of course our profound disagreements um but we love our catholic friends and um and our

02:02:03.580 co-belligerents in the realm of culture and politics uh but there is a protestant um equivalency

02:02:10.380 that rejects a pope vicar of christ on earth um you know it still holds to what we believe

02:02:18.120 is sound doctrine in regards to soteriology and these things would reject the council of

02:02:22.440 vatican ii all these things um and and is you know just distinctly and unapologetically

02:02:29.500 protestant um while still having an episcopal uh polity um governance hierarchy within

02:02:37.200 the church and that would be episcopalianism that would also be anglicanism both of those

02:02:44.060 denominations within the protestant vein historically protestant both of them had a

02:02:51.320 way of having a hierarchical form of church polity while still being distinctly and unapologetically

02:03:00.140 uh protestant and uh i think of you know the great great anglican men um martin lloyd jones

02:03:08.160 uh john stott he had a couple elves but um but had some really good things so

02:03:13.200 um i think there's precedent there yeah avery de pecky ten dollars thanks avery politics by

02:03:21.440 aristotle should be mandatory reading in high school it covers much of what was said here

02:03:25.580 Good show, guys.

02:03:26.860 Totally agree.

02:03:28.200 I cracked into it.

02:03:29.360 I also listened to some online lectures on it.

02:03:31.120 And Aristotle's politics is incredible.

02:03:33.000 Again, we're dealing with the common kingdom, the natural kingdoms.

02:03:35.920 This is not theology.

02:03:36.920 This is not church reading.

02:03:38.180 As far as the realm of politics.

02:03:39.360 You're not reading Aristotle on Doctrine of Salvation.

02:03:41.880 Nope, you're not reading him on Sunday.

02:03:43.420 But politics, I want to learn it.

02:03:45.280 I want to understand it.

02:03:46.200 I want to know the history of it.

02:03:47.920 There's even lessons he has on virtue, like the golden mean,

02:03:50.900 avoiding the excess or deficiency of certain virtues.

02:03:53.500 i think those are incredible and uh highly recommend aristotle yeah this dude rock sent

02:03:58.300 five dollars i think this is a question you answered thanks for the detailed answer on

02:04:01.880 deacons it helps a lot the only loose end i have is roman saying phoebe was a servant different

02:04:07.000 thing which you said uh you answered the greek the same word can refer to a deacon deacon office

02:04:13.580 deacon as i think he probably gave the super chat before i got to that part of the answer

02:04:17.880 because it was so long and that's one of the ways that i'm able to milk more super chats out of our

02:04:22.780 audience is i'll give an answer and be so painstakingly slow and thorough that uh that

02:04:30.180 they're like i gotta you know he's not getting to this other part of the answer so i gotta send him

02:04:33.860 more money so i would just say to you this dude rocks um gotcha gotcha all right tight as well

02:04:41.320 or ten dollar super chat last one for the day just wanted to support your ministry thank you

02:04:45.240 very kind thank you titus really appreciate it all right thanks for tuning in we uh hope that

02:04:49.200 You've been blessed by this episode, and Lord willing,

02:04:51.260 we will see you on Friday.

02:04:53.740 And what we're going to be discussing,

02:04:55.360 we're going to have a special guest.

02:04:56.540 We are.

02:04:57.060 Can we announce it?

02:04:58.520 It's not a secret. 0.91

02:04:58.920 Did Protestantism make the West gay? 0.99

02:05:02.420 That's the idea. 0.93

02:05:03.840 That's the title.

02:05:04.520 That's the idea.

02:05:05.040 That's what we'll be discussing. 1.00

02:05:05.820 Like this effeminate, fake, and gay ethos of the West. 1.00

02:05:12.000 Is this, you know, we'd like to say enlightenment. 1.00

02:05:15.180 I think it was.

02:05:16.800 I think among other things,

02:05:18.240 but enlightenment being a big one.

02:05:19.560 But there are guys who would say,

02:05:20.940 well, the other side of the coin of the enlightenment,

02:05:22.700 but same theme is the Reformation.

02:05:25.180 The Reformation is just the enlightenment Christianized.

02:05:28.060 Now, I disagree. 0.72

02:05:29.620 We're going to actually defend the Protestant faith.

02:05:33.900 But this question, we can't just say,

02:05:36.460 well, I don't like it.

02:05:37.660 No, it is a valid question.

02:05:39.680 It's a valid question.

02:05:40.820 And so we're going to delve into the history

02:05:42.220 and we want to do it.

02:05:43.160 Can I announce the guest?

02:05:44.220 Yes.

02:05:44.420 we're going to do it with someone who um is more knowledgeable on this topic than both of us and

02:05:49.600 he's done a lot of great work uh he has his own youtube channel and is putting out his own content

02:05:54.380 you haven't heard of him i highly recommend that you go and check him out he goes by the name

02:05:59.720 the other paul the other paul and uh one happy little free bonus that you get by listening to

02:06:06.500 him is he's australian and has a thick australian accent that might be a bonus for some it might be

02:06:13.000 a detriment you know but um he uh he's very knowledgeable very well read and so he's going

02:06:18.260 to be coming and joining us on the show for the live stream on friday at 3 p.m central time

02:06:23.180 to give us a history of protestantism and uh and making the defense for uh fakeness and gayness

02:06:31.240 um coming from many protestants but not protestantism right so that'll be the show

02:06:37.260 on friday thanks for tuning in and we will see you soon lord willing bye

02:06:43.000 We'll be right back.

The NXR Podcast - October 22, 2025

THE LIVESTREAM - Why Leftists Hate Kings

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript