News Roundup: French on Talerico, SPLC Bombshell, VA Redistricting, Re: Critics

David French, James Tallarico, and Whether Social Sin Disqualifies a Christian

And I see this all the time. He can't be a Christian because he's pro-choice.

He can't be a Christian

Not with Tallarico.

He can't be a Christian because

I think Tallarico, it's because he said that he believes that they're like all religions share truth, share the central truth, basically.

I'm just really not willing to say that James Tallarico is not a Christian. I'm just not gonna do it.

Welcome to the Conversations That Matter podcast, fashionably late. I had a phone call that came in right before I was gonna go live and wanted to take it. I thought it was important enough, but now I'm like 15 minutes after I said I was gonna be, or at least as I scheduled it, which was four.

So my apologies to those who are in the channel. It looks like Cosmic Treason and Roman Zayt and Mark and a bunch of other people. Kayawan, is that how I say the name? They're all in the channel having a discussion and I haven't even started.

So welcome to everyone who's also coming in. I can see the numbers increasing as the stream progresses. We have a number of things to talk about today, including that clip you just heard. That was from the Allie Beth Stuckey program.

A few days ago, it was David French. And the question really was, and I didn't play all the context. This was a clip that the Blaze actually clipped, but context was James Tallarico supports abortion, supports transgenderism.

How can you say this guy's a Christian and David French doesn't want to write anyone off, apparently as a Christian. So James Tallarico, perfectly within boundaries. The thing that's interesting to me about this, there's a few things of course, but the first thing that stood out in my mind is David French seems very willing to call into question Trump's Christianity quite a bit.

Trump's not a Christian. Trump's, on what basis, right? Well, Trump's ethical abuse. Trump, the way he hates women and minorities. And it's that general temperament, that critique you hear from the left all the time.

David French has also gotten in on that. And we've talked about it on the podcast. And I didn't do deep research to find out who else he said that about. I'm sure there's others, but Donald Trump at the very least, can we just, at least can we take Donald Trump and say, Donald Trump says he's a Christian, has a cultural Christian identity.

He even just did the prayer week thing where he read a portion of scripture and he has held Bibles up and said we want to protect Christianity. And he's done a number of policy things that Christians are pretty happy with, at least conservative Christians, for protecting Christianity and making sure that they're not harassed under civil rights legislation and this kind of thing.

Now, here's the thing. Donald Trump within boundaries, James Tallarico, who's running for the Senate in Texas, not within boundaries. Senate, right?

Senate or Congress?

I think it's, is it Congress? Maybe it's Congress. I should probably check that out real quick. I can't remember for some reason. I was just in Texas, by the way. And it was interesting. I went to Dallas and Fort Worth for two days.

I was doing a film project there on the Episcopal Church. So I talked to Episcopalians and former Episcopalians and that should be coming out probably, I would think, by the end of summer, that mini documentary.

So we went to Dallas and I'll tell you what, one of the things I've noticed in Dallas, first of all, it's huge. It's getting bigger, but it feels less and less Texas. I just remember going there 15 years ago and before that even, and just not seeing what I'm seeing now.

Like it really does feel like California, whether it's the accents or the way people dress or there's a number of factors. You still see, especially when you get to Fort Worth, you still see some Texas, but it's more and more diluted.

Anyway, James Tallarico is running for US Senate. So I was right about that. And he has been to seminary. We played some of the clips on the show. He loves the bravery of transgender kids and this kind of thing.

And the thing that I think is like a blaring problem with James Tallarico in regards to his Christianity is he sees Islam as somehow legitimate. And Islam is obviously a false religion from a Christian viewpoint, but James Tallarico doesn't see Islam that way.

That's not what they were talking about in the context of the podcast. They were talking about social views, but I would probably start with that. Just say, well, look, is Allah the same God? Is Allah a legitimate God?

Is that a path to God? Is that, what do you think about that? But the context is these social views. And so I wanted to have a brief discussion about this and just say, look, these social views that people have, whether it's abortion or homosexuality, transgenderism, these social policies that are in debate, if you are on the wrong side of these social policies, if you are on the side that is not in keeping with scripture, okay, you are on the side pushing to normalize these things, to increase these things, then you are not doing a Christian thing.

We can all agree on that. You're doing a very evil thing. And if you go to church and it's a real church, they should probably confront you about that. And if you don't repent, discipline you about that.

That's really not a discussion that would be controversial for this audience because we are Orthodox believers. And we believe that when Jesus said, if you love me, you keep my commandments, that he meant it.

Do you question someone's salvation over that? I think there are probably ignorant people that let's say they got saved very recently and they before that had a number of erroneous views. They may retain some of those views because they haven't actually thought about them.

Now those views are pretty overt, like murder and gender and stuff. Like that's pretty overt. Like if you become a Christian, that's gonna be probably one of the first things you realize, well, that doesn't conform at all to the God that I worship now.

There is a discipleship process though. And people do, I think, come to greater levels of sanctification as they're being discipled. They become more holy, in other words, and less tolerant of sin and more conformed to the image of Christ.

God completes the work that he started in you. And the Body of Believers is around to help in that. However, if you retain these things after going to seminary, like James Tallarico, you are now ordained to preach the word of God.

You are not just a Christian, but someone who really knows Christianity. You've been a Christian. You're representing Christianity. You are trying to even run your campaign based on the moral foundation you say comes from Christianity.

You're not ignorant about these things. These are well thought through things. These are not just political decisions. These are moral decisions that you've had time to ruminate on. And you have come to the wrong side of the equation, to the side of the equation that is against God's clear law.

If that's the truth, then I have no reason to treat you as a brother or say you're a Christian. That's just the bottom line. You're someone who is, I mean, with the case of transgender children, I mean, it was better if a millstone were hung around your neck and you were drowning in the depths of the sea.

That's Jesus, not me. Because you're causing these little ones to stumble. This is actually a big deal. And I don't care how nice someone sounds or how attractive and how they keep up with Christian protocol in other areas.

These views are reprehensible. And I am willing, unlike David French to say, that's not a Christian. Someone who knowingly and with understanding of what God's word teaches, who has been supposedly a Christian for years now, who goes around advocating for evil, blatant evil, you're not a Christian.

That should have been confronted a long time ago. If you were in a faithful church, it would have been. And you may have the identity on some level of being a Christian, but that's not what a Christian does.

Christians love Christ. Christ says, if you love me, you keep my commandments. It's really not any more simple than that. And look, there's, or complicated than that. And look, there's people who want to say that there's no law requirement here.

Like your political beliefs aren't the basis for your salvation. I totally agree with that, by the way. They're not the basis for your salvation. But if you support evil, then that is evidence. I'm not saying you're doing evil.

Like you're sinning and Paul says, I do the very thing I hate. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about you actually knowingly predetermined, premeditatingly, blatantly support sin and have no apologies and double down for it.

If that's the direction you're going, that is not a Christian thing. And we should not just assume that someone who does that is a Christian, certainly. But it definitely calls into question their salvation.

Because if you're a Christian, there's going to be fruit. There's going to be repentance. There's going to be humility. And that humility is going to mostly be a conformity to Christ and a dying to self.

And I can't think of anything more selfish than killing children because it's convenient for your life or because wanting to switch your gender because you don't like the one that God gave you. That's certainly out of step with honoring the creator that we have.

So there's a little rant for you, I suppose, but what fellowship is light with darkness, guys? I mean, it's really, it's idolatry on a certain level. Like this is deep, deep sin to the point of, this is idolatry.

This is saying that we reject the God who made us and we're going to make ourselves God. We determine what our gender is. We determine who gets to live and die. Sorry, guys. Sorry, not sorry. Well, there's a number of folks already making comments in the chat.

I'm going to get to some of these questions and then we will commence to talking about Al Mohler and Josh Hawley and the SPLC and what's going on in the state of Virginia. Oh my, Virginia. We're going to also talk a little bit about the response I made to critics of my talk and my article on the new, I didn't know what else to call it, but the anti-Jewish theology.

I did write an article about that. I was on the fence about it, but I decided to do it just for whatever few well-meaning people may be out there who may be confused by it. Hopefully this helps clarify things and we'll talk about that.

I'm here to answer any questions and comments or cries of outrage while the podcast is going on. So thank you for everyone who's here. All right, well, let's see. We have in the comments, First Cosmic Treason says, can Christians sincerely work for, can they work for the failure of the secular state of Israel or is this morally impermissible as an article of faith because it places us under God's curse?

Certainly Christians, well, Christians can work against evil, right? So if there is a state doing evil, we need to work against those things. At the same time, when you're talking about geopolitics, which is the category of this question, you're looking at nations across the globe and most of them are evil on some level, supporting evil, under evil, religious, or non-religious and I guess everyone's religious, but they're overtly secular in some cases and they're most of Europe's like this, right?

Where they support horrible policies. From a geopolitics standpoint, this is a political question. What's the best kind of outcome for the people that I serve in the United States? That's what I'm asking if I'm a magistrate making these decisions.

I don't wanna be, and certainly I can't be someone who actually supports evil things. That's not negotiable. But when I'm looking at alliances and trade policies and military cooperation, there are going to be times that I am going to side with people or people will side with me that I don't get along with, that don't represent in every way, shape or form my domestic policies and the morality that goes along with those.

That goes for the United States, by the way. I mean, if you even become a state rep or a local rep in this country, are you gonna abide by laws? Are you going to have cooperation with a national government or a general government that has as many evil connections?

It's kind of unavoidable, right? And so this is the situation I think Daniel and Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego find themselves in. There are limits to what we can do. But working towards, I don't know what that would even be.

Working against a foreign government that does evil things, certainly expose the evil things. I don't know what working against it necessarily looks like. If they're threatening us, that's in our purview, right?

If Iran legitimately is threatening the United States, that is within the purview of the United States interests. If they're not threatening the United States, then that's, and you're just gonna go there,.

I don't know what,.

To just change their policies because you don't like them. I don't know that that's something that would be justified. But what I do think is, the situation right now in the Middle East, it is complicated, it does have a history.

And it probably, when I said this when it first happened, I didn't want Donald Trump to go in there. It's hard to say when we're not in a situation room, we don't have all the intelligence necessarily.

But given everything I've read about this situation, it's a mess because you're dealing with, in Iran, some actual ideologues, some religious zealots. They don't care if you bomb them into the Stone Age, at least the people on the top in the government, right?

They are perfectly fine with that. They're going to hold tight. You can punish them economically. I mean, you only have so much leverage with people like that. And I think the mistake of American policy for a long time has been to think that everyone's like us.

The people in Gaza want the same things we want. They just want a better life. Nevermind the fact that they support Hamas, they have a pay-for-slave program. Many of the families that even accepted charity from the state of Israel for medical things, that kind of stuff, they would be honored if their children grew up and became terrorists.

I mean, there is a mentality that we don't understand where it's like, it is better to kill your enemy than it is to be successful personally. I don't know that Donald Trump sees that. And it's not, he can work over a boardroom, he can negotiate, but there are interests that aren't economic.

There are interests, but not everyone is looking for just raising a family and living in peace, right? This is actually something that's more, that's definitely in the West, but it's not all an Eastern thing.

There are people who will die for their religion. I think Iran has a lot of those kinds of people and they're in powerful positions. So you only have so many negotiating strategies that you can use at this point.

I know the question, I'm way off the question now. The question was about Israel and stuff. But I think when it comes to our foreign policy, we have to think in terms of, is this a threat? And if it's a threat, then what can we do about it?

There are limits to what we can do too. And I think Donald Trump knows this. There's electoral limits. Reducing Iran's ability to have not just a nuclear weapon, but also reach this immutability where they would be able to deflect any threat that came against them.

You can claim that as a victory. If the whatever emerges there is more friendly to the United States, you can claim that as a victory. You can claim that as we accomplished objectives that the United States wanted to accomplish.

But there's a cost to all of those things. And I think we're finding out right now that having bases all over the world and being involved in these various places, yes, there may be American dominance that may keep our dollars strong, but there's also a cost to these things, a quite literal dollar in bill costs.

And there's election considerations. There's the diplomatic headache that all these things bring. And it's not something that our country had to really worry about even 150 or even a hundred years ago.

This wasn't really, it's really a post-war thing, post-World War II that we sort of filled the gap left behind by some of these colonial empires. And now we have to think about these things. So circling back to should people, should the United States citizens work against the secular state of Israel in some way?

I don't know what that looks like. Evangelize them? Yes, that's one way I suppose you could work against. I don't know if that undermines the state though, necessarily. I mean, it's, I don't think we're going to war with Israel anytime soon.

That's because they're an ally, they've been an ally. So really the bigger question is what does allyship look like? What does enemy status look like? And those are the things that people are actually debating out there right now.

Is it someone an enemy because they have a nuclear weapon and they say death to America and they've killed thousands of our citizens. Does that make them an enemy or they're so far away, should they even be considered that?

Is someone an ally just because they've been with us in various fights and when we tell them to stop, they do and we can control them to some extent and we have an economic partnership and that is that there's on the other side of the world.

Does that make them an ally? Those are legitimate conversations to have, certainly. But I don't think we should be thinking about any foreign nations in a geopolitical way in terms of whether or not their moral standards domestically are good or bad and then we have some responsibility to do anything about it.

I think it's more, what's the responsibility that we have to our own citizens and that didn't then determines how we think of our relationships across the world. James Tallarico is a heretic, David French is clueless.

Well, yeah, rocky proof. Tell me what you really think about that. Calling himself a seminarian was the first sign. Yeah, he's a seminarian guys, like James Tallarico is not out there saying I'm neutral on these things.

So anyway, hopefully that is all helpful commentary. We have some news to get to though and then I will take more questions as the program unfolds. Let's start with this. I'm gonna start with Southern Baptist Land.

Can we start with Southern Baptist Land a little bit? Let's go to this headline. I missed this somehow and since I'm focusing on this woman pastor issue in the SPC, I figured I'd let you know about it.

Southern Baptist Confusion Over Female Chaplains

Called to serve, going where the bikers go. This is a story from the North American Mission Board. That means Southern Baptist, you are paying money to fund this particular entity in your convention. It's not just independent, your money goes to this entity.

This is from last, I believe it's December. I don't know, I showed up on the mobile app. It doesn't seem to show up here with the date, but it is from, it's not ancient history. And you have a picture here of a motorcycle chaplain.

Looks can be deceiving, it says. And Michelle Newsomes got a story to prove it. Michelle, a grandmother, motorcycle rider, Southern Baptist chaplain, and one of the founders of Faith Riders Motorcycle Ministry had just pulled up to a Southern Baptist annual convention meeting on her Harley Davidson Road King.

And she ran into the ladies room to freshen up. The story goes on, I'm gonna summarize it for you. And it just basically says, look, it literally says this about bikers. They're an unreached people group.

I kid you not.

I don't know if you knew that. Bikers are an unreached people group. I mean, we usually talk about like, I don't know, people in the rural areas of Bhutan or something. It's like, oh, they're unreached people group.

We need to go evangelize them. But apparently bikers, they're passing all those signs on the highway that say things like Jesus saves, but unreached. So we gotta reach them. And the way to reach them is to hire a chaplain to go reach them.

Now, I don't know why there weren't any men available for this. Here's the point I wanna make. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with a female evangelizing, obviously. There's nothing wrong with it.

I think if the woman at the well can go tell everyone in town, look at the person who knew everything about me, told me everything, and he's the Messiah, I think a woman can evangelize and that is perfectly fine.

And that's a good thing. Make sure it's safe though, right? However, calling a woman who does evangelism a chaplain, that gets confusing. And I think it's the confusion that has been the problem for the Southern Baptist for a long time.

What do you mean by chaplain? What kind of authority does chaplain carry with it? Chaplain is generally a synonym for pastor. It means essentially a pastor. It could be someone in the military. It could be someone who's doing parachurch kind of work.

They're in ministry doing pastoral kind of ministry, but they don't have a stable home church that they're doing that ministry in. So if you're a chaplain for the fire department or the military, you are an extension of a ministry that exists at the home base.

So that's why in the military, you have to be ordained by a certain governing board that certifies you that you are a chaplain to represent their denomination or group. So you are at the fire station or the police department, usually a local pastor who goes in, and now I'm extending my pastoral role to this area.

That's a chaplain. So should a female be a chaplain? It's not really the proper title. If all you're doing is going and evangelizing, and you get the impression from this, there's more going on, right?

There's counseling and these kinds of things. I mean, what do you make of it? I would say, I mean, you could use different words. You could say missionary, right? Couldn't you say missionary? This is the problem with the Southern Baptist Convention.

They aren't clear on these things, and the sloppiness gives you room for people with bad motives who wanna take advantage of the theological lack of clarity here to drive their bad theology through the hole, the gaping hole that's been left.

And so this might seem like a minor thing to some of you. I've been giving updates in every news roundup about the Southern Baptist and things I've been discovering in the Southern Baptist Convention about female pastors.

This one is not a female pastor per se. It's not someone who's in a church preaching on Sunday morning, as far as I know. I haven't looked up to see if Michelle's doing that, but this is someone who is commissioned by the Southern Baptist Convention with your tithing money to be a chaplain.

And I just think it's sad to me that at the top of the convention, they're not thinking through these things and how this looks and who could take advantage of that kind of thing, that kind of loose theology.

We need to make sure that the terms we're using reflect the theology that we have. That's my only point. So now I'm not leaving Southern Baptist land yet. Josh Hawley and Al Muller discuss challenges facing disaffected young men.

They feel shut out. This was on Al Muller's In the Library podcast. And I'm not expecting Josh Hawley to be aware of all the things that this podcast audience is aware about Al Muller. I have a whole entire playlist on the podcast regarding Al Muller.

I mean, he's changed his views on a number of things in the last few years, same-sex attraction, whether women should be punished for pursuing an abortion or not. Even on the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention, he's saying very different things than he used to say.

It used to be that they started because of slavery and defense of slavery. Now it's more, they started because of just wanting to do missions. And are those mutually contradictory? Perhaps not, but he's changed his posture.

On critical race theory, he said things that are certainly consistent with critical race theory, like things like racism is embedded in, influential in every single American institution. He said that, I believe, in 2020, 2021.

You would never hear him say that kind of thing now, right? This is the metamorphosis of Al Muller. And he doesn't, when he changes his opinion on something, come out and say, hey, I'm changing my opinion.

Sorry for what I said last time. Like he repented in 2014 for denying the existence of homosexual orientation. Now he denies it again, but he's not going to come out and repent for it. It's just the currents change and Al Muller tends to change with them.

That's what I've noticed. Now he has been pretty consistently against female ordination, which I appreciate. But anyway, this audience knows about Al Muller. This podcast, I wanted to just let you know about, because this, I see this as just more kind of attempts to shift with the needs of the moment.

So he says, is this, let's see, is this Hawley or Muller? This is Muller. You mentioned the manosphere, which makes me think of all these young men out there, many of whom voted for Republicans and the president this last time around, but now say that they're very disaffected.

This is just a very, in many ways, disaffected group because I believe they feel shut out from American society. Oh, I guess that's, okay, my bad. I think that's what Hawley said. So Hawley observed these difficulties.

Number one, they've been told by liberals forever that masculinity is toxic. He's right about a lot of this, by the way. They can't afford to buy anything. They are uncertain about how to have a relationship, how to get married, if they can get married.

Hawley, a member of an evangelical Presbyterian church suggested that the pain and the alienation many young men feel offer Christians an opportunity to basically disciple. Let's see, Muller, who serves as the president still of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kentucky, notes that no civilization can survive unfulfilled, aimless, restless young men.

It just doesn't work. One of the most basic Christian observations in politics and economics is there ought to be an appropriate link between labor and reward. And if that is not honored, then you actually subvert everything you say you're trying to do.

Muller went on to stress the importance of teaching young men that they must delay gratification and take the initiative in things like work, relationships, and even hygiene, if they hope to find joy and satisfaction.

He said that he had never met any sizable number of young men who regretted following the so-called success sequence, which includes getting at least a high school degree, securing a full-time job, and waiting until marriage to have children.

So let me just kind of cut through this a little bit. Al Muller, unfortunately, has been one of the people in the Southern Baptist Convention who has been a preventative, who has been a problem with young men pursuing those things.

Why do you say that, John? Because Al Muller, even if you go as far back as the Great Commission Resurgence book, Muller writes in that book, I think that was 2010, that the Southern Baptist Convention is gonna be this aging white male denomination unless we do something to diversify it.

And boy, did the Southern Baptist Convention decide they were gonna do that, including at Southern Seminary. A number of professors were hired at Southern Seminary that pushed critical race theory. And this is the same era that I was exposing this is around the same time that Al Muller is going back and they're trying to grapple with the history of the institution, to contextualize it.

And one of the things that they did in talking about how bad it was that Boyce and others who were affiliated with the seminary had, at one time, Gasp had slaves. They had a program at that time to right the ship.

It was even framed that way. I talked about it on the podcast. And that program was to give scholarships specifically to who? To black people. Now, look, I have no problem with different cultures, groups, people from different communities wanting to help support those within their community.

That's actually a noble thing. That's not what this was though. This was, hey, we have a problem with the perception out there. We're looked upon as, because of our history, because of just the way that the world looks at us as Southern Baptists.

So we got a race problem. How are we gonna meet that challenge? We gotta diversify. We've got to tip the scales in favor of one group over another. And now you got, especially white males, feeling like I can't win.

I got straight out of high school and I was told that, why even go to college? Why go to seminary? Why do these things? I'm not gonna be able to achieve what I think I should achieve. Now, part of that is a lie, by the way.

You can achieve things. If you do excellent work and you will always have a benefit from that. But it is disheartening when you find out that the scales are being tipped for others and it's not a fair playing field.

And in some way, Southern Seminary was not a fair playing field. And Al Mohler is responsible for this. And here he is with the damage of going along with this for years, saying, you know, this is a cultural problem out there and we as the church need to do something.

We'll use the church, unfortunately, or as a para-church in this case. You went along with something. That was part of the problem here. And that's why I just don't think there's credibility. Maybe Josh Hawley has some credibility with this, but I don't have any reason to think Josh Hawley knows about any of this.

But Al Mohler, no, unfortunately. And it's sad. And I think what would have to happen is you'd have to admit that shouldn't have done that. Shouldn't have tipped the scales. Shouldn't have done the diversity thing.

We should have just, if you're really about quality and as he said in this article, you reward someone for the work they put in, you gotta make sure that they're rewarded for the work they put in. I don't know if there's much more I can say about it, but I'm not trying to just take this opportunity to bash Al Mohler, cause I don't like Al Mohler or something.

It's more, Al Mohler is not unique in this. I see this quite a bit of Christian leaders who now post 2020, post all the things that happened and the damage that was created by decisions even they made, they want to come in as the solutions to those things.

And it's like, I don't trust you, man. You're not even admitting you're wrong in some cases. I'm glad for the guys who have, by the way, there are some who have. Josh Howerton's one of them. He made a statement on his show, I was wrong.

That takes a little humility, start there, right? Start there and then build some trust up over time. People make mistakes, that happens. Sometimes if you're in leadership, those mistakes have a lot more repercussions than they would if you were just a layman somewhere.

But people do make mistakes and there is severe pressure, especially in the moment. There's always social pressure to do things that please the crowd or please the elites or please whoever. And you have to be someone, if you're a man of virtue, who says no to those things.

Says, I'm gonna do what's right. I'm gonna, I have convictions. I know where my responsibilities lie. They're to God first, then to my family, then to my country. And I'm gonna make the best decision, not just what gets me likes, clicks, popularity, that kind of thing.

So I wanted to say that. I hope some people can rise up who can bring the encouragement, right? I suppose I'm one of those podcasts, hopefully to some extent. I wanna bring the encouragement that, look, life isn't over, God is working.

He's put you in a wonderful country. Even if you're a young man, you are living in a wonderful country. There are always opportunities, okay? Don't think that there's not. And one of the things you need to do is make sure that you are in a good place, physically, mentally, spiritually, so that you can take advantage of those opportunities.

Because all God requires is that you be faithful in the things that he's put in front of you. And you can't change the world. Geopolitics is not gonna be the thing for most of you. It is gonna be working within the community that you live in, or changing that community if the Lord wants you to move.

So we need a lot more of that encouragement, obviously. In fact, I'm in discussions now with some guys who I think are pretty good in the realm of business, and I wanna do a podcast on this. Like, what are the opportunities out there for Christians, especially young men who wanna start out, and they're not sure where to go.

The traditional mechanisms that would get you a job that could feed a family aren't as strong as they used to be.

So what do you do?

That's a legitimate question, and it's one that we need to be thinking about.

So there you go.

Southern Poverty Law Center Indicted Over Informant Scheme

All right, let's, oh gosh, I got the comments coming in, guys, I got the comments coming in. John Harris, gasp, had slaves. At one time, gasp, had slaves to mock a hundred years of suffering. Would John Harris talk like this if he was a time machine into a black slave into a, I don't know, I don't know what that means.

That's bad grammar, and had to be a slave for just 10 years. Yes, I probably would. Look, the gasp is, this was an institution that existed for all of human history, and really the question for Christians is, did James Boyce, sorry, not James Boyce, Boyce College.

I don't think, it's not James. It's, yeah, it is James, okay. I was thinking James Montgomery Boyce. It's James Pettigrew Boyce, okay. Different middle name. All right, so anyway, did James Pettigrew Boyce treat slaves well according to the law of God, according to how Paul says slaves should be treated or not?

That's really the main question here. Did they abide by what scripture says about these kinds of things? Abusing is evil. It's wicked. It should be condemned. It shouldn't, you know, you shouldn't be supporting, obviously, that kind of stuff in any way, shape, or form, but the real question for Christians, when they look back and they see the patriarchs, they see the members of the early church, they see those within their history who participated in social hierarchies, labor hierarchies that existed in all the societies at the time, they need to ask themselves, were they Christians in that?

That's really the question. So yes, what happened at Southern Seminary was you had the mere fact that some of the people who were involved at the formation of that seminary either had slaves or were in churches where there were slaves.

That alone was enough to condemn the history to perdition and to say, we need social policies to diversify now to correct this problem. That's what I'm talking about. All right, well, Breitbart News. We already talked about that.