561: How the Evangelical Movement Failed a Generation with Jon Ward
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 сер 2024
- From the Jesus Movement in the 1970s, through the Religious Right in the 1980s, the rise of New Calvinism in the 1990s, and the MAGA movement today, as a Christian kid in the suburbs and then a political journalist in Washington, Jon Ward has had a front seat to the most significant characters and events in American evangelicalism. He talks with Skye about his new autobiography, “Testimony,” and why he is still committed to Christian faith despite the failure of the movement that raised him. Also this week, early data shows a reduction in the number of abortions since the Supreme Court overturned Roe, but it’s less than many predicted. The so-called “independent prophets'' are predicting God will kill Donald Trump’s opponents next month. Why are they still supporting him when there are alternatives? And a report finds advocates of Christian Nationalism are more rooted in cultural heritage than Christian theology. Is anyone surprised?
Patreon Bonus: Christian Asks - What is Hell?
/ 81695519
Patreon Bonus: Jon Ward bonus interview
/ 81704208
0:00 - Intro
3:26 - Theme Song
3:47 - Sponsor: Blueland
To get 15% off your first order, go to Blueland.com/HOLYPOST
4:56 - Show continues
5:35 - MAGA prophet says anti-Trumpers will experience sudden deaths in May
13:48 - Abortion rates since Dobbs decision
29:52 - Why some Christians feel the need to pass God’s law as the nation’s law
43:22 - How Christian is Christian Nationalism
Sponsors
57:07 - Sponsor: Hiya Health
Go to hiyahealth.com/HOLYPOST to receive 50% off your first order
58:12 - Sponsor - Sundays
Get 35% off your first order of Sundays. Go to SundaysForDogs.com/HOLYPOST or use code HOLYPOST at checkout.
59:23 - Interview Intro
Jon Ward - www.jonwardwri...
1:02:14 - Jon’s upbringing from the Jesus Movement to New Calvinism
1:07:22 - Gnosticism’s influence on Evangelicalism
1:18:54 - Journalism during the Trump era
1:30:46 - End Credits
Links mentioned in news segment:
MAGA prophet Lance Wallnau says that anti-Trumpers in both political parties will start dying “sudden deaths” next month
currentpub.com...
Legal Abortions in US Down 5,000 Per Month Since the End of Roe
www.bloomberg....
How Christian Is Christian Nationalism?
www.newyorker....
Other resources:
Testimony: Inside the Evangelical Movement That Failed a Generation by Jon Ward
amzn.to/40i5mJ8
Holy Post website: www.holypost.com/
Holy Post Patreon: / holypost
Holy Post Merch Store: www.holypost.c...
The Holy Post is supported by our listeners. We may earn affiliate commissions through links listed here. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
"Do you know where this leaves us? Exactly where every other Christian in the world is! Living in a country that wasnt necessarily set up to cater to your comfort, and still following Jesus just fine." - Phil
That might be the best way to conclude all conversations about complex topics going forward. So good. And TRUE!
Women are really sick of men writing laws about our lives and bodies. Before 1973 my mom was an ER nurse. Women came in all the time with knitting needles etc ending their pregnancies. There were huge church supported group home for fallen teenagers until the baby is adopted.
Yes, an easy simple answer that keeps the sheeple from having to think or take on personal responsibility for the world around them.
Why is western civilization being intentionally collapsed and who or what profits from this?
All because there are NO MEN here to do what must be done.
The commie globalist trash want us disarmed so we can't hunt and exterminate them as should have been done generations ago.
The SECOND AMENDMENT was written as a statement of MILITARY purpose to ACKNOWLEDGE our NATURAL BORN right to possess ARMS SUPERIOR to those carried by the standing army our Founders rightly feared. But we have NO MEN to enforce this.
Why don't we have an engraved in granite copy of the Bill of Rights and the Bill of Rights of that state in front of EVERY govt. building beside a granite gallows to be used on the demonscat and republicrat trash that breaks their Oath as soon as they take it?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See what the evil goolag doesn't want you to:
ua-cam.com/users/waypasthadenoughabout
Full disrespect: “You get to make your own healthcare decisions with your doctor” is NOT an extreme position.
The Jon Ward interview is excellent, from great questions to clear,thoughtful responses. Mr. Ward is a very impressive guy. Thanks for doing this.
They don't want to create heaven on earth. They want to force God's hand and make him start the end times.
I had a conversation about that with my gramma. I always felt like trying to force God's hand was turning God into a puppet for their own personal use. I mused that I could see God going silent in that situation and let them dig their own grave and staying away just to reinforce that HE was in control and not those trying to force his hand. Of course, that would also mean everyone else would have to live through whatever nuclear war or disaster they started and I would VERY much like to avoid that
@Adam Gragg it say in the Bible that a lie is an abomination before God. It prohibits lying in many places and a few different ways. It doesn't give an exception for a lie one has convinced themselves is true. God, if revelation hasn't already happened, will come in his time. No one can hurry that. What man has built in defiance of God's will has been torn down before, but many suffer in these times. Your right to worry.
You are absolutely right I call End times psychosis! The notion that they will Force God’s hand into Returning sooner than anticipated.
Skye made some great points around the 20 minute mark. There’s more to pro life than being against abortion. There’s the holistic approach of head start, prenatal care, healthcare coverage, available hospitals, education, and so-on. The left has always pushed for a more holistic approach to promoting life. The problem is that the right has never truly been pro life. They’ve been anti abortion. The right has made little or no effort to address these issues. In fact, they’ve proven the opposite by voting against these things constantly during Obama’s tenure; and now-Biden. This is not a “both sides are equally” bad issue. This is one side (only) resisting social progress.
Good discussion as always. If women actually knew the full use of Mifepristone they would be more than upset about the current discussions. It is used for endometrial overgrowth in endometriosis and fibroid diseases. It is used in dangerous conditions like ectopic pregnancies. This will end up playing out in a similar manner as the shootings and gun debate in my home state of TN, where the Governor actually stood up and did something right….but not until his wife’s best friend was killed.
Hearing Skye talk about health care and family supports as well as manifest destiny, warms my Canadian heart.
Hearing him, like so many other Americans, just mention First Nations people as a footnote to the atrocities that happened to African Americans...less so. Tired of people talking like First Nations didn't suffer as much, or still do (look up 'No More Stolen Sisters'). It's not a competition, but saying it that way makes it seem like it is. Frequently, it is framed as "the worst thing to happen to Black people was Slavery and the worst thing to happen to Indigenous people was having their land taken away". Um, no. In addition to land issues there is all the things that also happened here in Canada: the terrible state of the reserves they were forced into, children being taken away from their parents into residential schools, the horrors and death tolls of most of those schools and the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous women. In Canada, there is the additional shameful history of the "60s scoop".
But unlike in Canada, there is a reason that the majority of First Nations people have disappeared from the U.S. Starting with the Moravian massacre, the U.S. has a long history of attempts at genocide against First Nations people and most of the others were directed by the government. The "trails of tears": forced relocations that turned into death marches. Giving the blankets of small pox victims to people in the reserves so they would catch it and die. Paying former soldiers to kill as many as possible and paying by the scalp. Killing off herds of animals heading north so Sitting Bull's people, who had fled to British owned lands for safety (sad statement), would be forced by hunger to come hunting south of the border where they would be massacred. Even the disappearance of the bison was a failed attempt at starving or controlling First Nations people by killing off all of the largest animals that they used as a food source.
Sorry, but I get so tired of hearing people in the U.S., often even other people of color, talk like the worst thing that happened to the First Peoples of the U.S. was having their land taken away. That WAS bad...but the repeated attempts at genocide...that was WAY worse. That needs to be talked about more.
All too sadly true and to our great shame. Reparations would not begin to repair all of the damage done to native peoples. I believe that is why this nation is experiencing so much violence. We have been and still are a violent and greedy nation with screwy ideologies that claimed this land as the new Isreal and thus justified cleansing the land of its heathen inhabitants to make room for " the chosen ones." The power of a lie, masquerading as justification for murder. Great injustices committed against people who never practiced greed as a way of life, who respected the earth and its many creatures, who honored its women, who treasured their children, and lived in harmony with their respective natural environments. This nation needs to take a good hard look in the mirror and beg forgiveness for its genocidal atrocities and make restitution, if such crimes can even be pardoned and atoned for. The arrogance of the white European is staggering, our penchant for cruelty and inhumanity evident in our horrific history, both towards the the First Peoples of this land and in the subsequent brutality of chattel slavery. All for greed and profit, this nation's true God.
I can't take it anymore. You all are too reasonable in this age that demands over-the-top zealotry (tongue in cheek). Thanks guys and gal for the well thought out and balanced discussion of this variety of topics. So rare these days and much appreciated.
I really don’t think the Democratic position on Abortion is particularly extreme. Most Americans were in favor of the status quo of Roe v Wade.
The wholeistic approach to the pro life argument makes complete sense, but when does anything proposed by the Religious Right make any sense? I personally believe that we don't need to make abortion illegal but unnecessary? There are certain situations in which abortion is medically necessary. Its not an easy issue. From what I have observed, abortion has been the bait on the hook to reel in votes, but totally neglected the social needs of support for families, especially for lower income households.Understand how difficult it is to raise a family as a single mom, struggling endlessly to make ends meet. I raised five children on my own with limited marketable job skills. It was rough. I am pro life, meaning caring for the welfare of the woman and the child both before and after the birth. I have known women for whom an abortion was the only solution, ectopic pregnancy, a malformed fetus with no hope of life outside of the womb, a child impregnated by incest, a woman whose health condition made a pregnancy impossible. It is not a black and white issue. To use it to capture votes is cynical and grotesque. The Religious Right have pulled this nation closer to a fascism mindset, which is beyond comprehension.
How can you have compassion on one hand and dehumanize a mass of society on the other?
I can understand singling out spokespeople for the ideas, but just proclaiming vast swathes of the country as detestable evil stooges?
@@kriegjaeger What dehumanizing language was used here? She said that the propositions of the Religious Right made no sense and are pulling this nation towards Fascism. Objectively those are true regardless of the nature and humanity of the people proposing them.
She did not call them demonic, compare them to animals, call their thought process stupid or even express a desire for their maltreatment. She simply said the ideas make little sense and are pulling things in the wrong direction.
I've heard all of the above said about liberals on talk radio for years, and don't get me started about what is said about minorities. This is the mildest from of criticism you can give to what is going on right now.
@@ohms7309
You're treating vast swathes of people as some kind of collective hive mind based on what you've heard on the radio?
Do you know any of them as friends you regularly talk to?
Then how can you claim to really know any of them but what someone else is saying, claiming to represent them?
If you want to stop the hate you have to stop putting it as "then vs us and they're all bad"
@@kriegjaeger I am making the statements I am making based on having listened to people who claim to be Religious Right both on the influencer side and the personal side. I have listened to arguments, read laws and policy propositions, and come to my conclusions based off of data and personal experience.
I would never put any group as a monolith. But when enough people in a collective support ideas and policies that are unhelpful at best, deeply harmful at worst, and scapegoating at it's ugliest, I have a hard time giving people the benefit of the doubt when I hear the same information/rhetoric being given by those at the top all the way down. I still try to, though.
I never took the us vs them mindset of those who had platforms like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity seriously, even though I saw those around me being influenced by it. Then as I grew older I saw this sentiment weaponized by people against immigrants, against minorities of all stripes. So for me, not acknowledging the hate and trying to see and appreciate the best in people has not resulted in the positive situation you've expressed. In the end, it's either I say what I believe is the truth and get rejected or I couch it in caveats to spare people's feelings and get where I am now: still connected but surrounded by people who have expressed in various ways that they don't care for my existence if I don't agree with them on a select number of issues, including the value of my own culture and heritage in a multicultural society.
@@patrickc3419 Presuming the idea that the fertilized egg is considered a full human being, an ectopic pregnancy is absolutely alive when removed. It can still grow until the rupture happens at which point both become at risk. So according to the idea, which I don't agree with, that a fertilized egg achieves full personhood as you appear to espouse, the unborn child is still alive until actual rupture happens at which point the internal bleeding needs to be addressed nearly immediately for the mother to have the best chance to survive. So an abortion is necessary on an otherwise viable, fertilized egg/fetus to prevent that risk.
You discounting that and saying the baby is already dead when under the logic that a fertilized egg is a baby, it is alive up until the mother is at risk is one of the many reasons why the laws I've been seeing have been so harmful, because they force women to risk the actual damage to their uterus until they need to be treated in cases where there is risk of life exception.
My own mother treated and even helped deliver from a person who had an abdominal ectopic pregnancy. Such an event is very rare and extremely painful and risky, but it is possible and to my mind highly miraculous (she believes so). But it should be up to the mother to undergo such a risk.
That applies to most other conditions and situations where the mother's health or the baby's health is at risk during or after pregnancy. It should be up to them to determine if a pregnancy that can harm their health and wellbeing, especially if they don't have the support system around them for either a difficult pregnancy that requires major hospitalization or a child condition that requires more resources than they can afford to maintain their life. If they choose to do so, they should be lauded in my opinion for their bravery and convictions.
We can avoid this by reducing the amount of environmental factors that can lead to complications in pregnancies (pollution, and especially environment racism and food deserts) and by increasing the support we give to mothers, regardless of marriage status. Because like it or not we don't live in a Christian nation, we live in a secular one, and even then, there will always need to be provision for the pregnant widow.
Great discussion! I think that balance is the key here instead of extremism. I love the part about a holistic approach to the life issue and acknowledging the pain of the past 400 years.
It's Obi-Wan, not Yoda. 😂😂🤦♂️
Obi wan erasure
Wise in the ways of prequel memes you are.
Skye made excellent points. You know you're on the wrong side of history when you seek to hide and revise history then seek to change the very rules you recently demanded everyone else obey the moment they are no longer clearly in your favor
Before the Moral Majority, even conservative churches were not focused on abortion. It only became a single issue matter after it was made political.
As an non American I struggle to understand why those seeking the decline of abortions also fight against all the things that are shown to reduce them, and fight against social care that supports the poorest and most vulnerable, and leaves people in fear of medical debt such that they get more unwell putting off getting help. But those moral issues seem off the table.
Even if you are prolife, which I am, I can put together a whole bunch of examples where it’s not as simple as the anti-abortion folks make out to be. And when you take those decisions out of the hands of patients and their doctors, you only get tragic outcomes.
@@patrickc3419 ua-cam.com/video/0jexQdD919k/v-deo.html
Agree. Pro choice seems to get mis stated as being pro abortion. I don't know anyone Inc those who have had an abortion who see them as desirable. But life is messy, and cases are individual. The right for women and physicians to explore abortion as one option is important. When you see clips of legislators suggesting that an ectopic pregnancy should be just moved into the uterus, it just reinforces that the decision shouldn't be left to politicians
You're still talking about abortion from a far-right political perspective instead of a medical one. Please bring in an obstetrician to explain why the political perspective is incompatible with the medical realities.
For example, most disabilities aren't discovered until the 20 week scan. Banning abortion before then prevents people from making the best choice for their situation. Most abortions are done before 10 weeks anyway, assuming they have access to care. Limiting access means that abortions happen later in pregnancy.
Choosing to deliver a very sick baby early to reduce their suffering is considered an abortion. Choosing whether or not to continue carrying a suffering baby is a heartbreaking decision. No one else should have to right to make that decision for them.
I chose to birth my disabled daughter. She seemed to be thriving and was in no pain in utero. I lived in her hospital room for the 98 days she lived. I held her as she breathed her last. Those were my choices. And I recognize that I was fortunate to have the support to do so.
While I was in the NICU, I inadvertently overheard so many of the other cases. I heard babies who screamed almost nonstop. I learned of deformities I had never heard of. Have you witnessed what is done to a coding preemie? Sometimes trying to safe a life is to increase suffering. Banning all abortion will increase the number of suffering infants.
And I'm not saying we should never try to save sick babies or that disabled people are any less worthy of life than anyone else. I'm saying that reproduction is so complicated that it's no one else's decision other than to make sure that whatever choice is made is done with the least amount of suffering possible.
@@patrickc3419 we should allow people the freedom to make difficult decisions and not impose our ideals on them.
@@patrickc3419 “inconvenience” is not being discussed, that’s just the straw man argument.
@@patrickc3419 public forum, so… people are going to talk.
Straw man arguments are a form of bearing false witness - they’re not exactly a small problem.
@@patrickc3419 what makes you assume that everyone who disagrees with you hasn't already done that?
Not believing that women have the right to have all the information possible in order to make an informed decision because they are more concerned about how it effects their political perspective is a tactic that is used by both sides (which is why I no longer identify either as pro-life or pro-choice).
First, let's recognize that there is a medical intent in pushing back the point at which abortions are preformed that is also about considering suffering; in this case the concern that, the further along the pregnancy, the more pain the fetus will experience during the abortion process. So, concern about causing the least amount of suffering possible is an in utero issue as well, not just after labor. Meanwhile, there has been push back from the left on the idea of giving pain medications to fetuses before abortions because that would require telling the woman seeking the abortion that the fetus' experience of the abortion will potentially be painful...and telling women that could cause them to reconsider having an abortion...and we can't have that. I can't help but notice the majority of those making these recommendations and legal decisions about whether to disclose this to women are...men.
Add to that the already established lack of willingness to talk to women about post-abortion trauma and infertility issues, and the left really isn't doing much better.
What it really seems to amount to, on both sides, is the infantilizing of women. The assumption seems to be made that women simply cannot handle making an informed decision, so they shouldn't be given that option.
I think a wholistic prolife abortion bill also needs to have an allowance in the case of the life of the unborn. We hear about the life of the mother, but I've heard of many cases where the doctor knew that the unborn was not viable and died moments after birth.
The challenge is those that will be born into a brief life of pain and suffering until their inevitable early death.
Philosophically we should see that as an urgent need to treat those medical conditions that cause that and abortion is just the easy way out.
Forcing the child and their family to suffer for our philosophy, though, is… problematic.
Why don't you ask some of the people whose parents were told they would never survive a decade, a year or a few months after birth what they think about it first?
@@Justanotherconsumer and maybe the terms need to be more stringent. There are cases where the baby didn't die moments after birth, but were born dead....
@@veggiet2009 it’ll be a complex medical question either way, and sometimes the experts get it wrong.
@@Justanotherconsumer yes, and that's my biggest problem with laws that involve medical issues, laws tend to be inflexible
LOL! "In my Father's Inbox are many emails."
I agree that somehow as Christians we have given up on the power of moral persuasion. I will pass a law and force you to do good things or to not do bad things because my testimony or the message of scripture is not good enough. That's sad.
Possibly but on other hand you have people masquerading as Christians to gain power. See the Catholic church.
It is both sad and ultimately ineffective, and what is worse is that we already know this due to prohibition
@@ohms7309 The prohibition led to an increase in organized crime but it did severely reduce murder, divorce, domestic abuse and typical crimes.
It's the same arguments for banning guns; there may be more organized crime afterwards due to the increased demand but overall it will reduce violence and crime regarding them.
Consider that if abortions were conducted after childbirth it'd be considered infant genocide of mostly black people who are poor.
@@kriegjaeger The argument I'm trying to make here is one of prohibition (outright banning) vs regulation (limiting the usage of). Completely banning alcohol forced it's manufacture underground, giving rise to a lot more problems than you let on (consider, if it was so societally beneficial, why was it repealed?)
Regulation of Abortion is essentially what we had before. Planned Parenthood, for all it's issues helped with family planning, aka making sure that people had children when they were ready. You could not have an abortion after a certain gestation period, etc. Is it perfect? No. Is it better than before Roe? Absolutely from what I know of people who have lived in that time who worked as nurses.
Lastly, it's very hard to take seriously your analogy about 'conducting abortions after childbirth' when:
1 - no one but you brought it up, so it's kinda out of left field.
2 - The infant and maternal mortality rate for African Americans in this country is significantly higher due to a variety of social, environment, and financial factors. All of which could be addressed as part of a holistic method of reducing abortions by making it easier/less expensive to get the pregnancy care needed as well as addressing systemic factors such as environmental racism and food deserts, to make pregnancy less risky or financially straining for the average African American, and by extension literally everyone else.
3 - By and large, by sheer force of population, it wouldn't be 'mostly poor and black people' who would be committing infant genocide in your increasingly ridiculous theoretical consideration. If this was supposed to be inducing some sort of emotive shock value to the conversation it pretty much failed, especially since much of the time the people who bring up this point do not know nor care through their words or actions about point number 2. I'm hoping you do.
"what if our goal in politics wasn't to bludgeon?" - Phil Vischer 2023 😂
Human flourishing is hard. Bludgeoning is easy.
@@Justanotherconsumer put that on a t-shirt!
I would add the Native Population to the African American peoples justified in the possibility of storming the Capitol
Its only 4:15am (here in the Pacific Northwest). I guess that's why it's just you & me so far. 🤗.
I totally agree.
My apologies. He did alao mention the Native Population. I heard it on a second listen.
Why is it that abortion is such an issue in America? Speaking as a Canadian Brit, and as a christian myself, I'm used to having abortion treated as just a normal medical procedure, available to anyone who needs it (at no cost) if the doctors decide it is necessary.
Abortion is not a trivial thing. No-one wants abortion to be necessary. No-one (not even your Democrats) want abortion to be freely available to anyone who asks for it (as your podcast here seems to suggest, erroniously). As you point out, abortion rates were falling steadily in the US up until Trump became President. Why not just quietly let them carry on falling? Why whip this up into a totemic issue and make it a bigger fear than it really is?
And especially, why make it a "christian" thing? The Bible doesn't teach against it, and it is a bit of a stretch to make "Thou shalt not kill" apply to it, especially in a country with so many guns and with corporal punishment. From outside your country, it appears to be an issue whipped up by politicians as a fear factor to persuade people to vote for them, and to demonise their opposition. Please, get your act together and find something better for your politicians to talk about, like better health care and child support.
It starts during integration. Before that Catholics where the main group pushing anti-abortion ideology. When the federal government forced religious schools to integrate they needed something to get Christians out to vote and vote for them. They chose abortion and preachers and national Christian thought leaders started pushing the anti-abortion rhetoric. It's like all things in the US a racist, bigoted policy designed to bring racist back to power. L99k at what's happening now. Abortion is just a gateway issue. Then they moved to oppressing LGBTQIA people. Some states are already creating anti-POC policies now.
Thank you! It's validating to read from someone who can see our country from the outside.
I don't like abortion, but reproduction is so complicated and nuanced that it's impossible to legislate against it. Banning "abortion" also inhibits how providers care for miscarriage/stillbirth and other types of reproductive care.
Women need to have the power to make decisions about our own bodies. It is inherently dangerous to experience. It's hard in the best of circumstances and deadly in the worst. Politicians have no place in deciding that for anyone else.
Religious people have the freedom to decide for themselves, but not for anyone else. Forcing religious beliefs on others is oppression, not freedom.
@@patrickc3419 you have no idea what it is to sacrifice your own body and health to create and bring life into the world. You have no idea what it is to leave your older children at home for months to keep vigil at an incubator and pump to sustain the life of that baby. You have no idea what it is to get the most deveststing news about the precious life you love and carry inside you. You have no idea what it is to bury a beautiful baby knowing that the only parts of her that still live are the bits of her DNA that reside within you. You have no idea what it is to be terrified that should the worst happen, your doctor will have to let you get sick enough that your life will finally matter more than your unborn child's, but that's only if they get legal approval first.
It is not your body, your life, or your health that will EVER be at risk.
It isn’t in the Bible, but it is in the Didache, a document of early Christian doctrine (1st-2nd century, exact date unclear), so it’s not a modem thing.
That that document was apparently explicitly excluded from the New Testament when assembled asks some hard questions, though.
It should be treated as the medical procedure that it is. A medical procedure that we could and should avoid by improving our society by the increased availability of contraceptives, comprehensive sex education, better food distribution and environmental regulation, and after-birth support for those who do have children, especially if we want to reduce the decline of our birth rate, regardless of their status. All of this has been proven to reduce abortions. Anything beyond that should be the woman's choice. Pregnancy can have permanent health effects, and even in the modern era, complications can lead to death. For a woman to be subject to that and not have any say in the matter is far too unreasonable to me, especially when its strict prohibition would be just as effective (read: Ineffective) as the prohibition of alcohol was in our history.
Do I like abortions as a concept? Absolutely not. But if we want to reduce them as much as we can (since eliminating any human behavior is impossible), then making them safer and less necessary requires a societal restructuring which many are unwilling to do. So, as usual, they resort to demonization as a result. It is sad but at this point not unpredictable.
10 years from now: “How the woke movement failed a nation and the world.”
What are the abortion rates by race and/or income? Some may think banning abortion is good no matter what, but to create additional inequalities and injustices needs to be considered.
The challenge is that abortion becomes an economic demand because of how cruel and uncaring our society is.
If people weren’t afraid that an unplanned pregnancy would ruin their lives, they wouldn’t want abortions.
You would rather the genocide of certain racial and income groups via abortion?
Sheila Wray Gregoire of the Bare Marriage podcast gave a shoutout to Skye Jethani’s book. You guys should have she and her co-host daughter on your show sometime.
Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I appreciate this weekly dose of meaningful discussion that isn't just this all-or-nothing rhetoric I get from the bible belt Christians around me.
As countfit Christianity grows it makes the real thing more obvious.....No, it does not. It becomes the real thing. It takes over ever channel of communication, it takes over every interpretation, message, ideology. As it grows into the only Christianity that is visible it will be harder and harder to find pockets of those that follow the narrow path.
This terrifies me because I know this isn’t a new problem.
What if the Christianity I was taught is just last generation’s golden calf? What if the “official” Bible is the result of political wrangling by similar problems in the early centuries of the church?
Lord, have mercy.
@@Justanotherconsumer
Do you think the Lord would allow that to come to pass?
"Those who seek, will find".
If you genuinely seek him out, you will find him.
@@kriegjaeger yes, absolutely that would happen.
Broad is the road that leads to death. It is very easy to find the wrong answer.
The mortal Church’s failings are obvious and plentiful, and yet it persists. Given all the divisions that are absolutely confident that all of the other divisions are wrong, simply wanting to believe does not mean finding the truth and that seeking and knocking and asking is a constant journey, not a box to be checked as done.
Are the Mormons right? They’re persisting and their faith in what they believe is sometimes strong indeed. The Jews have been persisting for a lot longer, and I do not doubt their faith.
It gets back to the problem of evil - why does God allow it? There are many explanations, but denying that evil exists because God wouldn’t let that happen isn‘t a persuasive argument.
The counterfeit faith turns a lot of people off, including genuine seekers. For some of us, finding a non toxic church body has been challenging. Its a mess. This podcast has given me hope, because I hear from thoughtful, informed, people express concerns honestly and a way forward for so many of us.
@Justanotherconsumer it isnt scary at all. Let's easy your mind if it is your soul you worry about. Jesus teaches the way. Love God with all you are, your entire self. Love your neighbor as you love yourself. 3 task he gives us. Care for the poor and needy. Becareful with this one. He doesn't just charge this to the church or through the church. It's a task for all. Care for the strangers, immigrants, in your land. Care for those in prison. Do these things for God's glory and you will be OK. Jesus himself said so. Think not what Jesus would do but what he did do. Did he condemn anyone? Did he treat sinner as criminal? Did he meet anyone with anything other than love.
The Solidarity Party is literally the party making the case you are recommending. It's actually in the platform.
Amen, Skye! We can express our beliefs, attempt to persuade, but CANNOT force.
Thank you Christian for that hopeful conclusion. 🎉
You are my new heroes.
I find myself worrying about Christian's daffodils 😔
EDIT Are you part of a community? Where can I meet Christians like you? I'm hungry for your fellowship
love your approach...
The interview with Jon Ward doesn’t start until the 59:24 mark if you came to watch/listen to that.
I once attended a rather cultish and legalistic church of which had their origins in the Jesus Movement. They've abandoned that movement ( since the 80's ) and embarrassed of it. Sad.
Statistical evidence from a wide variety of countries shows that the most effective way to reduce abortion levels is to not have good sex ed, access to birth control, and access to good pre and post natal care. In the context where the access to planned parenthood etc has been removed the options for going there for birth control consultations etc.. Also restricted access means much later abortions. In the context where pregnancy and birth is a considerable cost, before even the cost of raising a child then that impacts choices made. If prenatal diagnosis of a major disability, and the fear of lifelong medical expenses is also a factor in whether to continue a pregnancy.
Awesome discussion, keep up the good work Holy Post team.
FYI: The interview with Jon Ward begins at about 59:24
“Serve and sacrifice”- imagine that!
Skye mentioning that there's not much that can be done is partially true (but only partially). In the US, where folks can be split evenly on an issue, only a part of the general public shows up to vote. If you wanna get someone elected, it's easier to just find more folks who agree with you, and work to get them to the polls, instead of changing the opposite side's mind, then getting them to vote for your guy.
(in reality, if you change their mind they won't show up. Because if they don't show up and their guy wins, they just need their guy to compromise, which is easy. If your guy wins, they are cool with it too. Since they are ok with both outcomes, why show up and vote?)
So being more extreme, or raising the stakes of the election, helps appeal to your base. This leads to more polarized candidates who are less likely to compromise.
So Skye has all that correct. The part he gets wrong is there is stuff to do about it. Rank-choice voting, like they have in Alaska is a good example. Also a single primary where the top two candidates run off against each other also helps.
These systems favored moderate candidates by eliminating the advantage of polarization.
There are ways to game that system too.
I honestly think the voting method should be determined at random each election cycle so that the parties have less incentive to game the system and more incentive to do actual work.
@@Justanotherconsumer
This is an interesting comment.
Like I could reference studies on fair elections, look at other countries that have implemented the types of reforms, absolutely "own" that this works, but I don't think that'd work. (I might be wrong, but I don't know that any election reform, outside of voter ID laws, would be OK)
Which is interesting. Like if I had a friend that drove an f250 as their daily driver, and they complained about not having enough money, and wanted to save one fuel, and I suggest they get a toyota prius.
And they reply "nah, it easy to drive one of those in a way that gets bad fuel consumption."
Like this is true. You can both abuse a Prius and Rank Choice Voting, but if you wanted less polarized elections and better gas Mileage, both are a better choice then where you are.
So I guess the question is: "if it won't work" is your first response to a solution, where is that coming from? Where'd you learn you can't fix things?
I might be reading you wrong, but if their was a solution that favored less divisive elections wouldn't doing that be the best? If you wanted better gas mileage wouldn't getting the most efficient car be the best idea, instead of cycling through vehicles hoping you won't get stuck with a worst one?
@@Superwoodputtie the goal is not ranked choice voting, the goal is government that works better.
Every system is abusable when the goal of the players is abuse. Ranked choice voting drowning out important discussions by promoting milquetoast moderates and a toxic who-can-be-more-moderate instead of a toxic who-can-be-more-extreme isn’t an improvement.
Things like the checks and balances in the constitution come to mind - systems designed to resist abuse.
As annoying and potentially toxic as polarization is, it forces people to make decisions rather than just accepting the status quo. Slavery ended because of extremists. Women got the vote because of, it seems comical to call them extremists now, but that’s what some were at the time.
@@Justanotherconsumer so you want a government that can be toxic and effective? Wouldnt that be good condition to kickoff a takeover?
Like something exposed by the previous administration, since the president in power will likely have some form of party say in the sentate, the checks of impeachment are a false threat. The same with the Supreme Court. After the passing of the 14th ammendment to allow congress to enforce laws, the scotus, eventually found laws based off of it unconstitutional. It wasn't until mid 20th century that the bill of rights started to be extended to all people.
Since the Supreme Court is the sole arbiter of constitutional interpretation, even an ammendment limiting their power must be interpreted by them.
A government is only as good as the people in it.
@@Justanotherconsumer Although, I would point out that a different voting method would give some of the minor parties a greater chance of winning. To bring up your point about extremes, I would say that the Green Party is more extreme about climate change than the Democrat party, yet the system we have in place prioritizes the major parties and seems to feed the rhetoric of "throwing away your vote". Reforming the voting system would give us more options, at least.
When we minister to evangelicals we need to understand that there are truths in all religions but this acknowledgment is not a validation of their beliefs...
There is no way holistic pro life policies would pass. Too many people don’t want higher taxes to pay for what they would see as entitlement programs.
The ban on abortion reinforces the current social order - poor people have more children than they can afford which makes them desperate so that they’ll work jobs with no hope of advancement for pitiful wages to support children who will be at a constant disadvantage who will work the same menial jobs and the cycle continues.
Breaking the cycle by letting people have control over their lives would mean a labor shortage at the bottom of the economy because people wouldn’t be trapped by poverty either because they controlled their lives or because they just didn’t exist.
“Winners” need “losers” and abortion reduces the supply of “losers.”
Actually it was Obi wan who said that, right before he dueled Anakin Skywalker in Revenge of the Sith
Obi Wan said the thing about absolutes, to Anakin. I don't think Yoda ever said it.
The prosperity gospel has seriously corrupted the biblical gospel.
Read some psychology! The entirety of it! Read some sociology! The entirety of it! Chewing faith as a countermeasure against faith won't solve any problem.
"Only sidth deal in absolutes" -ObiWon Kenobi- Yoda.
S̶i̶t̶h̶ sidth
@@firiel2366 haha
Praying for discernment is always needed. Im really concerned with many. I need to pray more to see others like Jesus.. but the entire Trump thing to me was what lost people wanted to see and hear. Hypocrits and they turned away because now all their life they heard all these sins being preached, then this whole Trump for God and US.. I shkuld have prayed more.. still Im broken too
Umm, there were several slave revolts. But I get your point Skye.
I'm reminded, as the so-called prophet declares death on others, that he, like Pharoah, has declared such curses on his own...
Christian asked where Americans get this we have to obey to be blessed mindset and my brain immediately started singing the A Message From The Lord song from Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie 🤣
It turned to , adoration!!! That's idol worship!
A christian man very republican in my town recently posted on FB.. Where does the money come from thata feeds free lunch kids? Plus believes in absolutely wrong in all cases abortion. It doesnt match
Leave abortion seekers alone and stop trying alter their decisions. Sex is not reserved for middle class and wealthy people.
Why do the guests never look like the picture shown for the episode's masthead?
Good morning from the beautiful SF Bay Area 10 months later. Pro choice IS pro life. Pro choice IS pro family. Anti choice IS anti family. Anti choice IS anti life. Anti choice is both un American and un democratic. In Israel the government pays for abortion on demand because they see life at first viable breath. As far as the 19th C. goes, for wealthy women who did not want to have more children abortion was a far safer solution than childbirth. Birth control was illegal. Just how far do you feel you can insert your beliefs into women's lives? Trust me, no one, I mean NO ONE, "wants" an abortion, BUT, it is sometimes the best choice. Birth control choices are not "killing children." Please.
Why does God create unwanted pregnancies knowing they will be aborted?
These people are deeply unserious.
My opinion: Skye on occasion share profound and beautiful truths (e.g black Americans plight through out history) but most often seems callous and both sidesism.
When a cild becomes old enough to stop believing in Santa Claus and he doesn't want to stop believing, then he invents a new miracle. "How does big Santa and his toys get down through the tiny chimney, Billy?" "He makes himself small."
That quote was from Obi Wan, not Yoda
LOOK at AVAILABILITY of WOMENS HEAlTH CARE
obi wan said only a sith deals in absolutes. not yoda.
I love this content but I struggle with Christians' understanding of Choosing to serve God and follow his commandments vs. choosing not to serve God and not follow his commandments. Arent, are we going against God's mandates when we FORCE people to follow God's mandates when they choose not to? We are taking away their right to choose which is the foundational principle of Christianity.
When you get sick, do not go to hospital…. If you die, accept gods plan. Tnx
The promise that God will bless you if you keep his commandments works better if you actually keep his commandments. The far right thinks there are only 10 commandments + "Don't Be Gay" Which is what the Rich Young Man thought until God reminded him about all the other commandments, most of which deal with taking care of the poor.
Technically all commands are fulfilled by the two most important commandments.
The rich young man was likely defrauding people, if you read through the commands Christ have him, one was not of the 10 commandments which was not to defraud.
The rich young man CLAIMED he was doing those things, but Christ singling this command out, challenging him to sell everything and the man leaving indicates he was not being entirely honest.
What past episode of Holy Post discussed the "New Prophets" ?
9:54: *_"cognitive dissonance won't allow them to admit wrong"_* probably wrong you too! Please understand that Evangelicalism and self-appointed prophetism is lead by evil people, narcissists, that are more or less malicious. Narcissists can never admit wrong. There is no such thing as: _"because you are Christian, you are justified by your beliefs."_ The reality is instead: because you are Christian, you are _judged_ by your beliefs, not your actions. If someone else does something wrong in the name of your belief, *_you_* are responsible!
The church will be judged for not providing for the needs of mothers so that finances are not a determining factor in getting an abortion. The churches are filled with retired people who could watch babies while mothers work. And business owners have no excuse to not let people work from home.
All aborted babies go to heaven.
Which church in specific?
Mine does all of those things :|
All aborted what???
@@patrickc3419
Took me a second but 👌
spot on
@@kriegjaeger 👍.
Science in general, but the moral law written on man’s heart in particular, gives their argument to say otherwise no leg to stand on.
Zero-sum game is the definition of religion to begin with. The stories are just as fantastical as the conspiracy theories and both sides have to be right and the other wrong. If not, then you are wrong and everything you believe is wrong and you lose.
I don't buy the high level of cynicism where legislators don't actually want solutions on these culture war issues - I don't think there's any basis for that and frankly it's a juvenile analysis
Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
Political wedge issues are nothing new, and politicians holding views simply for appearances is nothing new.
@@Justanotherconsumer
I don't have any evidence for the claim...
@@Justanotherconsumer
But intuitively it's easy to see evidence to the contrary... genuinely successful effort to put in certain laws to fulfill the mission of the people's culture wars... whether on the Republican fascists or whether on the Democrats side
The Apostle Paul pronounced a curse on most churches today because the main Christian denominations of today preach a different gospel than what Paul preached. To quote exactly what Paul said, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8). Both apostle Paul and Peter preached the same gospel and quote from the prophet Joel (2:32) saying, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of Yahweh shall be saved." (Romans 10:13 and Acts 2:21). The English translations say “Lord” instead of “Yahweh.” But “Lord” does not translate “Yahweh” it is a substitution of a totally different word altogether. This substitution activates two additional curses because if you substitute a word you are both adding and subtracting at the same time. “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18, 19)
We are commanded by Messiah that, “...repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:47). In other words, we are supposed to preach the gospel that came out of Jerusalem and not preach the gospel that came out of Antioch, or Rome, or England, or New York, or Chicago, etc. By the time the gospel got to Antioch it had already been perverted as we read, “...And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” (Acts 11:26). The problem with this is that YHWH spoke of a people called by His name (Deuteronomy 28:10; 2 Chronicles 7:14; Isaiah 43:6, 7; Daniel 9:19; Amos 9:12; Acts 15:17). YHWH did not choose the name “Christian” for Himself. The people of Antioch chose that name and all the so called main denominations of today embrace that name “Christian” for themselves. When Peter and Paul preached the gospel they quote the prophet Joel, “Whosoever shall call on the name of YHWH shall be saved.” (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:13). The English word "Lord" is not a translation for the name YHWH but is a substitution. I ask you, how many of the church fathers and so called main denominations of today preach that gospel? None of them. Absolutely none!
“Blessed are those servants, whom the Lord when He comes shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them.”
Some people say that they are watching all the time but they overlook verse 38. “And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.” (Luke 12:37-38).
Under normal circumstances people are sound asleep during the second and third watch. Therefore Luke 12 is not talking about watching in a figurative way. The LORD is talking of a literal watch.
There are appointed times in the scriptures for us to fulfill a literal watch. In fact, all of the appointed times of holy convocations (moedim) listed in Leviticus 23 are watches and vigils of Yahweh. Each one of them are fulfilled by both an Old Testament and corresponding New Testament historical event.
In other words they will be assembled together in a holy convocation and not out and about driving cars and flying airplanes. Like the 120 were assembled in the upper room Acts chapter 2 for the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost).
Unfortunately, because of a man-made ecclesiastical calendar many will not be watching at the appointed time when He comes.
1:07:27 Hello there Christians. I'm a Gnostic, a Sethian more specifically, and I don't take well to you accusing me for your own Christian failures. It is narcissist gaslighting. You are responsible for your own bad behavior, not me! Together with the earlier toxic derrogating culture towards eachother, I have decided that you have not yet become well, but instead perpetuate a bad attitude towards all parts of humankind that have a differing opinion. You are just continuing the Abrahamite totalism, but in a new way.
These people are not Christians. They are social justice advocates who use occasional “Christianese” in their speak. They do not believe nor can exegete scripture
1:17:20>🤯 HOW can he say that?? There is no "somewhere in between". There's only RIGHT or WRONG: Our 3rce Holy God OR satan: Jesus said one is either WITH him or AGAINST him.
News flash: Murdering people with guns is already illegal. We can debate about how to more effectively reduce its occurrence, but we can't make it more illegal than it already is.
Meanwhile murdering the most fragile members of our society is celebrated. There are already lots of efforts to provide alternatives and protection for mothers in difficult situations, but the conversation can't focus on improving those efforts until we all agree murder is wrong.
Embryo is not a member of society but woman is.
@@liliar9992 Must be nice to have the privilege to deny other humans personhood because you're bigger than them.
@@liliar9992A pregnant woman has 20 toes and a penis??? (Or two vaginas)?
You really need to learn to be a little less condescending to each other. It is not the very least funny or jargony! The podcast exhibits too much lingering Christian (yeah, *"Christian",* I've been in the circles myself) bad attitude!