Gio and Joey are to committed Protestant Christians who talk about cultural, political and social issues based on natural law. Nevertheless, we have come to that conclusion based on the Scriptures. That is what we are explaining in this second episode before we move forward.

In this episode we reference C.S. Lewis book the Abolition of Man. We dive into the Biblical book of Romans and Daniel. We share a disturbing video of a United States Congress woman, Lauren Boebert, who wants to abolish the separation of church and state.

You can find a pdf copy of The Abolition of Man here.

Thank you for listening and be sure to leave us a five star rating and honest written review.

You can follow Gio | @giomarin and Joey | @adventistcowboy on twitter. You can watch this episode on our YouTube channel the Gio and Joey Show.

Here is the website to the podcast. The Gio and Joey Show.

Thank you for listening once again.

Gio and Joey.

Hello everybody.

Welcome to the Gio and Joey Show.

Here we are with episode number two.

If you haven't had a chance to listen to episode number one, you're free to find

it on iTunes or Spotify or Google Play.

Joey, welcome back, brother.

How you doing?

Doing very well.

Excited to get into this topic.

what we're going to do today, even though we promise in episode one that this

is not gonna be a Bible thumping, podcast.

We do have to address why that is, and we are going to address it from scripture.

And not only are we gonna address it from scripture though,

Joey has a passion for cs.

uh, Christian Apologetics, and he's gonna talk to us about a book that addresses

this called The Abolition of Man.

Joey, before we dive into the first quote, give us, the reason

why you want to use this book and why it's profound to the topic

today.

I think most of us know that CS Lewis is kind of the premier Christian public

intellectual of the last century certain.

he's got writing that covers so many topics, but I think one issue that

he really hammers in the abolition of man goes to what we're trying to

do with this podcast where we talk about kind of the two kingdoms, right?

There's God's government and there's his authority.

And that's what we're ultimately subject to, but there's a different

government and the earthly governments and they have a different realm

of authority that God grants them.

And so I think he really captures that well in the abolition of.

Yeah, and it's something we're gonna hit from the Bible

perspective later on in this podcast.

But for now, let's open up with that first quote that you wanted

to share with the audience.

We'll put it here up on the screen.

CS Lewis says, the Chinese also speak of a great thing, the

greatest thing called the Dao.

. It is the reality beyond all predicates the abyss that was

before the creator himself.

It is nature.

It is the way the road, it is the way in which the universe goes on the way

in which things everlastingly, emerge, styley, and tranquil into space and time.

It is also the way which every man should tread in imitation of that cosmic and

super cosmic progression, conforming all activities to that great exemp.

in ritual says the anex.

It is harmony with nature that is prized.

The ancient Jews likewise praise the law as being true.

This conception in all its forms, platonic o, Aris Olian, stoic,

Christian and Oriental alike.

Aye shall henceforth refer to, referred to for brevity simply as the.

for those who may not be familiar with the abolition of

man, break that quote down and exactly what CS Lewis is getting.

. Joey: basically what he's trying to say is

moral code, and some of the other quotes we have will flush this out a little bit,

but there's a certain moral code that is universal to the human condition, right?

So in other words, whether you're born in China, , whether you're

born in India, Africa, Europe, America, it doesn't matter.

There's a certain things, there's certain objective truths that.

so plain that all societies have kind of adopted these and that if we apply

reason and we're good-willed, we can see the logic behind them and we

can say that these things really are true rather than kind of the modern,

progressive, subjectivism where your truth may not be my truth and whatnot.

So that's what CS Lewis is arguing against.

We see that from even a early age where little kids argue that's not.

Well, they're appealing to a higher authority.

Many people may not, believe that to be God or, may not believe in religion,

but the fact that they're appealing to a higher sense of what is fair

lets 'em understand that there is something that governs all of us, and

we'll get into that here in a bit.

Anything else upon that particular quote that you want to.

. Joey: No, I think it'll be flushed

the

other quotes.

. Joey: Continuing on it says,

is something we cannot neglect.

It is the doctrine of objective value.

The belief that certain attitudes are really true and others really

fault to the kind of thing, the use, and the kind of things we are.

And so again, he's just kind of saying, in who we are as humans.

These things are intrinsic.

Just what we're talking about.

And we can go on to the next one

And all the time, such as the tragic comedy of our situation, we

continue to clamor for those very qualities we are rendering impossible.

You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the.

That what our civilization needs is more drive or dynamism or

self-sacrifice or creativity.

In a sort of ghastly simplicity, we remove the organ and demand the function.

We make men without chess and expect of them virtue and enterprise.

We laugh at honor and are shock to find traitors in our midst.

We castrate and build the geldings be fruit.

And the reason why I included this quote by Luis, is cuz I think what we do in

our modern society, with progressivism and kind of the social liberalism is we,

that's kind of just pervades our culture.

Everywhere from Hollywood to the education system is we deny the reality of the

dow, we deny, you know, what you're gonna get to in the Romans with natural.

We deny these things.

We deny human nature, right?

We've got utopian, you know, I know communism in the last

century, but Nazim as well.

There's these kind of utopianism schemes that deny the reality

of human nature, right?

So for Hitler, he could say, humans aren't necessarily bad, right?

It's all these groups of people, and if we could get rid of them,

we could perfect this other race.

or Stalin and the communists and Marks right.

They said humans are innately good, but it's systems that are holding us back.

So in other words, when we deny human nature, we deny the dow, we deny, a

right conception of the common good, when we deny that it leads to chaos,

and then no one knows how to act.

But yeah, we still demand, you gotta act i, I think of one example, some

of these me too situations, where.

. In our society, we've boiled down like sexual virtue to one virtue

consent, which of course is essential, but when that's the only virtue,

that doesn't give any guidance of how do we actually act, right?

In Christianity, there's lots of virtues, there's chivalry, there's, leadership,

there's respect, there's, caring for the other person's feelings, right?

But we take all that away, but yet we still tell men,

oh, hey, but don't be a pig.

Well, it's like, yeah, don't be a pig.

But how, and I think that's what Lewis is getting.

As I was reading the book myself, it's a short book by the

way that people are interested.

It's called The Abolition of Man, Baia Lewis.

You don't even have to buy it.

If you Google it, you can find a pdf version.

I like what he stated in the book.

And what you are elaborating on is that people want to get rid of the

social norms and then act surprise.

When people don't behave to norms they may be used to and so when

there is no standard to appeal to, then it becomes a wild, wild west.

What else captured your attention?

on that point, something that Andrew Klavin of the Daily Wire said

that I think is really applicable here is he was talking about.

In his day.

It was just the accepted norm.

You don't take advantage of a girl.

You don't, do these things.

And he's like, because you're a gentleman.

And he, so he is talking about these other values, but he says, he feels,

terrible for some of these people, both guys and girls who have been lied to by

the sexual revolution that says, oh, all that stuff is old timey and whatever.

No.

There's just things you do because it's right to do.

I do think there's rational reasons for, the institution of marriage and

all these things, but it may not be exactly scientifically explainable.

And so our modern society says then throw it out.

Throw out these standards.

What did he say?

We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.

We look at.

Society today and, the notion that everything is relative, as you

stated earlier, my truth is my truth and your truth is your truth.

But they failed to see that in making that statement, there are appealing to

what they believe to be absolute truth, which is that everything is relative.

The very fact that they're appeal.

That everything is relative makes an absolute claim, which we are arguing for,

that there are things that are absolute truth that should guide all of us.

I stated in our earlier podcast that even the atheist doesn't want people

to murder, Even the atheist doesn't want people to steal from them.

So what CS Lewis is getting at folks is that there is objective.

And it's to the benefit of society that we all seek that truth.

And as we're seeking that truth, it makes society better because

the opposite makes society chaos.

I think that's a really good point, about objective value.

And I'm really interested as we take this conversation into Romans

13 and how the ideas that Lewis is flushing out in the book.

I know, CS Lewis is familiar with Romans, and I see that thread running through.

But before we go into Romans, there's something in the book, abolition

A Man that that I enjoyed basically, and I want the audience to know

about it, is that words have meaning.

They may describe feelings, but something to describes a feeling

can be tied to objective reality.

and what he argues about the book and what we begin to see in society today is that

people are trying to separate words from their meanings or trying to redefine words

to mean something that is not concrete.

One of the example, I like to.

Is the notion of, being an anti-vaxxer.

Well, my wife and I are vaccinated.

My wife and I have three smart girls, growing girls,

and they've been vaccinated.

But because we did not want the covid vaccine, now we

become labeled as anti-vax.

That's not our reality because if you take the word itself, it would mean that

I am against all vaccines, Anti-vaxxer.

But they're trying to manipulate words into a reality that is not based on truth.

And that's what is amazing that Suis Lewis brought out even a long time ago.

Does that make sense?

That makes perfect sense.

I did get that.

And that actually brings up, I don't know if, um, the audience is familiar

with Steven Pinker, but he's a secular, he's an atheist, he's a cognitive

psychologist, I believe at Harvard.

I could be wrong.

But one of the Ivy League schools.

He writes in one of his books, he writes that, , there's something

called the euphemism treadmill.

And basically what this is society gets uncomfortable with a term.

They said term problematic, say, so they'll change the term, right?

So in other words, we don't want to call transgender people or we don't want to

offend, people who have gender dysphoria.

So, and transsexuals, is offensive.

So we're gonna call them transgender or we don't want to.

, people who are overweight, so we'll say, weight challenged so we say

these euphemisms and I can't think of a better example right now, but I

know there's, there are some mm-hmm.

but, we'll say these euphemisms for things.

, as a way to get around the offensive thing, but the meaning

of the thing still exists, right?

And the meaning of the thing is what people are reacting to negatively, right?

So you can say, you know, your weight challenged all you want,

but ultimately that's gonna come to mean the same thing as fat or obese

or whatever, because ultimately

it's still a negative thing.

It's not the word that's negative, and I think that kind of ties in

there.

Yeah, and I think one of the earlier ones, before we used to call,

older people like grandmas and grandpas out of respect the elderly.

And it was a positive connotation, but people then began becoming

offensive of it, and now they changed it from the elder.

The elders, even scripture talks about the elders to their senior

citizens, It's no longer a used car.

It's a pre-owned car.

It still means the same thing.

And people are easily offended by words when they should look at reality.

Not be offended by words.

It's a used car.

What's a big deal?

used car and pre-owned car mean the same thing.

People try to manipulate words, and if you manipulate words,

you can manipulate society.

That's

kinda what Orwell wrote about in 1984, that what Big Brother did.

They manipulated words and then they changed history.

We were never at war with East Asia.

We're always at war with East, you know what I mean?

So it's like that's just been a feature of totalitarian regime.

Control the vocabulary.

And that's why in today's society, you see so many people get

offended by the use of words.

It becomes that speech is now what?

What did they say?

Speech is now violence.

Violence has always meant something physical.

It never applied to.

. And so we as conservatives, we as people who objectively seek for truth, whether

it cuts, , through our own hearts or not, we have to not concede to these

changes of words, male and female.

Man and woman.

These are realities that have based a society forever and ever.

Anything else before we jump into Romans?

Joey?

No, I think we cut it.

We hit that.

Well, that was good.

Before we jump into Romans, let me set this up.

So in the Bible there's this concept, and like I said, we don't

want to make this a Bible thum.

Show, even though we are Protestant and we will appeal to scripture every

once in a while, we want to lay the groundwork for future episodes.

we believe in God.

We believe that God is the ultimate authority.

We believe that God is the ultimate virtue for morality, that his ways are the best.

However, Joey and I are aware that we live in a.

where if you're an atheist, if you don't agree with the Bible, Joey and I cannot

appeal to scripture as a basis for authority because you the atheist, you

the secular person does not believe in it.

So how do Joey and I interact in society?

Well, the Bible teaches us princip.

To act in society, which to fight for what we believe in

without appealing to scripture because it's common to all of us.

And the first verse, Joey, I want to jump into is in Romans chapter

two, actually before we get to Romans 13, and this is what it says.

It says, for when the Gentiles in scripture, there's two main

groups, Jews and Gentiles, for when Gentiles who do not have the.

Of God, presumably.

For those who don't understand scripture, do instinctively the things of the law.

These not having the law are law into themselves in that they show the work

of the law written in their hearts, their conscious bearing witness

and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.

In other words, what it this is saying is that it's appeal.

to the universal, like we said in the abolition of man, the

Dow, where it's common to all of us and for us, for Joey and I.

Well, those are found in the last six commandments, and we'll get to those.

I'll espouse upon those here in a bit.

But Joey, based on Romans two 14, any thoughts you'd like to share?

The first thing that comes to my mind actually is a story from the gospel.

Don't have the exact text on me, but you know the story about, the

centurion who interacts with Jesus.

He takes on faith, right?

That Jesus can heal him.

And Jesus makes the comment that I have not found faith

like this even in Israel, right?

Even among God's people.

Mm-hmm.

And there's a writer I really like on 18th century writer who makes a comment.

There's like, there's gonna be people who never heard the name of Jesus, right?

Never heard the name of Jesus, but God.

But they follow their conscience, right?

And I think what really appeals universally to the conscience is

what you're saying in the last six commandments about how we treat each

other and if they're following that to the best of their ability, that is faith.

And Jesus considers that.

And so I think that from a Christian perspective, it's good to remember

that like there are people who don't share our moral conviction, who don't

share, I don't wanna say our moral convictions don't share all of our

moral prayers, the Holy Spirit hasn't wherever they are on their walk,

they're either outside the church , or whatever, but they're following what

they know to be true and what's been convicted on their hearts to be true.

And so I think in society, right?

If we can recognize those univers.

We can get along much.

I've met a lot of atheists that are very moral people, people

who may even show better morality than even some professed Christians.

And in the book one Corinthians chapter five, there is this

scandal, this sexual scandal going.

Where a Christian is sleeping with his stepmother.

In other words, he won her away from his own father.

He seduced his stepmother and he's parading her around the church.

And Paul says, what are you guys nuts?

That's not grace.

Get rid of this guy.

And I like what he says.

He appeals.

He says, man, this guy's doing something that not even the gentiles would.

Because he recognizes there is a universal right and wrong that even

the Gentiles find out abhorrent.

And so Paul understands that there is a general principle that guides us all

and that brings us to Romans chapter 13.

And let me give you the backdrop before I read the verse, Romans 13.

According to Christianity, God sets government in authority.

All authority is set before God.

In other words, in the last days, in judgment time, they

will all be accountable to God.

However, God gives them a sphere in which to govern.

And these verses here in Romans 13, eight, and nine will bring us to the 10 command.

But I want you to see what it says.

Paul says, owe nothing to anyone except to love one another.

And that's what Joey and I owe.

The atheist, the L G B T Q, the homosexual, the abortionist.

We are to love them for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

Now, for those of you who may be familiar with the command, Look at

the commandments, Paul quotes for this, you shall not commit adultery,

you shall not murder you shall not steal, you shall not covet.

And then he adds.

If there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saint, you

shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Well to the astute Bible student, they will recognize that.

Here we have listed.

2, 3, 4 of the last six commandments.

So here are the 10 Commandments there.

Honor your father and mother.

You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal.

You shall not lie, and you shall not covet.

Joey, can the atheists live by these six commandments?

Not only can they million, millions of them do . Okay,

elaborate on that.

Go through each one.

I, I'll, I'll take one example here to start with, right?

Mm-hmm.

, you should not commit adultery.

You don't have to be a Christian to know that adultery ruins relationships, right?

That adultery harms children, right?

That adultery, um, and obviously with adultery, right?

and we can flush this out a little bit more, right?

But marriage in a Christian tradition and in other religious traditions,

but also even I think from a secular.

Point, this can be made right?

That marriage between a man and a woman is the only foundation

that can create children, right?

So anything that outside of that would fall under adultery, right?

Whether it's premarital heterosexual activity, whether

it's homosexual activity, whether it's pornography, lots of things

fall under this, but all of those.

We don't have to go to scripture to say, Hey, this is wrong, this is disordered,

this is gonna lead to problems.

I don't need to appeal to scripture for any of those things.

You shall not murder.

We can all agree you shall not murder.

Obviously we have a disagreement in our society.

Um, we don't recognize all life, right?

The unborn.

, and in previous times we didn't recognize, um, the life of like our

African American brothers and sisters, and there have been people that have been.

. we all recognize, and thankfully we've grown to recognize in terms of race

that none of us deserve being murdered.

But I don't think anybody would say that.

As we move to that, we became a theocracy by outlawing slavery or

by insisting on equal rights for our African American brothers and sisters.

We didn't become a theocracy ry because we can all recognize that it's not

right to treat other people that.

same with honoring your father and your mother.

This goes into the whole conversation happening right now about parental

rights, who has charge over children, the state or the parents?

And obviously there are extreme examples of abuse, but generally

speaking, in the vast majority of circumstances, the default is the parents.

The rights to end the charge over their.

Obviously that comes with responsibility as well.

You shall not lie.

We have contract law, right?

That would appeal to this.

And you shall not covet.

While we don't actually have laws, obviously we can't police

thought crimes, but we can see how coveting leads to stealing, which

is one of the other commandments.

Yeah.

And not only that though, even though we don't have thought crimes, we see, if you

look at covering like, let's say jealous, that a man sees a woman with another

man and it's at times has led to murder.

And I live here in the Houston area and there was a big famous case of

a Nassau astronaut who drove several hundred miles to the house Of the

girlfriend of one of the other astronauts that she was after ended

up either hurting her or killing her.

And we see, thought leads to what actions and actions, form character.

And so here we see people that, even though these are to Joey and I, what

we call part of the 10 commandments, the last six, these have to do

with our relationship with each.

And as Joey pointed out, the atheist can live by all six of

these because he doesn't want people disrespecting his parents.

He doesn't want people murdering, he doesn't want people committing adultery.

He doesn't want people to steal or lie to him or to covet to the point , of

trying to then steal or lie about things.

And so when Joey and I in future episodes begin to tackle.

Cultural issues or social issues or political issues, we are going to base

our arguments on whether these last six Commandments are being adhered to.

Because if everybody followed this last six commandments, we

would all be a better society.

And if the atheist can agree on it and other religions can agree

on it, the Muslim, the Jew, the.

If all of them could agree, we see that these laws are not necessarily God-given,

even though we believe they are, that God has put them in the conscience

and in the hearts of everybody, and it is on that basis without appealing

to scripture that we're gonna be making our arguments going forward.

But you may ask, what about the first four commit?

And this is where we make the distinction, Joey, let the audience know why we

don't allow the government to dictate the first four commandments and why

we're not going to argue in future episodes based on the first four

Commandments.

we're gonna get to a quote by one of our lawmakers, where I think

this distinction becomes important.

So the first four commandments, if you look at them right, there's you

shall have no other gods before me.

No grave in images.

You shall remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.

Do not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, And so we take, we see

these things and what do these have to do with, these have to do with

our relationship with God, And first John says very poignantly, God is.

, well, what do we call forced love?

We have a dirty word for it, right?

And it's rape, right?

Mm-hmm.

words.

When you, when you force love, when you force a relationship,

that's a dirty thing.

That's a, that's not love, actually.

So in other words, in order for it to be love, it has to be freely chosen.

So when we're dealing with these first four commandments, which I do think

are binding, but I think your life will be better as a Christian, I think

you're morally obliged to follow.

. But the reason why we can't force that, and it is outside of the realm of secular

government is because, it deals with a person's personal relationship with God.

So in other words, the conversation that conservatives were having in the

case we were making during Covid and with the VAX mandates and stuff, Is

that it assaulted our conscience, right?

And I know there was many who made the case, right?

That because of abortion research, right?

There were some who just believed if this could be harmful, but they don't

know if it's harmful, they believe their bodies or the temple of God.

And so they didn't wanna risk it with their bodies.

I 100% agree with that cause, right?

That we should have the freedom of choice in these situations when it

comes to our relationship with God.

And so that's, , um, I would never argue, and in fact I would argue

harshly against anyone who would try to enforce these, uh, conscience

principles of a relationship with God.

And that's where we, Joey and I, for the audience to know, we're

big proponents of religious liberty.

We do not want to set up a theocracy here in the United.

We do not want to dictate to the world what we believe in.

Now we will preach what we believe in.

We will try to persuade people, but everybody has to make that choice freely.

Everybody has to be persuaded, not forced, because when you try to use

force, when the government tries to use force, and we have seen it in

history, if you look at what some religious scholars call the dark age.

, where the medieval church was, killing other Christians.

You know, we talk about the Holocaust, which is gruesome and horrible and

happened in a shorter time period.

But during the dark ages, the medieval church killed upwards to

50 to 60 million other Christians who did not believe the way they.

And so we are big proponents of religious liberty, and there is a great example

in the Bible where three Jewish boys were ordered to worship an image,

thereby breaking the second commandment.

Joey, for the audience, let them know what that story's about.

For those who aren't familiar with, the book of Daniel, Daniel had

three friends, SHA Misha, a Nigo, and in Daniel, one of the stories that happens

here is the King Nebu Eser of Babylon.

He, , he had a dream, that's outlined in Daniel chapter two, where he

sees a statue and it's got all these different medals and, these different

medals represent different kingdoms.

And he's the head of gold, right?

And it's represented that his kingdom was this most powerful kingdom in the world.

But these other colors that came beneath, they represented other kingdoms that.

And he wanted his power, to last forever.

So he didn't like this, he didn't like this dream.

So what he ended up doing is he instituted a statue.

He had a statue made that's all gold.

He said, I'm gonna be the leader and I'm gonna be the leader forever.

and then after he made it, he said, everyone in my kingdom must bow

down and worship the statue of me.

And, there was many Jewish captives that he had taken from Jerusalem, and

obviously they believe in the God of.

They can't worship, another God.

But many of them did as we'll.

See, three of them, Daniel Stent friends, Shara, Misha and Abe

Nigo decided to stand firm.

And I'll let Gio take the story from there.

They decided to stand firm because government cannot

dictate, who you worship.

And Joey and I will never advocate that you must worship the way we.

My favorite line in Daniel chapter three, is when they say, we will not bow down

to you even if God does not save us.

In other words, they weren't presumptuous to think that God was going to save him.

, they realized that God could decide to save him or not to save,

decide to save him regardless.

They were gonna stay faithful to God.

And so when any government decides to violate your relationship with God,

then they become outside of the realm of God, and we as humans can disobey them.

You see in the picture representing that story, three were thrown in

the furnace, but there were four.

The fourth one was Jesus Christ himself, walking in their mist.

And the story goes that they were not harmed at all, and that they were,

faithful and saved by God, proving to the king that we must worship God

through the dictates of our own con.

. And so when the government tries to, force worship, Joey and I will be

on the side of religious freedom.

And the reason we bring this up is because we wanna show you a

scary video and remind me her name, Joey and who she is, uh, Congress

Congresswoman Lauren Bobert of, uh, Colorado's third district I believe.

She's in Congress.

I'm sure most of our viewers will probably have seen her.

Listen to this video and then we'll comment on what's wrong with this video.

We had

so many overreaching regulations in our nation is because the church complied.

Amen.

The church is supposed to direct the government.

The government is not supposed to

direct the church.

That is not how our founding fathers

intended it, and I'm tired.

Separation of church and state junk.

That's not in the Constitution.

It was in a stinking letter, and it means nothing like what they say it does.

Amen.

Joey, tell the audience what's so scary about that.

Well, first I wanna acknowledge that there's truth mixed with error

here, First of all, it is true that the phrase separation of church and state

does not exist in the Constitution.

The letter that she refers to is Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers.

The guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence, wrote a

letter to the Danbury Baptist.

and I, believe the letter who was writing right.

And what she says about the church or the state not being allowed

to direct the church is true.

And that's what, uh, Jefferson was referring to, to the.

. He said that the state is not going to have authority over you guys.

And by the way, Thomas Jefferson was not a Baptist, but he's saying he's exercising

a principle of religious freedom.

And I think it's worth noting that the First Amendment does

say there's two clauses.

There's the establishment clause and there's the free exercise clause when

it comes to the freedom of religion.

And so what it says, the establishment clause says that the United States.

is not allowed or permitted to establish a church, right?

So when she says that the phrase isn't in there, the concept very much is there.

I'm gonna stick up the Constitution over Ms.

Bort here.

But the other thing I wanted to say, to the point that she's making

about, , the church directing the gov.

The government, like no, the church.

Listen as citizens, as Christian citizens, just like our atheist

citizens, we direct the government.

We're a government, we're a self-governing republic.

So in some way, I think it's a good distinction to lay here.

So people like Warren have started using the term for themselves Christian

nationalists, and that's a phrase I'm sure our viewers have heard.

It's kind of the hot topic, right?

And li listen, my whole life, I'm not, I'm not that old, but my whole life I've grown

up in a conservative movement and there's something we've always talked about

is Judeo-Christian principles and our Judeo-Christian roots of our civilization.

I wholeheartedly believe in those principles.

I believe that this country was founded as a Protestant nation.

That's where this concept of church and state comes from actually.

But when she says the church are.

What our Protestant forbearers were fleeing was situations where the

church directed the government and particular instantiations of the church.

Persecuted other instantiations of the church.

I remember when uh, Lauren came on the scene, I actually applauded her, right?

Because she did take a stand for the Constitution when she was running.

I remember she, Beto o Rourke was a candidate for the de.

, nominee for president and she ended up confronting him and

she like had a gun on her hip.

And she said, because he had made a comment that, you know, hell

yeah, we're gonna take your AR fifteens was his exact quote.

And she made a comment, was like, no, no you're not.

And she made a comment that, that's not your right as a person of government

to violate our constitutional rights.

So I appreciated that, but I think she needs an education in that document

because what she says, is, very dangerous.

As I'm watching that video, because to be clear to the audience, Joey and

I, even though we're Christians, even though we believe in God and we believe

that following God is best, as for society, it has to be freely chosen.

You have to be persuaded to follow God.

what caught my attention from that video, the first question I asked, which church?

Is it the Baptist Church?

Well, Baptists believe different than Catholics.

Is it the Catholic church?

Is it the Mormon church?

Jehovah's Witness Church.

Which church is gonna direct the state?

That's a no-go with so many different denominations.

That is no bueno.

And we see in scripture plenty of examples.

When people try to force worship, it never goes well in.

Matter of fact, in the last book of the Bible, the book of Revelation chapter

13, there is going to be a movement to try to force worship and that

precipitates the second coming of Christ.

So force worship is never good.

People need to, follow the dictates of their own conscience.

And so that was number one for me.

The second.

That alarmed me was that particular church, I don't know what church it

was, but they were applauding and clapping for that statement of hers.

And I'm thinking to myself, these people vote.

These people vote are they gonna vote to establish a church?

And leads me back to my first question, which church?

I do not believe in what she said.

We need to keep, the government free from religion.

But freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion.

My religious upbringing, influences how I vote, but when it comes to dictating

whether you should attend church at the cost of public jailing or public

humiliation, that will never happen.

You are free to worship God or not worship.

And when we see Christian nationalism on the rise, part of the episodes we'll be

doing in the future is combating that, but in a way that balances how I love my

neighbor while staying faithful to God.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, that makes absolute sense.

So the term Christian nationalism, when I first started seeing it was

after the January 6th riot at the Capitol, and I started seeing it

applied by people from the left started calling just kind of normal

conservatives or anyone who happened to vote for the last president, right?

Some 74 million Americans.

As Christian nationalists we're just having normal conservative things

and then a certain subset decided to take on the name for themselves.

I think of Marjorie Taylor Green, Lauren Bobert, in the Christian world.

There's a famous book that went out the case for Christian nationalism

and so they started kind of taking this name for themselves, that's

why I think it's very important.

normal Christians not to let the left or let the other side define

the terms, because then you can get into some places where you

may not have expected to be right.

I don't think most Christians want to oppress their Muslim neighbors or their

atheist neighbors or their classmates.

But these ideas if we don't know the roots of them, can sound.

they could sound good, right?

But if we don't think of a history, if we don't think of, all the

fruits that were given to us by the Protestant Reformation and the history

of the United States, listen, I consider myself to be a patriot.

I love this country, but I don't mm-hmm.

, I don't love this country because, it's specifically a Christian nation,

but because I believe the ideas that infused its founding were Christian

ideas, were, Judeo-Christian ideas,

the idea that were made in the image of God and we have these rights.

The idea that we have the right to religious freedom, I believe that because

we're created in the image of God.

, I'm not saying that my Christian values, and I know you're not saying

this either, that our Christian values don't affect our politic.

Don't affect our governing system.

It's actually the very reason why we believe that our atheist brothers

and sisters, and our Muslim brothers and sisters and our Jewish brothers

and sisters have the right to their religious freedom as well.

It's because I'm a Christian that I believe that.

I like how you put it because that's what makes us the greatest

nation in the world and in history.

No one has had this type of government.

Give so many different types of people the freedoms they enjoy here.

Because if you were in Rome and you were a Roman citizen, well you had

all the freedoms you wanted, but if you were a Jew or a conquering

tribe, you didn't have any freedoms.

Not like the Roman citizen here in the United States.

We took a collection of people from all around the.

And gave them not only freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness, but we

also gave them the freedom to worship their God under the same government,

in under the United States government.

Because as you said, the Constitution says we have inalienable rights.

And unfortunately this country hasn't always followed those.

But here in this century we.

And the ideal that the Constitution ESPs and the founding fathers

espouse is good for everybody.

However, as we see in society today, people wanna rewrite history or condemn

people for their thoughts in the past.

And so going forward, we're gonna tackle some of those, conversations.

Joey, give us a little summary of what we talked today and then I will

give the audience a little prelude of what is coming in the next episode.

I think the basic point that I took away from our conversation today

is that we're trying to give our other conservatives, other Christians a

good blueprint for, as Protestants, what should be our realm of political.

and what should be left to conscience, we're differentiating

with the two tablets.

What this practically means is when we're voting, when we're, um, you knowing

for certain issues, what should be the principles that should guide that action?

So in other words, I really believe in advocating for pro-life.

I know you do as well, right?

And why is that not an infr way?

So a lot of people will say, oh, well, you're just forcing your religious views.

Well, no.

I, I don't believe you should murder people.

That's part of the second tablet.

So I think what we're really want to get across is that there's a realm of action.

Political things, right?

God did establish the government and the rulers, so there's a realm

of that, but there's a realm above that, that that realm does not

have the right to interfere on.

Yes.

When it comes to cultural, social, and political issues that affect all of

us, Joey and I are gonna make those arguments based on reason, logic, persua.

Not an appeal to scripture, even though we believe that the love we want to share

with the world is grounded in the love of God, when we are arguing with you or

when we are discussing with you, we're never gonna appeal to scripture because

we believe that there is inherent, reasonable, persuasive logic in the

natural laws that we see in society, and as a preview of what's coming.

We are going to discuss the paper, sex and Culture, where it talks about

how the degradation of marriage.

Has brought upon nations, not only, this current nation, but nations in the past.

It was a study how the degradation of the nuclear family has destroyed

society and what happens to society when that degradation takes place.

Until next time,

if you can subscribe, give us a thumbs up or, hit the bell

notification so you can follow us.

We are also on iTunes, Spotify, and Google Play and anywhere

else you can find your podcast.

Until next time, be blessed.

Keep up the good fight and remember your Lord and Savior.

Jesus Christ, Joey.