Badlands Media - Tuckabee & The Jews Part 2: Land, Bloodlines, and the Covenant Debate

Episode Date: March 4, 2026

In Part 2 of their deep dive into the Tucker Carlson and Mike Huckabee interview, Ashe in America and Ghost continue unpacking the theological, historical, and political claims surrounding Israel, biblical land promises, and modern geopolitics. The conversation explores the question at the center of Tucker’s challenge: who exactly are the people entitled to the biblical promise of land, and how would anyone prove that connection today? Ashe and Ghost examine arguments about ancestry, conversion, DNA, and the claim that modern Israel inherits promises made to Abraham’s descendants thousands of years ago. They also dig into the broader implications of Christian Zionism, the historical borders described in scripture, and the tension between biblical covenant theology and modern nation-state politics. Along the way, they critique Huckabee’s performance in the interview, arguing that many of Tucker’s core questions went unanswered. The episode closes with a reflection on intellectual honesty in political and religious debates and a reminder that, for Christians, the central question remains the same: who do you say that Jesus is?

of the Badlands. Explain those Badlands. That's a hell of a name. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to part two of Badlands Media's special event, Tuckabee and the Jews. Last week, we were in G-Money spot on Thursday night. I think Ghost and I both had the best of intentions of, are you frozen? Oh, no, you smile. Okay. Best of intentions of completing in one go, but we failed, as we often do. when we try to do things concisely. So we have part two tonight. I think we might end up or today. I think we might end up having a part three on this. I think we'll go probably about two hours, which might get us through the next hour of the interview. We got through the first hour on the first polymeth is that the G spot.

I did not mean to phrase it that way. That's not intentional. We were in his lineup in the rug, whole radio line up last week. Ah, already failing. Okay. So we have a packed show. I think we're going to start right at the one hour,

one hour and two minute mark from the interview. Because it'll back us up a little bit from where we ended, but it heads right into kind of the next part of the conversation. We're planning on having. Before we get into it, let's talk about oh no is there no tiny bright in here oh yeah because we're using this

we're using this random account right tell people about Gart while I pull this in okay uh yeah so Gart we're going to our next stop on the Great American Restoration Tour it's Gart 11 Nashville Tennessee that would be from April 9th to 12th

you can please join us if you're going to be in the area but if you're not you can still join us virtually. Tickets are on sale. We're doing an early bird discount for all virtual tickets between now and March 15th. That's the next 11 days. And then March 15th, it'll bump up to the normal price of $40 a ticket. So get your tickets now, Badlands Media.tvs slash events. And if you're new to Guard, if you're new to Badlands, we try to make the virtual experience as interactive as possible. We have exclusive live streams. running before Gart starts, there are opportunities to engage, to ask questions of the panels, to follow along and feel like you're a part of the experience in the dedicated telegram chat.

So definitely, you know, grab a virtual ticket. But if you can join us in person, you can because we have a blast and you will have a blast too. All right. And our second sponsor, and then we'll get into it. That's also us. It's soft as glover. Legend says, on St. Patrick's Day, a beard without oil is just a chin with ambition. But a beard with soft disclosure beard oil?

That's true treasure. Spiced vanilla. Naked, smooth as a lepricons getaway plan. Soft enough to impress your barber, bold enough to confuse a baby goat. And this bore bristlebrush tames your beard like it holds the crown coin. Every bottle is American made, which means when you buy soft disclosure, you're supporting six American small businesses. That's not luck. That's capitalism with cheekbow.

And while you're at it, try our mint green deodorant because even legends need fresh pits. Soft Disclosure, go for gold. Visit softdisclosure.com and use promo code tiny bright for 15% off. Be saying it's not been evaluated by the FDA. Promocodes not apply. A lot of fun. A lot of fun, but it's a lot of truth in that ad. When you support soft disclosure, every purchase, you're supporting six American small businesses,

and you're supporting us here at Badlands. And you get great products. excellent lip balm, excellent lotion. The lotion is like curing people's skin issues, obviously not evaluated by the FDA, but of course the FDA has an allowable amount of maggots in their canned goods. So why would we listen to them? All right.

You ready to get into it? Yeah, let's do it. Okay, so we're coming back to, I think this is just after Mike Huckabee said, it would be fine if they took it all. And so they get into kind of a discussion about that. We'll start it here. noticing that that is a huge piece of land.

So if God gave them that land, then they have a right to take it now by your definition, unless I'm missing something. I think you're missing something because they're not asking to go back. Thank you, Babbage. We are going to say goodbye to YouTube. We love you guys. You're amazing.

But your platform is a little bit calming. So we're going to take you down. head over to X or Rumble to join us over on YouTube. And again, thank you to Babbage, who always tries to prevent us from getting strikes and usually succeeds. Big fan.

All right. To take all of that, but they are asking to at least take the land that they now occupy, they now live in, they now own legitimately. And it is, a safe haven for them.

May I ask though, as because you're appealing, you're explaining what Christian Zionism is and your theological beliefs. And you think you just said it would be fine with you if the state of Israel took all of Jordan, all of Syria, all of Lebanon. That's really not exactly what I'm trying to say. I'm asking, is that what you said?

I thought that's what you just said. It was somewhat of a hyperbolic statement in that, you know, if that's what you feel like that we're talking about, but it isn't. We're talking about this land that Israel, the state of Israel, now lives in and wants to have peace in. They're not trying to take over Jordan. They're not trying to take over Syria.

They're not trying to take over Iraq or anywhere else. But they do want to protect their people. And they're not trying to take over Lebanon. But you're saying that as a religious man, as a Christian, a Christian Zionist, you agree with a lot of religious communities here in Israel that the justification for this country is theological. It's a contract between God and his people. And I'm telling you that that contract includes a tract of land that is much larger than the current nation states. So you may be a bigger Zionist than even the Jews are that living in Israel. I'm trying to understand the implications of your theology for geopolitics. Because you're saying that the present government of Israel has a moral right to take over what are now other people's countries. No, I didn't say that. Then what are you saying? I'm simply saying that.

the people who live in Israel, I think, have a right to have security, have safety. They have a right to be able to live in this land that they have a connection to for 30, 800 years. I told myself when I said a prayer that I'm not getting annoyed, but is someone who is, you know, the father of daughters. When I see child molesters hiding in Israel and escaping American justice, I think I have a right to safety in my country too. So you can understand that I think most people feel they have a right to safety. I do think Israel has a right to safety, and I hope that for them. And I'm sincere, but I'm an American, and I have a right to safety in my country, too. Of course you do.

And I think so, but I just want to get to this point. If Israel were to say God gave us in Genesis 15 all of Lebanon, all of Syria, all the way up to Iraq, would that be legitimate? in your view i don't think in this particular day and time they're asking for it would it be legitimate i'm not sure that it would be why because you just said that well god gave it to them that there is a a an understanding that the people of israel today now if they end up getting attacked by all these places and they win that war and they take that land and okay that that's a whole other whole another discussion but you and i started out when no no no we started talking about something simple.

So I'm going to pause it there because this is really important. What Tucker is asking is essentially did God give them the land or didn't he? Right? Because the argument is that the land is theirs because God gave it to them. And Mike Huckabee said that originally, right? Be fine if they took it all. And then I think realized what he had just said. And as we discussed last week, that drew international condemnation, that statement.

but what what is that land so we have here uh the the land the land laid out the lord said to moses this is numbers 34 we're going to read through verse 15 the lord said to moses command the israelites and say to them when you enter canaan the land that will be allotted to you as an inheritance is to have these boundaries your southern side will include some of the desert of zin along the border of edam your southern boundary will start in the east from the southern end of the Dead Sea. Across the south of Scorpion Pass, continue on to Zinn and go south of Kadesh Barnea. Then it will go to Hazar Adar and over to Asmon, where it will turn, join the Wadi of Egypt. And this is where we were talking about yesterday.

It's not the Nile that we're talking about there. And at the end, or last week, not yesterday, at the end at the Mediterranean Sea. Your western boundary will be the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. This will be your boundary on the west. For your northern boundary, run a line from the Mediterranean Sea to Mount Hore and from Mount Hore to Libo Hamath. Then the boundary will go to Zad, continue to Zifron, and end at Hazar Anon. This will be your boundary to the north. For your eastern boundary, run a line from Hazar Anon to Shepham.

The boundary will go down from Shepham to Ribla on the east side of Ayn and continue along the slopes east of the Sea of Galilee. Then the boundary will go down along the Jordan and end at the dead sea. This will be your land with its boundaries on every side. Moses commanded the Israelites, assigned this land by law as an inheritance. The Lord has ordered that it be given to the nine and a half tribes because the families of the tribe of Rubin, the tribe of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh have received their inheritance. These two and a half tribes have received their inheritance east of the Jordan across from Jericho toward the sunrise. So that's the land that is in question. The position of my Cuckabee is that that land belongs to Israel.

It was given to Israel by God. And when pressed on that by Tucker, he walks it back. And he says, well, nobody's asking for that. Well, if they get attacked by all those people, then they'll be justified in taking that land. But that's an inconsistent position from, you know, what the Christian Zionist position is, which is this land belongs to Israel. It was given to Israel by God. Either God gave it to them or he didn't.

And the borders that we're talking about of Israel right now have nothing to do. I mean, they're part of it, but it's not the land in the Bible. You're muted. Yes. I mean, I think everything you just outlined is accurate. Okay. So in Deuteronomy 17 through 8, he gives a reiteration of the land promise. Israel was given stipulations over the land.

That's in Deuteronomy 28, 28 through 32. We will probably get into that. We talked about that. At the end of last week, that was everybody's homework, was Deuteronomy 28 to 32 and Leviticus 26. The tribes of Ruben Gad and half of the tribe of Manasse chose their inheritance east of the Jordan River because the land was suitable for livestock.

Remember that Joseph had two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, Joseph received a double portion because he was Jacob's eldest son by Rachel. So Joseph's inheritance was represented through both sons. The other half of Manasseh settled west of the Jordan. Christian Zionism. And it turns out it's not because I don't, the core of Christian Zionism,

you said, and I'm quoting you, is the understanding of the belief, the theological understanding that Jews have a moral and legal, we went through the legal. moral deriving from the biblical, the promises in our Bible, which we share with the Jewish people, the first part of the Old Testament, that it derives from God's promise to the Jews. And so I have two questions. What are the borders of that? And who are those people in 2006? And you're not the first person I've asked, but you're the most reasonable, most gentle, most theologically informed person. So I'm really hoping for an answer. The first question was the borders. I can't get an answer.

Yeah, those borders are. So I'm going to give up. But the second question is every bit is pressing, which is who are the people? Who are the modern? Yes, who are the descendants? So we know, and I believe, and I agree with you as a Christian, that God promise. So that's weird to me. He's, I'm going to give up because I can't give an answer because they're both citing the Bible as their authority and the borders are in the Bible.

This land from modern day Iraq to modern day Egypt to this people. the Jews to Abrams, actually not to the to Abrams descendants, as it says in Genesis 15. Who are his descendants now and how do we know who they are? I think they're the Jews and we know who they are because they've always been a Jewish people. There has been an unbroken line of Jewish people and they've lived in this land for 3,800 years. Sometimes not very many of them because they were chased out all over the world. They were hunted down. They were almost annihilated during the Holocaust.

They came back to this. Tucker they represent you know how many Jews there aren't a whole world please I understand first of all the greatest genocide of Jews no one ever mentions what was by the Romans where they were literally banned from Jerusalem for 500 years yeah of course and and it's all awful and I'm opposed to all of that I'm opposed to mass killing of anybody period I'm opposed to hear you say that I mean it yeah I believe that I believe that my question is and it's not a bumper sticker answer is a sincere answer how do we know because what you're saying is that certain people have a title to a highly contested

region they own it in some deep sense so i think it's fair to ask who are they and how do we know so the current prime minister's ancestors weren't from here within recorded history there he has no deed biv natchu on one side is family's from poland they're from eastern europe so how do we know that he has a connection to the people who god promised the land to Abrams' descendants. How do we know that? I'm just going to pause it really quickly because I found a map. The red line is the biblical borders, and the blue line is Israel's current border. So when Tucker says you're including Lebanon and Syria and parts of Jordan in that promise, that's true.

But so wait, when you're saying like the red line is that Is that based on the Genesis 15, though? Number 34 that we just read. So it's only just doing numbers 34 not considering Genesis 15 then? It's the same, I think. Doesn't Genesis 15 say from the Euphrates to the Nile to the Euphrates? No, it doesn't say from the Nile. It says from the Wadiol Aresh.

The Wadiol Aresh, I'm sorry, yep. Yeah, which we figured out last time was in the Sinai. Yeah. Okay. And then there's other, like, there's other points in the Bible where Sons of Jacob Purchased Land. I have that here somewhere. Why is this map, though, showing that goofy kind of like red, like, why is the red lines? The red line is the borders described in numbers 34. So it's still 47.

Okay, okay. It's just, okay. That's fine. Yeah. So the borders of the, of the, of the. the land today that we're arguing about are different than the borders laid out in the biblical promise. Mike Huckabee is defending both sets of borders essentially, but walking back his support of the red one. He said, I think it'd be fine if they took it all. This Tucker said, hey, man, this includes parts of Lebanon and Syria and Jordan. And Huckabee said, I think it'd be fine if he took it all.

And then he walked it back to the current blue borders, right? Mm-hmm. Okay. Yeah. All right. So moving on to who the people are. Just to be clear, I've never seen this specific map that you're showing right now. And I've never seen anybody in the modern age show that map as like their, their ambition for Greater Israel.

It's always been all of Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia. Okay, but the ambition of Greater Israel, as I understand it, is not necessarily a biblical designation. It includes the numbers 34 and Ezekiel 47 that represents an expansionist view. Is that fair or not fair? Yeah, I mean, probably. That's an expansionist view for sure. But yeah, I think what they always refer, they always seem to refer back to is an idea that it's going all the way to the Euphrates.

But whatever. And it does. I think it does. Doesn't it say it goes to the Euphrates? Let's see. Well, the Euphrates in this map is going to be like Syria, the word Syria is. It's going to be far off to the right. Turn, join the wadi of Egypt and end at the Mediterranean Sea.

Let's go to Genesis 15. And we can actually play a little bit more of this while I look that up. So we don't want dead air. All right. Oh, no, I totally just screwed the whole thing up. Where were we? Maybe around here. We probably would have been like an hour and 15 in, something like that.

Yeah, yeah. Are we that far? Maybe a little further than this. Maybe like an hour and seven. Yeah, try that. Let's just go through those things. Okay. So one of the that Jews have a moral and legal,

we went through the legal. Moral deriving from the biblical, the promises in our Bible, which we share with the Jewish people, the first part of the Old Testament, that it derives from God's promise to, the Jews. And so I have two questions. What are the borders of that? And who are those people in 2006? And you're not the first person I've asked, but you're the most reasonable, most gentle,

most theologically informed person. So I'm really hoping for an answer. The first question was the borders. I can't get an answer. Those borders are. So I'm going to give up. But the second question is every bit is pressing, which is who are the people? Who are the modern? Yes, who are, who are the descendants so we know and i believe and i agree with you as a christian that god promised this land from modern day iraq to modern day egypt to this people the jews to abram's actually not to abram's descendants as it says in genesis 15 who are his descendants now and how do we know who they are i think they're the jews and we know who they are because they've always been a jewish people there has been an unbroken line of jewish people and they've lived in this land

for 3,800 years. Sometimes not very many of them, because they were chased out all over the world. They were hunted down. They were almost annihilated during the Holocaust. They came back. To this day, Tucker, they represent. You know how many Jews there are in a whole world?

Please. No, but I understand. First of all, the greatest genocide of Jews, no one ever mentions, was by the Romans, where they were literally banned from Jerusalem for 500 years. Yeah, of course. And it's all awful. And I'm opposed to all of that.

I'm opposed to mass killing of anybody. Period. I'm opposed to hearing you say that. I mean it. Yeah. I hope I believe that. I believe that. My question is, and it's not a bumper sticker answer, it's a sincere answer.

How do we know? Because what you're saying is that certain people have a title to a highly contested region. They own it in some deep sense. So I think it's fair to ask, who are they and how do we know? Okay. So the highly contested region, just to close this point. out. If we look here, this is where that border would be. And it does say in Genesis 15, verse 18, on that day, the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, to your offspring, I give this land

from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites and the Kenizites and the Cadmanites, the Hittites, the Parasites, the Refam, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, the Gurgishites, and the Jebusites. So looking at, that land border here where that dot is and then looking here it is it does appear to be not fully all the way over yeah and here i mean i'll show you what the like where the where the euphrates is in a similar kind of map um this is the the the graphic that's typically associated with it So yeah, like this line right here. That's the Afrodis that goes all the way down the Persian Gulf.

So yeah. And then just to make that point, here is this is the logo for the Ergen, which is one of the first militias that was formed in the 1930s. This militia, this is one of like the Freedom Fighter militias. They'd call it. They describe it as that eventually became the ice. IDF in 1949 when they all, a bunch of these militias all merged together. But the Ergen was one of the most famous, certainly one of the most violent. It's the one that Bibi Netanyahu's father was a member of and run by Zayev Javatinsky.

And so you can clearly see this map in the background. Yeah. Is like that's that's Transjordan right there. So that's trans Jordan with parts of Saudi Arabia. Arabia beneath it and then this is supposed to all this supposed to be Palestine. So even in the original the original conception of when of like we're creating this new colony for ourselves, we're taking Palestine and making it Israel, even in that original conception in the minds of the colonists who were living there, it was never just the land that they were

given by the UN. It was always supposed to be at the very least trans Jordan and Palestine. So that's just to be clear. That's even the, even the earliest maps from the 1930s that they were drawing. Yeah. Go that. Yeah.

And, Mrs. Reis attire says, honest question, Ash and Ghost, was there any stipulation or conditions in the scripture that the chosen people had to hold up their end? So this is where Deuteronomy 28 and Leviticus 26 come into play, 28 through 32, on Deuteronomy. However, the Christian Zionist position on this is that the Lord was, the land was given to them as a possession, their experience living in it is dependent upon their acts, upon their, you know, holding up. And God says this in Deuteronomy.

We'll probably read some of it when we get to that point in the thing. But if you keep my commandments, right, then you're going to have a good time. I'm paraphrasing, obviously. if you don't, then you're going to be hated, you're going to be sent into bondage, you're going to have your land taken from you, all these things are going to happen to you. So there is, if you read Deuteronomy 28 through 32, there are conditions on their experience, but the position of the Christian Zionist would be that there are no conditions on them inheriting the land because God gave it to them and it's theirs forever.

Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, I mean, there's the question of the covenant and, you know, the covenant that Abraham made and, you know, the two sides to that, which was you're the chosen people. But when the Messiah comes, accept him. And did they, was that covenant maintained? You know, I question my, my interpretation is that it wasn't because the Sanhedron, it was and it wasn't. Some people kept it. Some people didn't. The people who kept it went on to become known as the Christians. And they kept the covenant alive. And then the people who didn't, the Sanhedra and the Pharisees rejected it. And they're the ones who broke the covenant, which is why Jesus condemned Jerusalem and said it betrayed God. So I think you need to be careful because nobody can live up to the law. There is no one good, not one, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. So it's not that the Jews failed to be good enough.

And so they lost their promise. They lost their covenant. that's unbiblical and that is sort of condemnation for all of us because the premise of it's not it's not the jews it's a people uh rejecting rejecting uh or losing the covenant it's just the people who chose not to not to fulfill the promise which was recognized the messiah yeah and this is where you and i depart right i mean we we kind of when it when it comes to is the covenant that God made with the Jews entirely over fulfilled in Jesus and it doesn't matter anymore versus is there still something happening there that God cares about is where I think you and I have

you know we've battled this about quite a bit that's where we diverge and you know I think we can probably get into what our what what our distinct positions are my personal position on this is that when you read God's words to Israel through his prophets, and, you know, Ezekiel 16 is a great example. His relationship with Israel is that she's his wife, right? So we hear chosen people a lot. We hear sons and daughters, right? But God's orientation towards Israel is that she is his wife. And when you read Ezekiel 16, this really comes to life. He's, I found you. I then, you know, put my skirt over you, which is a euphemism and made you into many nations. I adorned you.

You were beautiful. But you kept having to run after other nations. You are a harlot. You keep stepping out on me, your husband. And that hasn't been reconciled. There hasn't been an end to that story yet. And I don't think that God is one to leave major story. The Old Testament is all about this relationship

between God and Israel and to leave it unresolved in that sense, I think is, I don't find that to be consistent with God. Now, that does not mean that we are, as we've talked about, I think, last week, if you're in a posture of worshiping Israel or if you're in a posture of hating Israel, you're focused all your time and attention on Israel. And Lucifer is fine with that. Regardless of which position you take, he's fine if you're trapped in the Luciferian false binary. I think that there are still parts of the Bible yet to be experienced by the people. And I know a lot of people disagree with this. And, you know, there'll be the millennial kingdom people will jump into the chat and tell me I'm wrong and it's fine. We don't all have to agree. But there is,

I believe, a reconciliation of that. My position is, you know, we have to ask the question, what was what was Israel chosen for? What is what does chosen mean? What were they chosen for? Were they chosen to be are betters and to be over everybody that's not of that bloodline and to be better than everybody and step into that position and we all have to protect them in that position, I don't think so. That's not, God doesn't get the glory in that respect. I think what they were chosen for is to bring about the glory of God to be an example to the world of what happens when you live in God's promise and protection and provision and what happens when you don't.

At the end of the age, in my opinion, we come to a position where you see a split. you have the remnant who accepts the blood of Jesus as the atonement for their sin, and you have the rest of them that don't. And I think you're going to see the glory of God represented in both of those instances. Interesting. Yeah. I mean, look, I'm not, I'm certainly not a theologian, so I'm more than prepared. Neither am I.

Yeah. Yeah. So I'm more than prepared to be wrong here. But I guess, I guess just like the basic logic exercises that I keep running through are the basic is that the only way to get to heaven is to accept Jesus, right? That is the words of Christ. It's like, only through me will you know God? So accepting him as the Messiah, accepting him as the son of man, accepting him as the one

truth is critical. That's the critical part to having a relationship with God. And it seems like that's a direct connection, extension of, the covenant with Abraham because as God said to Abraham, you know, keeping the faith is means that when my, when I, when that day does come that I send the Messiah, accept him. Do not reject him. Don't turn him away. Listen to him and accept him. And in my opinion, accepting him. Part of that is accepting his teachings, listening to the teachings, listening to what Jesus said. Are you citing verses right now? No, I'm not citing verses. I'm just describing in a general sense. sense that that's what that that was the agreement between jesus i mean between abraham and god am i mistaken on that but that was the that was their agreement was that we are the chosen people and but the but the other half of that was when god sins his sons sins of the the the Messiah you will you will accept him you won't you won't you won't call him a liar you won't cast him out am i

mistaken yeah i don't i don't know that it's that explicit the the um the the the the the the covenant that's cited is I will make you into many nations. Those who bless you, I will bless. Those who curse you, I will curse you. And through you, all the families of the earth will be blessed. And I will bless those who bless you. I will curse those who curse you. And through you all the families of the earth will be blessed is one verse.

And, you know, what we talk about is that the second half of that, through you all the families of the earth will be blessed. The second half of that is clipped off every time the Christian Zionist talks about Israel. They do not mention through you, all the families of the earth will be blessed, which is my position on what that verse is about. They are chosen to bring about the glory of God. They're chosen to bring about Jesus Christ, the Messiah. They are chosen to bring about the atonement for the sins of the world through the line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, down through the line of David, culminating in the Messiah. So I think it's definitely part of it in terms of their commandment being, you will accept him or it's all over.

I don't think that's explicit. It might be. I just, again, not that it's all over, but just that like going with what Jesus himself said, none can know my father but through me. So if you reject Jesus, if you refuse to know Jesus, by death, you know, by his own words, you can't know God. Like you're basically cut off from God if you, if you don't accept Jesus. I mean, you cannot be atoned for your sin. So that's, that's the key here. And we talked about this last week.

The, the, when the Jews went into Babylonian captivity, the arc of the covenant was taken from them, meaning their ability to have the blood of the spotless lamb sprinkled on the mercy. seat once a year in atonement for their sin was taken away. They cannot be reconciled to God, therefore, without Jesus. And that's just a fact. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, that's like we've been doing the chosen together, the show, the choice. I mean, that's the whole, like in the New Testament, that's the whole battle there, right?

With the Pharisees and with and with all of the skeptics is, do you? you believe you know do you believe that i say who i am like do you do you recognize me and obviously we see later on the show like in the show but also in the new testament that they don't i mean some of them do some of them don't and the ones who don't um he calls them the son the synagogue of satan he calls them the the son of their father the devil he describes them basically all of all luciferians um so i think those are pretty pretty direct descriptions of what these uh holy men quote unquote who have chosen to turn their back on God. That's what their fate is.

And then of course, Jesus then condemns Jerusalem and says Jerusalem has turned its back on my father. Therefore, every one of these stones will be overturned. And of course, Rome does that as the instrument a few decades later. So I guess what this all comes back to is kind of what I think Tucker is getting out with Mike Huckabee. is when we say Israel, what is Israel? Is it a bloodline? Is it an ethnicity? Is it a people?

Like a specific physical group of people that you can point to using 23 and me and saying, okay, everyone who has this DNA is of this group and that is Israel. Or is it the follower? Is it the people who followed the teachings and listened to God and listened to Abraham and listened to Jesus and decided to accept Jesus, accept him for who he said he was, and then follow him with the New covenant in the New Testament. Is that the House of Israel? Because if that's the House of Israel, then the people who decided not to do that are no

longer in the House of Israel because they, again, rejected it. And then Jesus said, okay, well, then you all are the synagogue of Satan. You are the son of your father, the devil. So it's like, I guess my question, this is an earnest question. This isn't me like me knowing the answer. But kind of what I think Tucker was trying to ask Mike Huckabee, those people who did decide to turn their back, you know, the Pharisees and then their descendants, do they have special considerations in the eyes of God above and beyond what other people who do not accept Jesus? So you have groups of people who don't accept Jesus all over the world, sure. But does this one specific group that has this DNA connection potentially to this group,

you know, to the historic group that may or may not have been settled in ancient Jerusalem, do they have special consideration in the eyes of God because of their bloodline? Like, do they get special treatment? Do they get a special, like, do they get an extra chance to prove themselves? You know, like I guess those are kind of some of the questions that Tucker's asking, I'm asking, because it sounds like in some interpretations they do get special consideration and they are, there is sympathy for them. Understanding that there are a lot of other people out there who don't currently accept Jesus,

may one day accept Jesus, but currently do not accept Jesus. Yeah. So, so I think that there is. Gosh, there's a lot there. The Zionist position, as I understand it, it's kind of a dispensationalist position, is that the Jews are sort of on hold. Like Israel is on hold with God through the church age,

and then at the end of the church age, there's going to be this other kind of reconciliation for the Jews. I personally think there's a lot of problems with that reading because it kind of makes Jesus a liar, doesn't it? Yes. It basically says, well, I came to die for the Jews, but then you guys rejected me, so I'm going to go to the Gentiles and then God will deal with you guys some other way. I don't find any support for that. I think it is derived from 16th century Jesuit teaching, really reinforced with the footnotes in the Schofield Bible, and has become kind of main. stream accepted teaching among Christians in the West, but it makes God a liar because it was

once in fraud. Jesus on the cross said it is finished, right? And so, to me, the why of it is really important, right? When you look at the verses that describe the construction of the wilderness tabernacle, there's this kind of prophetic verses throughout. that foretell the gospel of Jesus Christ. The gospel of Jesus Christ is Jesus is the blood of the spotless life. He becomes the Lamb of God. He becomes the sacrifice to cover your sin, to reconcile you for your sin, all of us, once and for all. And there's no other reconciliation that's needed. I say this and I get yelled at by the, you know, by the Zionist, but all of Israel is saved now. they just have to accept it.

They have to turn to Jesus. They have to accept the blood of Jesus in order to be saved and reconciled to God because that's the way that God has provided. And he used to have another way, right, with the Ark of the Covenant and the Mercy Seat and the Blood of the Lamb on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies. But he took that away. And he took it away and then he provided the final way.

Jesus, the blood of the land, once and for all, for all of humanity, for all to be saved. And so there's not another way. The way is narrow, he tells us, right? There's one gate. There's one door. And there was one door into the Holy of Holies, into the mercy seat. There's still one door.

It's the blood of Jesus Christ. And that, to me, is consistent from the beginning of the Bible to the end of it. There's a lot of stuff that different ideologies try to read into it and put on top of it. And, you know, plan around, and a lot of that has nefarious roots. Some of the people forwarding it, I think, are very innocently stating what they believe. But at the end of the day, it is, in my opinion, heresy to suggest that there is another path to reconciliation to God for the Jews other than the blood of Jesus. Yes. And ultimately, I do agree with that because I think that not only does it, like you said, make Jesus a liar, it also raised a lot of the questions about, okay, but what about the followers of Christ? So if you're saying that

all the people who have followed Jesus for the past 2,000 years, that, you know, that's the Christian church, right, like in a general sense. I'm not talking about the institutions. I'm just talking about that's the followers of Christ, you know, numbering in the whatever, billions. But there seems to be with the dispensationalists, there seems to be this other group that are not currently followers of Christ, but one day will be followers of Christ, right? As we hope everybody will become followers of Christ, right? That's the Christian mission, right? But this one group gets special consideration and they are treated better than the followers of Christ because of this promise that will one day come, even though many of these people are born, live, and die

without ever fulfilling that promise. And that's just history. You can just look at the history and see that that lifetimes go by and this hasn't this promise that we're told is going to happen hasn't been fulfilled and yet these people are basically given this indefinite um grace period where it's not even a grace period it's like we're told by other by our fellow Christians that we have to elevate this group above the followers of christ because they're more special because of their genetic bloodline they're more special, they're more chosen than the rest of us. And they are basically like, it's almost like God created, I mean, in their own words, God created them to rule over humanity because they've chosen people, right?

And it's like, that seems to stand in a stark contrast with pretty much everything Jesus was saying, everything he was doing. We see multiple iterations in multiple moments in the New Testament. where Jesus is fawning over a Gentile who he just met because that Gentile has thrown themselves at his feet. And then like, I believe, he's like, this person's faith is stronger in me than any of you, Jews, my fault, like my disciples. Your Jews and this Gentile that has never even met me before has stronger faith in me

than you do, that is so wonderful. And because of that, they are so special. And they are, you know, they are part of my, they're part of my group. this is part of my flock. And so we see and we see the disciples almost in bewilderment. Like, wait a minute, but this person isn't a Jew. He's like, yeah, I don't care. I don't care about that, guys.

I don't care. It's never about that. It was never about them. They are, the Jews, the Gentiles, the Assyrians, the people of today, you're not the main character. God is the main character. And the only question that matters is who do you say that I am? and that's the only question that mattered in the Old Testament. And they couldn't follow it.

They chased after other nations. They adopted their customs. They intermarried with them. They adopted their gods. They worshipped their gods. And ultimately ended up sacrificing their children to their gods. And that is what will happen to anyone separate from God. It's why I think in Romans it talks about the church, the role of the church, the

orientation of the church towards Israel should be to make her jealous. Because God's heart is to want Israel to come back and say Baruka Baba Shama Adanai. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord to recognize who do you say that I am? What did Jesus build his church on? On this rock I build my church. What was that? What was the rock? Well, mainstream convention is that it was Peter.

Peter. The Catholics will tell you that, that Jesus built his church on Peter, on a man. Yes, but you and I have discussed that there are potentially other interpretations of that moment, and maybe what he actually meant was what he was saying rather than... Oh, I think there's only one way to read that moment. The person's standing in front of him. Yeah, I think there's only one way to read that moment. And I think that the other readings of it are a perversion from the pits of hell. And I think we see that in the scripture.

So Peter says to Jesus says to Peter, who do you say that I am? And he says, you are the Christ, the son of God. And he says, on Jesus says, on this rock, I will build my church. Yeah. Meaning the rock, meaning that idea. That confession. It is Peter's confession. It is recognizing that you are God.

I am not. That is the rock upon which the church is built. And we know that it wasn't Peter, in my opinion, because in the next verses, Jesus starts talking about, you know, dying and being resurrected on the third day. And Peter says, no, no, no, this is never going to happen to you. And what does Jesus say? Get behind me, Satan. Yeah. Stop trying to tell, stop trying to tell me what's going to happen, what's not going to happen.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. With your puny mortal brain. Exactly. All right. Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. Keep going. Let's keep going less we have. 12 parts of this series. Yeah, yeah, right. So the current prime minister's ancestors weren't from here within recorded history. He has no deed.

Bebe Netanyahu on one side is families from Poland. They're from Eastern Europe. So how do we know that he has a connection to the people who God promised the land to, Abraham's descendants? How do we know that? Well, if you take the genealogies that come not only from the old, but the New Testament, you see that there is a historical connection through the entirety of the old and the New Testament that details the Jewish connection to this land.

Does that include Bibi's family? How do we know that if his family comes here? But how do we know it's the same people? No, why is that crazy? If you say to me, if they speak the same language, if they worship the same God, if they follow the same Bible, if they follow the same cultures and traditions, and they always pray next year in Jerusalem, and they pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and they pray facing to it. Jerusalem. Does that not give you a little bit of a clue as to who they are? Let's go through

those things because I would like to have a rational, this is a conversation I've wanted. Bless you, thank you for doing this. Let's just go through those things. Okay. So one of the things I admire most of Israel is they resurrected a dead language in 1948. Good for that. Well, they really didn't resurrect it. It was existent. Okay. I'm not. That's a compliment. I'm not slightly. No, no, no. But it is the first time in all of human history that a language has survived through this length of time. It's, it's, it's, it's, I would call it, you might not, but I would call it a miracle. Okay. Then you can. I think it's wonderful as someone who loves language. Let's pause for a second. Then you know, it's parents. Okay. So, um, a few things about what,

about what Mike Hockabee just said, where he says, uh, they speak the same language. They have the same culture. Um, these are actually factually, verifiably, we can prove that that that's not entirely true. So Tucker says they revised the they revived the language in 1948. That's again somewhat true. That's somewhat accurate, but it's not entirely accurate. The language was revived in the 1800s, really the 1770s as part of the Jewish Enlightenment. I think it's called the Halaka, if I'm not mistaken. Somebody will fact check me, I'm sure, on that. But in the 1770s, basically, because I went and looked up all this history because I was very, I got down the rabbit hole.

So I had to like figure it out. I'd like to just curiosity aided me. And basically went with the rise of Orthodox and Hasidic Judaism, which were very new ideas. These are the new ideas coming out of the Turkic, Eastern European sects of Judaism. This is in the 1770s. So the same time that America is being founded.

You then had a response to that in the same decade because the Orthodox and Hasidic movements were all about basically saying, all right, we should isolate ourselves from our neighbors and basically live lives where like the Amish do, where like we're going to be separate from the rest of the world and isolate ourselves. All right. And these people spoke Yiddish and they came from Central Asia primarily. and they, you know, Ashikanazi, that's the ethnicity that is associated with them. So at the same time in Eastern Europe, like Warsaw, Poland area, you had kind of this response to that, that this rejection of that Jews should live in isolation from the rest of European society. So they said we should actually integrate with European society. And one of the things that came out of this counter movement of which B.V. Netanyahu's claimed descendants,

were part of was the resurrection of the Hebrew language. And they said, all right, so Hebrew is a written language. Like we study it as a written language, but it's not a spoken language, kind of like Latin. It was a dead language. So they said, we're going to recreate Hebrew as a spoken language because the Orthodox and the Hasidic were speaking Yiddish. But the other sects of Judaism of Jews did not have that. They only had the written language. So then they went about recreating this language.

they used their mother tongue as the root. A lot of it was Yiddish, which is why a lot of the Hebrew and Yiddish words are very, very similar, as I understand it. There is also other influences into it, but Yiddish was a big part of resurrecting the language. So my point is that as I understand it, the spoken language of Hebrew today is not the same spoken language that would have been spoken 2,000 years ago,

because it was recreated. The written language might be the same because there's continuity there with the written Hebrew, but the spoken version of it, which sounds very Yiddish. If you hear Yiddish, then you hear Hebrew, it sounds very similar for those reasons. Kind of like Ukrainian and Russian sound very similar because they're from the same roots. So that kind of disproves a little bit of what Mike Huckby is saying. We're saying it's the same language. It's not the exact same language.

They're not speaking the same language. They're studying the same language in a written form, but it's not the same spoken language. Two, it's the same history and culture. Well, again, like these people, a lot of the people who've settled Israel today, who were moved over in the 30s by the Germans, by the Third Reich. Again, they came from Ukraine. They came from modern day Ukraine. They were Ashkenazi. many of them had

Turkmen ethnic like the Turkmen ethnicity which means they came from like Mongolia Qazaria. This is kind of what Tucker is getting at describing Netanyahu's lineage, right? He's saying that they're the Europeans essentially. Yes because what ends up happening is

the Khazarian Empire, the largest Jewish empire in history which existed for 300 years from 600 to 900 to AD that that empire, that that ethnicity came over from Mongolia, settled in modern day Ukraine, creates the empire, and then when the empire breaks, there's obviously going to be, you know,

there's going to be intermingling between that ethnicity and the Eastern European ethnicities, which are numerous. So that's what then leads to like these Eastern European Jews who then are move to settle whatever a thousand years later to uh to the the middle east today so again we don't know like like people have gone and done a lot of these studies they've gone and they've taken the DNA of like of eastern Europeans and and middle easterners and they've tried to reconstruct this and there probably are connections there probably are like chromosomes that are that are the same but you're also going to find just as many if not more chromosomes as I understand it, that are going to be Slavic, that are going to be Turkmen,

that are going to be Mongolian, that are going to be Ashikanazi. So again, it's not the same ethnicity. It's not the same culture. It's not the same language. So when Mike Huckabee says all those things, it's just not, it's not accurate. And also, there's a really great clip of the Pope correcting Netanyahu, because Netanyahu said that Jesus spoke Hebrew. And he said, no, actually, he spoke Aramaic. There's a really great clue of the Pope correcting Netanyahu

when Netanyahu tried to say in their meeting that Jesus spoke Hebrew. And he said, no, he spoke Aramaic. So again, he probably spoke both. He spoke Greek too. And the majority of the Bible was, New Testament was written in Greek. Yes. I mean, he is the word. So I imagine he speaks all the languages.

Yeah. And there are still a few hundred people, as I understand it, in modern-day Palestine, who still speak Aramaic, who are Christian. So it's like if that is your like from again to to that point, if that's the premise, well, it's the people who speak the same language. Well, what about the people who are living in Palestine who speak Aramaic? Like who still celebrate the same culture that was celebrated 2,000 years ago. Do they have no claim to this divine right? And that's where I think Tucker should have hammered him a little harder on that.

I wish he had. But anyway. Yeah. So what Tucker was kind of Huckabee was describing, and it is the answer that you always get from the Christian Zionists when it comes to the who are the Jews. Are they really the Jews? Are they the right Jews? Right. You get this kind of works doctrine.

Well, we know because look at what a blessing they are. and we have, you know, such great fruit coming out of this people group. That's such an inversion to me because when, you know, I'm not going to read all of it because it's a lot, but when you go to Deuteronomy 28, like the first, this is, you know, God's promise to them, if you faithfully obey the voice of the Lord your God, being careful to do all his commandments that I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth and all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you if you obey the voice of the lord your god blessed shall you be in the city and blessed shall you be in the field and blessed shall

you be in the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground and the fruit of your cattle and it goes down but if you will not obey the voice of the lord your god or be careful to do all his commandments and his statutes that i command you today then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you curse shall you be in the city and curse shall you be in the field curse shall you be in your basket and your kneading bowl. Curse shall you be in the fruit of your room and the fruit of your ground. That to me is more, and there's three chapters of that, right? The blessings and the curses. First of all, nobody can ever live up to it. We know that. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Sin or entered the world. Sin separates all of us from God. The whole

point is that sin separates all of us from God, right? So he provides them a way to be atoned. because they can't possibly live up to it. But when you consider that the justification for how we know that the people group right now claiming the promise, essentially, are the people group, is a doctrine of works? Well, the fruit we should look at, because Jesus said, you'll know them by their fruit, right?

The fruit we should look at should be, what is, are they blessed in the land, or are they cursed in the land? Are they experiencing the blessings? Or are they, you know, Are they viewed elevated or are they hated and viewed kind of this book of? That's in my reading, what the scriptures say in terms of how we will know. I also think, and you and I've talked about this, because I believe that it is,

that they are chosen to bring about the glory of God, both in what happens when you obey God and what happens when you don't, to me, the language and the bloodline, right? Do they have the right DNA in their blood? First of all, they've intermingled and intermarried and had so many children with so many different people. And also, you're not allowed to do blood testing, right? So how are you going to know that? Well, they've been here forever.

Okay, how do we know that that's actually them? Don't ask that. You're not allowed to ask it. I think more importantly, and this is, you know, again, my understanding of this, it matters who claims it. because if you claim to be Israel and you claim that the promises of the Most High God belong to you, but you deny his son, you deny his blood sacrifice,

you're going to be on the judgment side of the end. If you claim the promise and recognize that your sin separates you from God and the only way that you can be atoned is through the blood of Jesus, then you're going to be on the blessing side of that. And either way, the glory of God will shine. Interesting. Yeah. So this map I'm shown is one of those studies that I was referring to where somebody went through and painstakingly took DNA samples from populations across Europe and Eastern Europe and kind of mapped out what the most likely migration patterns were. And so you can clearly see that this is what they came up with because there was an argument as to whether the traditional argument was that when the Romans sacked Jerusalem that the Jews all fled across the Mediterranean and then basically

came up through Central Europe or Eastern Europe and then migrated East and then ended up in like Warsaw, Poland, Ukraine in the 1900s. And then that's how they got back to Jerusalem. But he actually, there was this Khazarian theory about them moving up through the Middle East coming up through the caucuses into Russia and then becoming part of the Qazarian Empire and then actually migrating West and into Poland later. And he found that both were actually true, that he found DNA evidence that both of these dynamics occurred, which means that you, again, to your point, you have different sub-ethnicities. You have those who went to the Caucasus, those who went to Italy, those who went to Central Europe, the Balkans, whatever. And obviously over the centuries, those are, you know, the DNA is just going to look

different for all of them. So even if you were to do a DNA test on everyone in Israel, it's like, what are you looking for exactly, right? Are you looking for the people who, whose DNA can be traced to the actual land, the farthest back? Are you looking for people who are of a specific ethnicity because of the history and where you think the diaspora was moving around? Like, these are things that should be established if we're going to have this premise that Mike Huckabee is arguing. But of course, he's not interested in that at all. Yeah, Babbage says we're headed to a part three. I think you're right. I think we knew that going in, though. My question is, are we heading to a part five at this point? Because we've been going an hour and three minutes

and we've gotten through seven minutes of. But this is the most important part of the whole conversation. The entire debate hinges hinges on who are like what is Israel, like who are the Israeli people. I mean, I think that's the geopolitical though. I think I think that's the entire, the entire debate for geopolitically what to do about Israel hinges on what are the borders and who are the people. And that's kind of what Tucker is saying. My position in this is that if you're going to make biblical arguments as Mike Huckabee is making, if you're going to make biblical arguments, then we have to cite, We have to be grounded in the scriptures. We have to be grounded in the Bible.

And spiritually, the blessings and the curses are ongoing. And they're spelled out in the scripture. There are conditions. Maybe not, according to the Christian Zionists, maybe there's not conditions on whether or not the land is their eternal possession. Right? But there are conditions upon whether or not they're going to be blessed or cursed in it. And that has to do with how they're following the commandments.

Now, not everybody can follow the, nobody, right? Nobody can follow all of the commandments all of the time because all have sin and fall short of the glory of God. So that means they need atonement. They need to be reconciled for their sin to God. They need the blood of the spotless lamb to cover their sins. And they don't have that ability since Babylonian captivity. It was taken from them in Babylonian captivity. there is one way to be reconciled, which was given to them many, many years later after Babylonian captivity, God sent his son, right?

To be the blood of the spotless lamb once and for all. And that's the end. That's the story. So spiritually, right, the biblical story of why Jesus and why did he came and why the Jews and all of the things, that story is, in my opinion, not done yet. And the reason of why Jesus, why is it his blood? Why do we talk about being covered in his blood? Why does the blood matter? Well, the blood matters because that's the mechanism to be reconciled to your sin,

to reconcile to God for your sin. It's a blood sacrifice. It's always been a blood sacrifice. It's still a blood sacrifice. And you can't separate those things. In my opinion, you can't. Yeah, I think you're right. And the last thing on that is I would just say that the way I interpret the Mike Huckabee argument, and I'm open to be convinced otherwise, but, you know, and this is kind of like all the Zionist arguments that I've heard is that, you know, who have a chosen people?

Like, that's the question. Like, well, it's the Jews. Okay, well, who are the Jews? Well, it's the people, you know, and then Huckabee gives his little rant on what he thinks that is. So, but what you're saying is that it ultimately, based on what Mike Huckabee is saying, is that it is a blood lineage. It is a, it is a heritage that you inherit from your parents. And therefore, there is nothing that other people who are not born with that blood right can do to become chosen people. That therefore they are always on the outside.

They will never receive God's grace. They will never enter God's kingdom. And again, that spits in the face of Jesus because Jesus said, those who follow me are the chosen people those are the chosen people those who choose to follow me so again like and this is something that i don't think guys like Mike Huckabee like to admit they don't like to admit that um well who who have a chosen people not the followers of christ apparently they won't admit that but that's what they mean when they say it and that's the way i interpret it so and that's why i took such offense when christianome you know pat passed her little hate speech law and said that it was the god's chosen people act

It's like, wait a minute. So you're saying then Christy-nom, as a Christian woman, that the followers of Christ are not the chosen people. It's actually this other. This is so mind-blowing to me that we get hung up on it. Well, they can't be the chosen. What are they chosen for? So what they claim to be chosen for and what Christian Zionism claims that they are chosen for is idolatry in my view. It is elevating themselves to the same level as God.

it is taking the glory upon themselves. God will not share his glory with another. And that is the original sin of Lucifer. This is one story, guys. It's one story from the beginning to the end. And when you consider that, it's, well, they're not chosen. Yes, they are chosen. Well, they were chosen.

Well, they're not chosen anymore. They were chosen. What they're chosen for through you, all the families of the earth will be blessed. He is going to reveal his glory to the world through this nation. And that means good stuff. And it means what happens when you don't. And that's not me making it up. It's Deuteronomy 28 through 32.

He explicitly says what's going to happen when you're living in my promise, when you're keeping my commandments, when you're living in my protection provision. And when you're being a harlot and running after all these other nations and using the wife metaphor, which God uses, not me making it up. I'm not making up the Israel is God's wife metaphor. God uses that metaphor. Read Ezekiel 16. When she's running off and being a harlot, what happens then? When she's running off and being a harlot, the most profound example that we have is when she goes into Babylonian captivity. And that's following King A has sacrificing the children of Israel to Mollick.

Yeah. That is that is what we're talking about. So it's the same sin. And it's the same, it's the same, the sin that separates us, right? Not who do you say that I am? Do you recognize him as the sovereign most? Most High God. Do you recognize him as absolutely distinct? There is no one like him. There is not, will not share his glory with another. Moses was told to speak to the rock and give water. And he said to get water. And he said to the Israelites, you crazy rebels or something, I'm going to miss it up. But you, you rebels, we're going to give you water. We're going to give you water. That little bit of taking God's glory for himself, of equating himself to God. That is what kept him out of the promised land in my reading and understanding of the scriptures.

God will not share his glory with another. It is all about the glory of God. Them claiming to be chosen and saying that that elevates them above everybody else, when they continue to reject the blood sacrifice to cover their sin, they are separate from God. They cannot be reconciled without the blood sacrifice, and they don't have the ability to have the blood sacrifice done the old way. only Jesus. Only Jesus is the only way that they can be

reconciled and they reject him. So what are they chosen for? That. They're chosen for that. They're chosen to be that example, to reveal the glory of God to the world. And this is why I say it's a Luciferian false binary. To love Israel, to hate Israel. Either way, you're worshiping Israel. And you're not recognizing God for who he is. Yes, I would agree with that. And I would say that the, you know,

the focus, the crux of all this shouldn't really be on the Jews because I look at like any religious group that's outside of Christianity. They're going to have their own ideas, you know, like the Hindus have their own ideas, the Buddhists have their own ideas, the Muslims have their own ideas, right? And it's like, okay, I don't really care what their ideas are because they're not my ideas. Like they're not, like, you know, they're not the teachings of Jesus. So that's, that's their prerogative to say that they're right and everyone else. is wrong. That's their prerogative, right? I think the real issue that I take is with like the people like Mike Huckabee who are self-described Christians who then use the Christian doctrine and weaponize it

against other Christians and say that this group that's outside of the followers of Christ are like this special group that we all need to, like you said, elevate and put on the pedestal. Worship. Yeah, worship. That's idolatry. Yeah, yeah. And it's like, that's where I have the issue. So my real problem is actually with the Christian Zionists. It's not even with the Jewish people who are going to call themselves chosen because, you know, but I'm sure the Hindus are also going to. Yeah, the Hindus are going to call them themselves chosen, the Buddhists and all, like whatever. I don't have a problem with any of those people because that's their religion. But when Christians are telling me that as a Christian,

I'm actually not chosen as one of God's children because of this skewed interpretation, specific interpretation they have of the Bible, and then they use that as like a geopolitical talking point, that's when we're going to have issues. Like we're going to disagree. It's the only, I mean, you know this. That's the only reason I'm involved in this conversation at all.

I don't care about the geopolitics. I really don't. I'm sorry, guys, I'm xenophobic. I think America's the best and we should worry about America. I also think that's biblical, right? Because if we're supposed to be, if Christians, if America's Christian nation and Christians are supposed to, to be making Israel jealous, as it says in Romans, what we're supposed to be doing is live in God's

protection and provision and promise. We're supposed to be keeping his commandments. We're supposed to be doing the Deuteronomy 28 to 32 and trying to keep the commandments of God and walk a straight and narrow path with God and that will make her jealous. We are not supposed to be worshipping her. We are not supposed to elevating her. We are not supposed to equating her with God. And we're certainly not supposed to turn God into a liar by saying the being covered in the blood of Jesus isn't enough. If you don't have the right heart orientation towards the nation of Israel, that's heresy. Yeah. And unfortunately, this is geopolitical because since we did our part one and part two, we are now involved in a major war that potentially is going to be bigger than any war we've been in in the past 80 years. Maybe. Maybe. I'm saying that's the way it's being painted. It's being painted as like this major conflict and the assets that have been put in place.

know, the heaven and earth has been moved to get everything in place for this. So, you know, that there's obviously like a political cost to all that. It's not just financial, but there's other calculus involved as well. So because all this is being done because of theology, we have to talk about the theology and we have to pick it apart. Yeah. You're going to love this next part. This did not speak Hebrew. Okay.

They didn't live in this region. Netanyahu, the founders. of this country were mostly secular. Some of them were avowed atheists. They were not praying for the peace of Jerusalem. They weren't praying at all because they didn't believe in God. True. There's no genealogy linking their families to the people of this land 3,000 years ago.

They're none. So how do we know, since they didn't share a language, they didn't share a religion, they had no religion whatsoever. How do we know that they had a right to come here from Eastern Europe? And but they were scattered land. They were scattered to Eastern Europe. They were scattered all over the world. There were many in Ethiopia.

They were in Russia. They were in Poland. They were throughout Asia. Jews were all over the place, but they were still Jews. But they were still Jews. Okay. Let me get to the nub of the question. Since again, a lot is at stake.

A lot of money is at stake. Land is very valuable. Israel has a lot of resources. By the way, if you're accused of crime, you can hide here. That's a pretty good passport to have. It's a good thing, right? So who's entitled to it? I don't understand, and you're very discouraged in the United States from asking this question for some reason.

It's a totally rational question. You're not discouraged. You're not discouraging. Others do. You're like the only person I could have this conversation with everyone will be like, shut up, Nazi. It's a foundational question. Are you speaking of an ethnic group or a religious group? Well, I think you're looking at, for many people, it is religious.

there are people who may not have a deep religious connection to Judaism, but they're still Jews. So it's an ethnic category. It is ethnic, but it is also religious. It is rooted in religion. You can't take it out of it. I mean, what Mike Huckabee just said is that even people who don't care about God, who are atheists, who have no connection, spiritual connection, like, you know, like not even referring to Jesus, just saying within the confines of the doctrine of Judaism.

people who do not even care about that, who are ignore all of that, who have no relationship with God even within the Jewish community, they have a right that the rest of us don't have. That's what he's saying. He's saying that even those people who just happen to be born in the bloodline but are, you know, two whatever, full themselves to, you know, embrace what that means, they still actually are, you know, they're still chosen. they're still saved, they still get salvation, but the rest of us don't. Like, that's the inherent implication in my, in my.

So he's not saying the rest of us don't. I think for the right, I think what he's saying. Well, the rest of us don't get to be chosen. The rest of the rest. Again, they never define that word. They will never define what it means to be chosen. What means God loves them more. That's what we're essentially told, right?

That's the kind of the gist of the modern. Christian and Christian Zionist and Jewish view of what chosen people means. It must mean God loves them more. God explicitly told them what they were chosen for through all the families of the earth will be blessed. And if you keep my commandments, then you're going to be like, you know, the rulers of the world. And if you don't, then you won't.

And guess what? All have sin and fall short of the glory of God. So they can never achieve that. They can never achieve the works. None of us can. That's another core teaching of Jesus, right? There's no one good, not one. There's no one righteous.

No one is without sin except Jesus. No one walk this earth without sin. So it's not, so the conditions of them living in the land with, you know, as kind of the rulers of the world, that can never happen because it relies on them being blameless. and sinless. But they're chosen to reveal the glory of God. And that's clear throughout the word of God. And quite frankly, I don't want to be chosen for what Israel is chosen for. I want to be chosen for what Christians are chosen for.

What the church is chosen for. The bride of Christ who is waiting for the day of her wedding. That's what I, that's what I am. chosen for and what I want to be chosen for. I don't want to be chosen for the revelation of what happens when God gives you every opportunity and you still say no. I don't want to be chosen for that. Yeah. And it's worth noting the notes that Tucker makes about the colonists who founded Israel, modern Israel, were atheists. A lot of them actually were. And a lot of them actually were self-described Bolsheviks because they all came from

the poorest part of Europe. They lived in ghettos. The history books that I've read, the accounts that I've read, they were so poor that when the empires would have wars and the winning Cywell would win the battle in the local area, they'd walk through these towns

and there was nothing to steal. They'd walk, they'd go into people's houses and they literally didn't even have furniture to steal. That's how poor they were. And so these people lived in such abject poverty that a lot of them did not have religion. A lot of them did not have that. And that's where the Bolsheviks came out of.

But they all subscribe to the idea of collectivism. The collectivism became, took root in this part of the world. This is modern day Ukraine, modern day Belarus, modern day Poland. And that is where socialism, communism, all of it comes out of these ghettos. And so when Tucker says they were atheist, what he means is that a lot of these people were self-described Bolsheviks. They were all collectivists to some extent. And I think that's, again, just one of those things, one of those facts that is glossed over and lied to by all the Christians. All the Christians Zionists lie to us about that, that these people all basically have American values.

Like they all have American and American ethos, and that's just not true at all. They actually come from a very different part of the world with a very different set of principles informing their politics. And I think it's very perverse when we're told that these people are basically an extension of America and the American value system. Yeah. Atheist. Well, I will tell you this. There are some people who say, I'm Christian. They never go to church.

They never pray. They never read their Bible. they don't tithe but they're not entitled to citizenship on the basis of that but i'm saying they still call themselves christian even though they identify in that way here's the difference you're saying that people who have this identification have a deed to a huge chunk of land on the mediterranean okay so there's you know it's a it's a right you keep telling me it's a right and so it's totally fair to say if you come to my house and say i've got the title to your house house. I get to ask, may I see it? Where'd you get it? And that's exactly what happened here.

People from Europe, Eastern Europe came here, in a lot of cases, atheists, and kicked out a lot of people who lived here. Well, but they did not just throw people out. They bought a lot of land. There's no question about that. But they also in 1948 kicked out a lot of people. In the war? It was a war. I agree. I'm not, look, I'm not, you want to relitigate the history. I'm just saying it's a fact. Okay, including a lot of Christians. A lot of Christians wound up fleeing and they lost their homes and they've never been allowed back. And all of this was justified on the basis of this identity that forms, that is the ticket to the right that you keep referring to. So my question is very simple.

I'm going to wait patiently for an answer. Does this right derive from religious affiliation or from genetics? And I would say it's both. But I would also say that when you said the Christians were kicked out, Tucker, Christianity is growing in Israel. And there is a big lie that goes out there. But no, let me finish this because I keep hearing that Christians are really not treated well in Israel. That's simply, that's a lie.

There are lots of different. There were 34,000 Christians in Israel in 1948. There are 184,000 Christians here today. And by Israel, what are you counting? You talking about the land? What territory? Are you counting Israel proper? Are you counting the West Bank as well in Gaza?

I mean, when you say Israel, those numbers apply to what landmass? It would be in Israel proper. Okay. There's 184,000. Now, I'll tell you where Christians are not doing very well. They're not doing very well in the Muslim control countries. There's almost no Christians in Qatar, for example, except those who live in the Christian ghetto, who are the service workers.

I'm sorry. I don't want to argue with you. There are many more Christians in Qatar than there are in Israel. That's not true. It actually is true. And I refer you to Wikipedia, Mr. Ambassador. Wikipedia. I refer you to the government of Qatar, the government of Israel.

These are knowable facts. In Jordan, by the way. The numbers are down. In Syria, the numbers are down. I'm just saying. There are about twice as many Christians. But they live in the enclave. They are not native Qataris.

Okay. We're mixing so many different categories here. I'm just saying I get things wrong all the time. You've just gotten something wrong. I think it's important to acknowledge it. There are many more Christians in Qatar than there are in Israel. fact. How many? Now you caught me. I don't know. I can look at my phone, but I was just there and many more, like, whatever. I just want to get to the point. Okay, so we'll get to the Christians in a second.

Before we do, we should just address real quick what Mike Huckabee said about, well, they bought the land. That's true. They did buy the land, not in some cases, not in every case. And they bought the land starting actually in the early 1800s. and they did it over about the course of about a century. The Palestine Exploration Fund was one of the many organizations, you know, kind of like an NGO that was doing this stuff. Matt and I have covered this. It was one of the first shows we did together in Breaking History, digging into all of that.

London was a major launch pad for a lot of these endeavors. But again, it just highlight the point that there were a lot of Jews living in Palestine, Palestine in the 100 years, 120 plus years leading up to the creation of Israel. And so again, like one of the stories that were told is that the Jews weren't welcome there prior to the partition of Palestine. Just an absolute lie. There's money from the 20s where the money that was minted in Jerusalem had three different words on it for Palestine. It had Palestine written in Arabic and Palestine written in English to represent. the three different face that were in Jerusalem.

So again, it's just not accurately conveyed. But to that point, I want to show this. Again, I mentioned this group, the Ergen, one of the most famous militias, was a terrorist organization, recognized as a terrorist organization, even by the British government of Palestine, and by the Israeli government later, recognized the Ergen as a as a terrorist organization. One of the, you know, the leader of that group, Zayev Jabotinsky, I mentioned him before.

Again, his personal secretary was Netanyahu's dad. So Netanyahu was raised by this guy. Like grew up around this guy, was given delusions of grandeur, I think, by Jabotinsky and a lot of the people around him. And then one of the offshoot of the, of the Ergun, was this group called the, I think it's the Lehigh, I think it's how you pronounce it. The Stern gang is what it was known as. Abraham Stern basically had a dispute with Jabotinsky.

Jabotinsky thought the best opportunity for them to get their own country was to, at the beginning of World War II, was to align with the British, even though they had been engaging in acts of terrorism against the British for years. Stern said, no, no, no, no, forget the British. let's go partner with the Nazis and the Italians because they're socialists and we're socialists and we have a shared value system. We're collectivists. They're on the same team, actually.

We have the same politics as them. They even sent them multiple proposals for treaties to Mussolini and to Hitler. And Jacob Stern described himself as a terrorist. He said right here, the group referred to its members as terrorists and admitted to having carried acts of terrorism. So that's how they got a lot of these neighborhoods emptied is they went in and they would round people up and they'd shoot them. They'd blow up buses. They'd blow up government buildings. They'd blow up homes. They blow up schools. These were all things that they did actually do. And even the governments, the Jewish governments recognize this. So it's, again,

Mike Huckabee is just not telling the truth. And it's really, it's really obnoxious that he is, you know, glossing over the truth and in hiding the truth. I think that is in of itself a really despicable act. Yeah. So he talks here and I think they're going to go through it a little bit more, talks about the growth of Christians in Israel. And so I just pulled the stats from Open Doors. This is based on citing Israel's Bureau of Central Bureau of Statistics,

the number of Christians in Israel has been growing, increasing, since the founding of the Jewish state in 1948. However, the percentage of Christians as a part of Israel's population is falling compared to other faiths. The growth rate, they cite, 182,000 Christians, which is kind of what he said, right? That's close to the number he said, 180 something. Thousand Christians currently living in Israel, which corresponds to a 1.9% share of the total population.

In contrast or comparison, however do you like to frame it, when we look at the rate of growth of Christianity in Iran, and I choose Iran because we're at war, right? We're told in some ways that this war is a justification for biblical things, or has a biblical justification we are told. the the Christian growth rate in Iran is 20%. Hmm, that's interesting. So do we think, this is kind of where I go back to what would Jesus do, right?

Do we think looking at, you know, we're doing the chosen on the choice tomorrow at 11 a.m. Eastern time. You guys can join us for the season finale of season two. When we look at what, the things that Jesus does that super irritate his followers, the Samaritan woman comes to mind, right? And like you said, the, you know, the Gentiles coming and falling at his feet and him accepting them and his Jewish followers who are,

leaves themselves chosen and elevated above. And our warrior is coming to liberate us from Rome and set us up to rule over the world the way we were promised, right? They get really annoyed when Jesus is ministering to accepting, healing people that aren't Jewish. But, you know, it's, it, it, he wants that none should perish, tells us that. Through you, all the families of the earth will be blessed.

He came to save the world, not just one people group, came to save the whole world. So when we look at the fruit, people know them by their fruit, when we look at the fruit at a growth rate of 1.9% versus 20% whose side should the Christian be on? And again, I'm out of this conflict. I think that the scriptures are being used to justify a bunch of different men, right, and women, but, you know, using it in the universal sense. the male pronouns in the universal sense, right, for men to justify building their own kingdoms in the name of God. And that is taking the Lord's name in vain. And there will be judgment for that, which is why I don't want to be a part of it.

When God says in Ezekiel 16 that Israel running after other nations and intermarrying and intermingling and accepting their customs and adopting their gods and ultimately worshiping their gods is her harlotry. and that the people that she participates in that with, right? The other nations that she's running after are essentially like her Johns. Why would you want to be one of them? Why would you want to be, well, we have to protect her. We have to provide for her. We have to make sure she prospers. No, you're assuming the glory of God because that is quite literally what she's chosen for

is to show what happens when you live in God's protection, provision, and promise, and what happens when you don't. And when we insert ourselves, in the middle of that exchange, we will be judged for it. Now, the one thing that I, you know, will always caveat is that it, and I've said this like three times already, so, you know, bear with me. whether you're loving her and believing that she's elevated above you and that you have to be, you've got to protect her. We've just got to wrap our arms around her

and get her to the end until, you know, God is ready for her or whatnot. Or you hate her and think she's greater evil than the rest of the world and want her condemned and you're going to be the mechanism of that condemnation. Either way, you are in opposition to God. you are not glorifying God. Yeah,

which is difficult because everybody takes such a rabid, binary position on this issue. And I think that's what Lucifer wants. I think that's the way he set it up, just like we drew it up, right? Draw it up. So it doesn't actually matter if you love her or your hater, as long as you're focused on her and not on God, you're doing

exactly what the devil wants. Are you familiar with the siege of Bayet Sehor? I don't. No, I don't think so. not in that framing. Okay. So Bait Sehor is a Palestinian city. It's a suburb of Bethlehem with a very large,

it once had a very large Christian population. And in 1989, because of policies that were being imposed on Palestine by taxation that was being imposed on Palestine by the Israeli government, the Christian community in this town, which was very vast. It was a very large, powerful, rich Christian community imposed a, what's it called, a boycott on all those really goods. And so here's like the article describing what happened here. But what ends up happening is that the IDF comes in because they were like, this is a real problem.

These people have money and they have political clout and they are organized and they're Christians. and we don't want this to spread. So we are going to embargo the whole town, the IDF surrounded the whole town. They didn't let anybody leave, come or go for 40 days. They cut off the power to the town. They cut off the phones. They seized people's property. The 300 richest families in the town ended up losing all their wealth.

They ended up taking homes from people. They took their furniture. They took their refrigerator. critters. They took their goods. And basically, as it's described, as the town was never the same again. They basically gutted this town of its Christian inhabitants. And many of them left as a result once the embargo was lifted because of the ruthlessness of this campaign that the IDF wage against them. So when Mike Huckabee says this stuff, again, this is 1989. Like, he's just lying. Like there were multiple instances of the IDF doing things to Christian. in Palestine because they weren't Israeli citizens. They were Palestinian citizens driving them out of their homes, driving them out of their villages. We're talking about Bethlehem here. What year are we

talking about this? 1989. Okay. 1984. What point are you making? The point that I'm making is that when he says that the Christians that are prospering under Israel or whatever, he's lying. the Christians were driven out of these places during the Nakaba, which is the 1948 massacre. They were driven out by the subsequent wars, 1967, 1973, the 1980s, 1982, 1989. These wars that happened subsequently that are being waged by the IDF against Palestine are not just being waged against the Muslims, they're being waging against the Christians. And we're seeing the Christian populations dwindle as a result. And then the last thing I'll say is you mentioned 182,000 Christians in Israel, 400,000 Christians in Qatar.

Now, many of those are temporary workers, but there are more than twice as many Christians, at least temporarily living in Qatar, than there are living in Israel. That's the official statistics that Tucker was referencing. Yeah, I mean, all of it is, all of it's biblical, right? I mean, Jesus tells us in the world you will have tribulation, but if you're not, I have overcome the world. You're going to be, if you're doing it right, if you're being, if you're a follower of Jesus and you're doing it right, you're going to be persecuted for his namesake. And that is, you know, the highest honor. So in terms of, I don't, I don't think we reconcile this problem, right? Like, I think the idea that we're going to come up with a suitable reconciliation to the conflict between,

the Jews and everyone else in the Middle East, that we're, that we humans, that maybe, you know, maybe it's the Abraham Accords or Steve Whitkoff is going to crack this nut and solve the whole thing. I, I just don't think that's, that's a serious position. Well, it would certainly, like, we would certainly get a lot closer to doing that if our leaders weren't lying, like, all the time lying about what was actually happening. When Michael Huckabee gets up and just totally misrepresents the situation by saying that Christians are thriving under the Israeli government and, and, and, totally ignoring the history there where the Israeli government has actually sent the military after Christian women and children in places because they didn't want to pay taxes to an Israeli government that was imposing ruthless taxation on these people who weren't even their own citizens. Like that history should be told.

That history should be understood by every American, every Christian should understand that history. And when we are deprived of that history by our Christian leaders, we are being betrayed by our Christian leaders. And the question is why. And my, the only assumption I can make, the only conclusion I can reach is because our Christian leaders, just like Judas, have been bought off. They've been purchased by, but they're deceiving us because they've been purchased, in my opinion. I mean, there's no way that Mike Huckabee doesn't know some of the stuff that he's acting like he doesn't know about. Like he doesn't know about the pedophiles. He doesn't know about, I mean, like he didn't know that Jonathan Poller, like me with Jonathan Pollard was a bad idea. Like he's sitting here talking about the Christians in Palestine and Israel as if like that just totally ignoring the history. Like some of the history I just laid out. That's deception. And it's like, does God engage in deception? Is like, is that a godly thing to do?

Yeah, I agree with you. Now, whether or not he's been bought off and like has been, you know, and get entered into a knowing and willing contract to to betray his faith. right i i i'm not willing to say that i don't know you're right i don't know that either certainly but he is certainly forwarding a position and we ended last week with um him talking about the abrahamic family house which makes bc red um and him talking about it is a beautiful thing i think he's absolutely deceived he is and he is forwarding that deception upon others no question about it. Whether he's doing it because he is sold his soul or because he's, you know, just so deeply deceived by this cult, I don't know. Yeah, like an earnest believer, you mean? Like a condition of the

heart thing, right? I don't, I mean, I guess I guess we could know if there was some transactional thing, right? If there were some receipt of, of a transaction, we could maybe know. But I think Jesus said to know them by their fruit. And I think that fruit is rotten when you consider what he is forwarding. And for those that missed last week, the Abrahamic family house brings together the people of the book. In this interview, Huckabee refers to himself as a people of the book twice from my counting. And the people of the book is this idea. And it's in Christian churches here in America, guys.

Be very careful where you get your teaching from. it is this idea that the the descendants of Abraham, the three kind of religions that have place for the Bible, that have a space for the Bible in their belief system, that they're all under the same God, that they're all, all worthy in that we need to find unity, right? We need to find unity across these three Abrahamic religions. And so what we're going to do is we're going to be. build places together where we can we can all be together and you know we'll have a mosque and a synagogue and a church and we'll agree upon the things we can agree upon we'll just set aside and won't include the things we can't agree upon that is deception from the pit of hell because the thing that they cannot agree upon that they have to set aside is jesus and whether jesus is the final blood sacrifice for the covering of sin jews and muslims don't believe that muslims believe that Jesus is a prophet, right? Jews believe that Jesus is condemned. And the Christians

believe that Jesus is God. So it is not something that as a Christian, you can, I believe, participate in because you are by participating in it denying who Jesus is. And Mike Cuckabee, at the end of this interview, advocates for it being a beautiful thing and more of what we need in the world. Yeah. And, you know, again, I just go back to the fact that like if the truth, if you is operating from a first principles, from a point of truth, earnest truth seeking. He wouldn't omit, like, really, really important parts of, like, the modern history of this region, where Christians have been absolutely brutalized and ruthlessly and very cruelly treated by the Israeli government. If anybody brought that to his attention, he probably would deny it.

He probably would say that didn't actually happen. That's the kind of behavior we're seeing out of him throughout this interview. And that, I think, is such a sinister view, like a sinister thing to do, especially when you're talking about secular governments. You know, it's really gross. Yeah, agreed. All right, we gotta keep going. I made this 1.25. If it's too fast, everybody in the chat, let me know.

Oh, hi, Abby. Abby's here. I love you, Abby. Abby says, Jesus is the way, and she is 100% correct? Hey, Abby. Love Abby. Abby's the best. All right.

That forms the basis of this whole conversation, which is who has a right to the land. And you said it's a mixture of religion and ethnicity. Because as I noted, and you agree, many of the founders, maybe the majority of the founders of modern Israel did not believe in God at all. So they were not religious Jews. They weren't religious at all. They were atheists. They were atheists, I believe them. So that suggests it's ethnic.

But it's also true, as you well know, because there's a famous court case about this, that ethnic Jews who convert to Christianity do not have the rate of return. That was settled by Israeli Supreme Court. I'm very confused. So that would suggest it's not ethnicity, because you invalidate your Jewishness by converting to Christianity. There are a number of Messianic Jews who live in Israel. I'm here. I'm aware of that. I'm aware of that number.

But you're not contesting what I'm saying because it's a very famous court case. The right of return has to do with your mother, your grandmother. It has to do with family. There is a lot of, sure, ethnicity is a big part of the right of return. Great. To make all the I. Then to come to Israel, then live here. Then if I, if both of your parents are Jewish and you have an ethnic right to land,

you are one of Abrams' descendants, but you convert to Christianity. How is it? You don't have the right to return. I'm totally confused. But I know a number of people who have returned as Christians, but have Jewish history. Are you saying that Jews who convert to Christianity have a right, a legal right to return? Because I know that they do, whether when you say do they have a right to return, do they prove? It's a legal category as an in government.

Which is by their family history, their grandmother, their mother, and there are many aspects of that. I've read it. I know that these are people who are Christian and they came here, made Ali-A. they had Jewish blood, Jewish history. They were Christian, messianic, but they came here, and they were welcomed here. And they were given full legal rights here. Absolutely. And a passport.

So clearly, it's not true that you invalidate your right of return by converted Christianity. That's just false. I'm not aware of that. I know that there are a number of Christians here. I go to church with Christians every week here. Of course. But do you have a right to come and say, I am an ethnic Jew, even though I practice Christianity. Therefore, I have every bit as much right to move.

to a settlement in the West Bank or into Eastrus or anywhere I want, Gowley anywhere, because I'm returning to the land of my forefathers of a legal right in the state of Israel, even though I've converted to Christianity. You're saying that's true? I'm saying I know people have done it. Now, can I tell you what the law? He is the ambassador to this country. I'm not sure. Well, it's really significant. I'm not. I don't have any Jewish roots. So therefore, I cannot quote you the law if you want me to do that. I'm sorry. What? I know that there's Christians that.

come here. So do you, I mean, you want me to understand the law? I'm just a Christian. I don't have Jewish roots. I, I, you know, why do you expect me to know the law? Because you're the ambassador to the nation of Israel, the U.S. ambassador to the nation of Israel, and you're the first Christian to ever be in that position, right? First, first Christian to ever be in the, or Christian Zionist, anyway, to be in the position of U.S. ambassador to Israel and can't be bothered. This goes back to the pedophilia thing from last week. I don't know the law. You can't expect me to know the law.

You can't expect me to know the law that pertains to Christians. And here's the part that's most egregious. It's about rights. So in the first part of this, he says over and over again that the Jewish people have a right to this land, the people of Israel, right? Israel has a right to this land. God gave them this land, therefore they have a right to it. And when it says, okay, so if God gave them the right to the land, do the people that have that descendancy that follow Jesus,

do they have a right? And he is dodging the question. He is all over the place. And then comes with, well, you know, you can't expect me to know the law. Yeah, actually, we can. We can't expect you to know the law because one, you're the ambassador to the nation. Two, the nation itself has a profound impact and influence on Christians. So the rights of Christians in that land should be somewhat important.

But now all of a sudden, rights don't matter. Now all of a sudden, rights are what rights? He's going to talk here in a minute of, you know, if they can keep the Irish. we're going to talk about. The Irish comparison, I think, is so great that's coming up here in a second. Do you have anything to say before I hit play again? No, no, no, keep going. I have these cases pulled up, but I don't know if they're worth talking about. But keep going. Well, it really matters because you're saying, in fact, people in the United States are being called anti-Semites.

A lot of them, including me, because they somehow don't believe that Israel has a right to this land. Do you think Israel has a right to this land? No, you haven't defined what the land is. And you haven't defined to Israel, so I really don't know. It is the land they're living in now, the borders that they have. The borders are moving. The borders have moved in the last year. What do you mean the borders have moved?

Well, they are the 1967 borders, I'm including, you know, the west. Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria. What are the borders of Judean Samaria? Well, you basically take the Jordan River, and it's west of the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, to the Lebanon border. And Israel did have control of the Sinai. They gave that to Egypt. They had control of it. Right.

They gave it away in 1979 in the peace agreement. But, okay. So whatever you call it, the land that was taken from Jordan in 1967, you call it Judean Samaria, there's a significance to that that I don't fully understand. I'm against it. It's the biblical. It's the biblical. 80% of the Bible happened in the Judean Samaria. But we've also established that the Bible gives Jews the right to occupy the land from the Nile to the Euphrates.

So I'm very confused by why we've shrunk the land and why we're dismal. Israel has shrunk the land. They have made that decision. That's why they gave away God's. They gave away the signs. They've given away a lot of things. Abrams descendants are the ones who have the right to have this land, correct? Yes.

Okay. Why don't we do genetic testing on everybody in the land and find out who Abrams' descendants are? It's really simple. We've cracked the human genome. We can do that. Why don't we do that? Would you be against doing that? I have no idea what that would prove.

I mean, maybe it would be. What do you mean? It would prove who Abrams' descendants are and who has a right to live here and who doesn't, according to the theology that you yourself just explained. And so I'm very confused as to why we don't do that. If you believe the theology that you've just explained to me, would we do that all over the world? This is the only country in the world that you've said has this covenant with God,

that this people have a moral and legal right to the land. What about people who convert to Judaism? Would they have a right? Well, you've just, you've just said there are not. So you just told me, they can make Aliyadh, they may not have the DNA. I guess we should talk about these. three cases, these three core cases. You have the cases or the laws? I have the laws. Do you have the cases? I have the cases. So the three cases are the brother Daniel case. Rufisen is the guy's last

name. That's from 1962. In that case, a Jewish man from Poland during World War II hid in a monastery for over a year from the Nazis during the time converted to Catholicism and then used his position at the church to save people in Belarus from the Nazis. And then after the war ended up becoming a monk. And so as a Catholic monk, he tried to apply for the right of return in Israel in 1962 and was denied. And then ultimately in the Supreme Court ruling, they said no, because you decided to become a Catholic monk, you are no longer a Jew. So you've been denied your right of return. The second case is the Shalit case.

What year was that first case? 1962. And the second case is the case of Shalit. And this is where a says that Benjamin Shalit in Israeli naval officer married a non-Jewish woman. He asked the government to register their children as Jewish by nationality in the popular registration. the Supreme Court ended up ruling in his favor because basically in the nationality part of like their registration, he said they're Jewish rather than saying whichever country they were born in. And so the Supreme Court ended up siding with him despite the fact that the mother wasn't Jewish. And so it says as a result of the ruling, the ruling caused a major political crisis.

Israel's parliament needed amended the law of return to define a Jew after this case to define a Jew a Jew as quote someone who is born to a Jewish mother or converted to Judaism and does not belong to another religion. That's the amendment from 1970 and it's section 4A rights of family members quote the rights of a Jew under this law and the rights of an OLAE under the nationality law 5712-1952 as well as the rights of an Olai under any other enactment are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew, and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew except for a person who has been a Jew and has voluntarily changed his religion and then Section 4B. For the purposes of this law, Jew means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism. and who is not a member of another religion. Yes.

And so that last part, I think, is the part that they added where your mother had to be Jewish because that was the big argument with these kids. And so the last one is the Arrestford case from 1989. And this is where a group of people, a group of Jews converted to Mezzionic Judaism. And then when they tried to practice, when they tried to apply for the right of return, the question was, well, wait a minute, you're actually not Jewish, you're a Mesootic Jew, you believe in Jesus, and so that led to a Supreme Court case, and ultimately the Supreme Court denied them citizenship and said, because you believe in Jesus, you are actually of a different religion than Judaism, and therefore you have no right to citizenship in Israel. Yeah. That it doesn't matter, you told me moments ago, trying to keep track.

Okay. That it doesn't matter whether or not you believe in. God or whether or not you practice Torah Judaism or rabbinic Judaism, which is something else that I don't even know if we should, I don't even know what that means. But it doesn't matter whether you're quote a religious Jew or not. What matters is that you are part of the Jewish people to whom God gave this land that extends from the Niles of Euphrates. And so if you believe that, wouldn't you want to know with a burning passion who those people are? And because of science, we can now know who those people are. So why aren't we finding out? I guess you could propose a,

DNA test for everybody who comes here, everybody who lives here. I'm comfortable with secular nation states where none of this is done on the basis of blood. I'm uncomfortable with that. I'll just say that. But there are people who may not have bloodlines, but who have converted to Judaism. Are they going to be able to live here? You're going to kick them out? By your standards, they can't live here. No, no, no, no. They have a right to live here because God gave them the land because they're the descendants of Abraham.

They're the descendants of Abraham. But if they're the spiritual descendants of Abraham and they've now decided that they're converting to Judaism, that's heretical that converting to Judaism in 2026 makes you the spiritual descendants of Abraham you know the the discussion we were having earlier about what you know the covenant and the the covenant made with Israel there's one thing that I think is not in dispute and that is that they can't practice Judaism biblical Judaism you can't practice Torah Judaism because it requires the temple and the Holy of Holies and the Ark of the Covenant and the mercy seat and the blood of the spotless lamb. You can't do that. So they have a whole bunch of other things that they do. But here, Mike Huckabee is claiming that if you convert to Judaism in 2026, that makes you the spiritual descendants of Abraham. I think that's heresy. And I'm happy to debate the ambassador about that. But that is that that that's kind of where we got. I think you had a video. I don't know if we'll play it today, but you had a video of him talking about Judaism being the root of all morality. But you could say the law, right? God's

law is the root of all morality, but you cannot equate God's law or the Torah with the Talmud because they're at odds in many respects. And you cannot practice the Judaism of the Bible. You don't have the tools or the mechanism, the ability to carry that out. And so, This part of this is particularly enraging to me. Yeah, I would agree. They have a right to live in Israel? Well, there's a whole... The other thing that I will say is that there's a whole bunch of different organizations.

One of them is tack right citizenship. Tech right? Like I'm conflating it with that chainsaw company that we had as a sponsor. But first right citizenship kind of thing. And I know this is happening right now. because they approached my child to come to Israel. And you can take your trip, your special trip to Israel. This was in a chat.

My son said, but I'm not Jewish. And they said, oh, you can convert. So they're approaching Christian youth and offering them things of value. This is going to come up and be important here in a few minutes. Offering them things of value to deny Jesus and convert to Judaism. So if a Christian converts to Judaism, as Judaism exists today, they convert it. That means they are denying Jesus. Organizations in Israel are encouraging young Christian men and women, girls and boys, to do that and offering them things of value in exchange for it.

legal literature in Israel on that question. And my understanding is that certain types of modern Judaism qualify a person and other types don't. Is that your understanding? I don't believe that people converted, and I could have this wrong, but I know people who face this person to the people. I don't believe people who've converted in a reform synagogue have the right of return. I don't think that is because I know people who've married into Jewish families and they find

know they don't have the right of return so that is perplexing to me yeah i know you know my experience is a little different than yours i know people who have definite jewish connections uh family relations but now they're christian some are not necessarily practicing jews they're not they're more secular jews as you've discussed but they come back here okay i'm not against that i'm just i'm just wondering since you have since you began this conversation by asking me did i think they had a right to come here yeah that my question was on what basis do they have the right Right. And you said because God granted it. And I also said because there should be a land where Jews could live in peace and safety.

And I asked you what a Jew was and you couldn't answer it. You said it partly is religious but doesn't have to be. It's partly genetic but it doesn't have to be. And so that you can see why I'm confused. I think I was very clear that being Jewish is an identification either through blood or through faith that you're Jewish. It may be that you're a blood Jew, but you don't necessarily practice Judaism just like there are people who say they're Christian, but they don't do a thing to demonstrate what Christian. There are a lot of bad Christians, including me,

of the time, a lot of the time, but I don't have a right to real estate on the basis of my claim of Christian. You don't have a right to real estate if you're talking about a specific parcel, but if you're talking about a land, I think what we're talking about is, that's all I'm saying. And there was a designation to the family of nations of the world that there would be a Jewish homeland. Let's get to that point, because I think you've taken us on several trails here, and I'm not sure we can follow them all. I don't think that's true. Do you think that's true that Tucker has diverted this conversation on a bunch of different trails that are not relevant to the point? Not at all.

No, I think it's all smack dab in the middle of the point. He's just very uncomfortable about it. Exactly. But is there a reason that the Jewish people that represent, and I want to get back to this because you didn't let me finish while ago, they represent 0.2% of the world's population. In the entirety of the world, there are about 16 million Jews total. And 8 million of them live here. The rest live mostly in New York or South Florida and a few other places.

Okay. So this is a small population of people. They have connection to this land. Historically, biblically, do they? Yes, they do. If BB's family, we know they lived in Eastern Europe, there's no evidence they ever lived here. He's not religious. But in what sense is, but ancestrally, do you have his family tree? No, we don't.

Do you? He doesn't. So no one does. That's the point. So how do we know that he is any connection to the friend at all? And if there has been a practice of Judaism and a connection to the language, the Bible, the land. His ancestors didn't. he doesn't practice Judaism in any rigorous way.

His ancestors didn't live here. They didn't speak the language, and there's no evidence they ever lived here. So in what basis does he ever write to be here? Very much speaks the language. He has fought for the land. His family has fought for the land. I feel like they're dodging a very obvious question, which is where does this right come from? And the reason it's meaningful is because there are a lot of people in the territory that Israel controls today, particularly in the West Bank,

who through genetic testing, we can know their families have been here for thousands of years. We don't know whether they practiced Judaism, whether they were Samaritans. pre-Islam. We don't know that. A lot of them we know have been Christians for 2,000 years. They have less of a right to the land than someone whose ancestors, the only thing we know about them is they lived in Latvia or Poland. They're Eastern European. How does that work? They're Jewish. By what definition? They're Jewish by their... But how do we know they have any connection to the use of the Bible? They're Jewish by the connection to the language, Jewish by the connection to the Torah?

But how do we know that Beebees, specifically Beebe's ancestors ever live? lived here. How do we know that? I'm not sure if I understand your question. How do we know if the Prime Minister of Israel's ancestors ever lived? Maybe I could ask you, how do we know they didn't? It's on the basis of the claim that they did that all kinds of things happen. People are displaced. There's a money flow. I mean, it's a big question. A lot hangs on this. It's not some theoretical thing like, oh, do my grandparents do this or do that? It's like, no, no, we have a right to be here because my ancestors were here. Okay, how do we know they were here? I'm totally unable to process what you're trying to get at. It goes back, do Jewish people have any land on this

planet that should be theirs to give them? I feel that way about all peoples. I feel that way about Jewish peoples. I feel that way about... Okay, then you don't mind them having this little... Is there any, is there any country, let me ask you this bluntly, is there any country that European peoples have a right to exclusively? I think they have attained their land through conquest. I mean, let's ask ourselves... Has the Britons attained their land through conquest? Or they've always been there the romans the greeks no let's speak no let's well you can certainly say that here the romans the romans controlled this as you know and they expelled they don't anymore amen i want them to control it hope i'm anti roman okay we're on the same page okay but my question is

very simple is there any european people that possesses the same right to their land that the jews including people whose ancestors lived in eastern europe possess here the britons we know the british people the british people their ancestors have been there for thousands years that's provable through genetic testing. Do they have a right to their land exclusively? Is anyone saying they don't? Yes. Of course. Yes. No one will say they will and I'm asking you do they have that right?

And I'm not sure what that question involves because no... He doesn't know how to answer it. He doesn't know what the approved talking points are so he's dodging it. That is my read on this. This is the third time I've watched this and I've never been more confident in that position. He continued to dodge this question

not because he can't fathom it or even comprehend what kind of question you're asking because the question is pretty straightforward. He's dodging it because I don't think he knows what answer is approved by the people that gave him the talking points for this interview in the two-big-a-month. It really is mind-blowing that a guy who, like, has been to Israel 100 times in the past 50 years. 100 times. That's not hyperbolic. That's what he said. Yeah, 100 times. He said over 100 times, which means twice a year for 50 years. and has spent this much time opining about it publicly

has not done more like research and like is just prepared for an interview like this it blows my mind that he did he was not better prepared to at least bullshit his way through this yeah well I think probably part of it at least was he was expecting

the Tucker Carlson that debated Ted Cruz to show up and Tucker Carlson is way better in this interview than he was in the interview with Ted Cruz. I mean, I was banging my head against a wall when he, you're both retarded. And they're both retarded here in this too. But, but he's Tucker Carlson, 10xed his ability.

And I think that, that Huckabee thought he was going to be debating Ted Cruz as Tucker Carlson. Yeah. My ancestors, by the way, lived in Israel. And so I expect 40 acres in a mule from the Israeli government at some point. Yeah, you just have to deny Jesus and they'll give it to you. Yeah, right, right, exactly. That is the, who do you say that I am?

Know them by their fruit. A condition to inherit the promise of God is to deny the Messiah? That's not, that's not from God. You can't prove that I didn't live in Israel, guys. You can't prove that I didn't live there. Of their homes. But here, hold on, you just, why won't you answer that question? Because I just did.

So the Irish people have the same right to their land that the Jews have to have a biblical connection. Okay. But I'm a Bible believer. Okay. So that is. But it's also a principle. And that is, and you've said it 15 times. Sometimes people have land because they were able to attain it through war.

They were able to attain it when it was challenged. I understand that. There's all kinds of conflict. But we can't say that about the Irish. The world borders change all the time. Actually, the borders of the island of England have not changed. Nor, nor. But the island.

Ireland. Those are just two examples. So you've got the indigenous people there. do they have a moral right to that as their homeland? And I think they would probably say, yes, we do, because we have anxious history to do it. I've never thought about whether they... Now that I'm raising the question and you spend a lot of time thinking about the right of the Jewish people to their homeland, do the Irish have the same right to a homeland?

As long as they can defend it and as long as they, you know... As long as they can defend it. But Tucker, here's the point. Wait a second. Wait, hold on, hold on. Now you just flip out. You're the minister here. Yeah, and I'm telling you...

As long as they can defend it. And if they can't defend it, you're not allowed to tell. That's crazy. It's crazy in terms of... how it compares to his position on Israel, but it's also crazy from an American reading of rights.

And he is the American ambassador to Israel. Yeah. This guy was the governor of Arkansas and ran for president multiple times, including against Trump in 2016. Like, this guy ran for president multiple times and has never thought about this. He's never thought about like the rights of nations,

the rights of people. Like how all that, like, where does that come from like what you said the the the great migration flooded the western nations of the world with refugees right yeah climate war whatever refugees but people people yeah people with different different um morality worldview ways of life uh we've seen that here but when it comes to what's happened to the UK and the flooding of of brown people with different values into the UK and changing their culture, it has been profoundly impactful. And to your point, this guy was running to be the world leader for the most, the most powerful

world leader in the world, right, the president of the United States. And he's never thought about it. He's never thought about the great migration. He's never thought about the rights of Western peoples to hold on to their lands, to have a right to their lands. He's only thought about this in regards to the one nation biblically that is proclaimed to have this right. And he sees that without equivocation, can't answer any question that might undermine that argument. But he's never thought about it as it pertains to any other. Nation, now, this is a very, it's a very Christian Zionist position to believe that Israel is distinct.

You can't treat Israel like any other nation. You have to treat Israel as the separate chosen nation. It is idolatry. You have to idolize it and worship. You have to set it apart and set it aside and treat it differently. Yeah, I mean, it's just this Irish thing. It's one of my favorite parts of this interview because it's just such a mask off moment. And also, I think you're right.

I think he's lying. I do think he has. thought about these things. He maybe doesn't have a coherent position on that on it. And if he doesn't, idoltery. I mean, the entire first Trump presidency, like this was like the debate that was raging online was like, does Europe have the right to its countries or, or do these Muslim invaders have the right to come in and kick them out and, you know, set up Sharia law? Like this was a major, just pointed political discussion that was happening all over the place, including

within the Republican primaries. And you have to imagine that so many people in the Republican establishment share this guy's view, no wonder they sold us out. They don't give a shit that that foreigners have come and stolen our land from us and stolen our country.

They help do it. They help facilitate all that. They don't give a shit. They don't give a shit. They'll go defend Israel, you know, for whatever reason, but they don't give a shit that America is being destroyed. Because God will curse them if they don't, remember? Yeah, yeah.

It's that unbelievable. Grave apostasy. I think that what is very, very special here is that there is a biblical, as well as an ethnic, and a historical. So you can take anyone, but if you add them all together, biblical, historical, and ethnic, you have a very strong case that the Jewish people are living in a land that is indigenous to them, that has been their historic homeland for 3,800 years. You can repeat it as.

And you can also look in the archaeology. the stones cry out. Okay. You've been to the city of David for example. Okay. So you know then that. And I love that. It's amazing place. It may be the greatest archaeological discovery in all of history. It's great. It's stunning. And they still continue to find things that date the Jewish people to this land archaeologically for 3800 years. We can we can date the Britain, the British people to their land much longer, much thousands of years longer. Stonehenge is 3,000 years older than any building built by the descendants of Abram in this country. And so I just, it's fine. Yeah. I'm not. not trying to invalidate anyone's right. I'm just wanting you to affirm that right, but it makes you uncomfortable and you won't, and I don't know why. Because I've never honestly sat down and asked myself, are the lines around the United States? So we know what the lines are. I'm saying, but are

those lines? Are those rooted in something other than the historical connection? Well, great, then they should have it. But they have a right to have it. But then you said, if they can defend it, and if they can't defend it, they lose the right. But I didn't say it was exclusive one of the other. I think you're really going off the trail. I just want to know if these principles apply universally or if they only apply to the people of Israel. For the Christian Zionists, they only apply to Israel. And my answer appears to be just the people of Israel. They're the only ones with these

rights. And I just reject that. I didn't say that. But Christian Zionists that are not, you know, the ambassador in the region who has to watch what he says, Christian Zionists do believe that. They believe that Israel is separate, that the land belongs to Israel because God gave it to them

in the ancient world through the covenant with Abram. And that yes, they are different. You cannot treat them the same way that you treat any other nation. And this is the reason I keep hammering on this is because he's not being honest. He's not being honest about what his position is. Now, maybe he can't because he's sitting in that region of the world. And some of the stuff he already said drew international condemnation as we talked about.

Right. So maybe he can't say it. But it is important to realize that the person claiming to be the representative for Christians in that nation, right? That he is not being honest. Yeah. Yeah. It's really scary, actually, that these people work at the highest levels of our government, because I agree with Tucker and some of the other statements he's made that I think they would

100% side with the Israeli government over us. If anything were to happen, they would say, well, it's the government of Israel saying this, so you're actually wrong. and whatever, yeah. And Rebel Nader says ignorance is simply not an excuse in his position. I think he's claiming ignorance, but I don't think he's actually ignorant of these points. I think he's pretending to be ignorant because he can't answer the way that he wants to because it might result in World War immediately if he does.

Yeah. We are talking about Israel. We're in Israel. We're talking about Christian Zionism because you've made some disparaging statements about Christian Zionists. You've apologized for him for him. which I appreciate. And now we're trying to define Christian and Zionist. And it seems like we've gone way, way off of that.

As you suggested, as a former debater at the outset, I'm trying to get to terms and a common understanding of what the words mean. And I'm no closer to that than I was when I began. You're not closer to the term of Christian? What that means? I think it's someone who follows Jesus. And that's my next question.

There are a lot of Christians in the West Bank. And there were a fair amount of Christians in Gaza. And some of them have been killed. There were 5,000 in Gaza? Yeah. And two different churches were hit by the IDF. Christian Hospital was hit seven times by the IDF. And I don't understand.

They were not hit seven times. They were different. I know. And one of the times it was a rocket that was shot by Hamas. And all the news agencies reported that the IDF shot the rocket. Did the IDF ever hit the hospital or the churches? They did. Why?

Accidentally. And they apologized for it. And it was very unfortunate. But I also, you got to. Every time it was an accident. Remember, there were times. Hamas often hid caches of arms under hospitals

Were you bothered by the fact that the IDF hit Christians? I'm bothered that anyone got killed in Gaza But you know why I'm bothered? You're a Christian minister Because here's the thing Can't say that the Christians are Islamic extremists No, but I can say that the reason to decide

With the Christians over the secular government of Israel But I would look at it even more broadly I would ask you this Why was there so much suffering and continues to be suffering in Gaza? It's because Hamas Which could have built a Singapore, built a Hold on. Pause it.

Before we get Before we get to this, this little rant, he was just beginning to justify bombing hospitals. He was just getting, he was just beginning to justify it. He goes back to it. He goes back to it. He does actually justify it eventually. Yeah, but I mean, I mean, he was saying, well, did you know how mosque was had tunnels underneath the hospitals and the churches? It's like, so wait a minute.

So you're saying that there actually is a justification in certain scenarios for bombing a hospital or bombing a church. We had to. We had to, Ghost. There were weapons under that hospital. And so, you know, the fact that Hamas put the weapons under the kids, it's not our fault. We had to bomb it because of the weapons. I mean, it's almost an admission that they intentioned. So first it was, it was an accident every time, every time a hospital, a school, et cetera, Christian church.

Every time that they are hit, it's an accident. But also, did you know, sometimes they have to be bombed because there's, weapons in those hospitals and churches. And that just begs a whole bunch of questions. What is the calculus? What's the tradeoff? What's the decision of deciding to actually pull the trigger? Go no go on the bomb, right?

Go no go on the military act that's going to happen. Is the go no go? Is the calculus? There are children there. There are children. There are sick people. That's a hospital. That's a school.

whatever, right, there are children there? Is that part of the calculus? Or is the calculus there are weapons under that facility, whatever it is? So we have to blow it up. And the fact that there are children there, well, it's there. It's Hamas's fault.

I can understand the argument he's making. I think it's immoral. I think it's a deeply immoral argument. And that's crazy when, you know, Judaism is the root of all morality, right? We're told that. So this is the root of all morality, bombing children is the root of all morality. That's crazy talk. It's absolutely crazy talk. And I don't

understand how people go along with it. I think it's unbelievable that people go just nod their head and say, yes, this is God's will. These people had to die because God wanted them to die. I suppose that's the justification. I don't know. But that's crazy. It's absolutely crazy. And yeah, war is war. But you know, blowing up churches in hospitals and then saying, well, we had to because. Yeah. They put the weapons in there with the kids, so we had to kill the kids. That's the argument. And, you know, you can say, and some people do, some people don't, some people do.

And some Zionists, right? Some Zionists don't. Some Zionists do make the case that, well, the weapons had to be destroyed because the weapons were such a massive threat to Israel that we had to destroy the weapons. So the fact that our mission, our operation that we drew up to go in and destroy the weapons, the fact that it kills children, they're not Jewish. They're not Jewish children. They're not Israeli children.

So it's fine. Yep. That's pretty much, pretty much as I understand it, the justification. It's the argument he just made or is about to make. You're not sharing your screen. Oh, sorry. I'm going to back it up just too few years. Fair amount of Christians in Gaza, and some of them have been killed.

There were 5,000 in Gaza. Yeah. Yeah. And two different churches were hit by the IDF. Christian Hospital was hit seven times by the IDF. And I don't understand. They were not hit seven times. They were different.

I know. And one of the times it was a rocket that was shot by Hamas. And all the news agencies reported that the IDF shot the rocket. Did the IDF ever hit the hospital or the churches? They did. Why accidentally because and they apologized for it and it was very unfortunate but I also you got to remember there were times Hamas often hid caches of arms under hospitals were you bothered by the fact that the IDF hit Christians? I'm bothered that anyone got killed in Gaza but you know why I'm bothered? You're a Christian minister because here's the thing can't say that the Christians are Islamic extremists.

No but I can say that I would expect to decide with the Christians over the secular government of Israel. But I would look at it even more broadly. I would ask you this why was there so much suffering and continues to be suffering in Gaza. It's because Hamas, which could have built a Singapore, built a Haiti. They had a landmass the size of Las Vegas. They built tunnels underneath that are larger than the London underground, over 500 miles of tunnels. They didn't build it to move people from one hospital to the other, one marketplace to the other, but to hide terrorist, to hide weaponry. And in October the 7th, they went over there and they massacred 1,200 civilians, massacred, mutilated, humiliated them. You're never going to get me to defend Hamas.

Sorry. Please don't. I'm not going to. But I tell you, I'm a bald by. How many civilians have been killed by the IDF in Gaza? We don't know. What's your guess? Well, the only numbers we have come from this dubious entity called the Gaza Health Ministry. You know who that is? Well, what does Israel have some kind of count on it? We also know that a lot of the people who were killed were in fact warriors.

Sadly, how many kids were killed? We don't know. What's your guess? I don't know. I'm sure it was thousands. And it's thousands of many kids were killed. Some of the kids who were killed had been recruited to be in the military. Kids as young as 14 years.

kids. Do you hear yourself? I just said that there were kids as young as 14 that were recruited to be Hamas soldiers who were given arms. How do you feel about the kids being killed? I think it's horrible. You know what I also think is horrible? You realize why he uses 14, right? Why is that?

The age of 14, because in Judaism, you're an adult at 13. Ah, okay. I think it's horrible. The 1,200 people were slaughtered by people across the border. 252 people were taken hostage 48 of the 1200 were Americans and then when all lives equal when Hamas could have ended this on October the 8th and given all the hostages up they didn't leaving no choice you're never going to get me to defend himas I'm not pro Hamas I'm totally opposed to slaughtering innocence whether Hamas does it or whether the government of

Israel does it in much larger numbers and the reason I'm opposed to it is because i'm a christian and I believe that all souls are created by god I did don't do not disagree with that wholeheartedly But I said how many children have... I do not disagree. All souls are created in the image of God. I do not disagree with that wholeheartedly, but... War is a horrible thing, period. And we don't know.

We know that a lot of the numbers were reported by Hamas. You said you think thousands of children have been killed. Yeah, and a lot of times, you know why they got killed? Because Hamas would gather up the children and put them in the targets. Do you know what Israel does? They send page messages and they send texts to every cell phone in Gaza. and they say we're going to hit this particular target. They drop leaflets and they announce where they're going to hit.

Nobody does that. The U.S. doesn't do that. Israel does that in order to prevent. Let me finish this. They do this in order to prevent civilian casualties. What Hamas does, they say, oh, this is the target. And by gunpoint, they push people into those various places. And then when people get killed, they say, look, Israel just slaughter these people,

even though it was Hamas who moved them into harm's way, knowing that it was going to put them in a place of danger and death and destruction and they do that because they don't care. You say you care about life. I care about life. It's interesting that they don't care about life. I'm not saying that Amas does. You're never going to get me to defend Hamas. I'm good. I'm anti-Hamasa. I said that three times and I believe. Your dig at the United States is very revealing. Why is it revue? Okay. So this is where he says, permit me a moment of outrage. Anything to add to that segment? I think we get through. Let's go through this part to around this whole segment

with the moment of outrage after this and then we'll probably wrap up for. Yeah, yeah, I probably only have about five or ten more minutes and I got to jump off. Okay, we can stop here if you want. Yeah, it's a good part to pick up next week because they're about to change. They're about to change the topic about the, you know, he says the dig

at the dig that you make at the Americans. And he is basically talking about the the IDF being a more moral military force than the U.S. military. But we'll pick that up next week. So, yeah, man. I mean, it's sort of enraging. I mean, it's beyond sort of. It's entirely enraging.

Yeah. Yeah, it is definitely enraged. In the name of the, you know, claim, claim to be doing what you're doing in the name of Jesus when you slap Christian on it. And it's very unchristian. It is for the glory of Israel and not for the glory of God. That's my final thought is that the part of this that we watch this week really brings to life that what is happening with this movement, with this ambassador. And in the, I mean, I don't claim to know what's happening with this Iran conflict that we're in right now. Some people are saying it's biblical.

There is biblical support for Iran, Ilam, coming in. into the promise of God, coming to know Jesus. There is biblical support for that. As we talked about, the growth rate of Christians in Israel is 1.9%. The growth rate of Christian, as a percentage of population, growth rate in Iran is 20. What is it that we want? We want every knee to bow, every tongue to confess that Jesus is Lord as Christians. We want to be the hands and feet of Jesus.

this and what would Jesus do? I don't think it's this. So glory of Israel versus glory of God. That's my key takeaway. I'll let you have the last word. Yeah, no, I would agree with that. I think it's, you know, Mike Huckabee's absolute failure to even address the questions that Tucker was asking, which I think were very fair, kind of just highlights the deception that we're all living under because we're not even getting an honest, earnest dialogue. Like the conversation isn't even happening. Like there's no real, this is the closest thing we've ever had to like an actual conversation on this topic.

And I do applaud Mike Huckabee for agreeing to the interview for that reason. But we'll probably never get another one like this. I don't think anybody else is going to be volunteering to have this conversation again. Yeah, this is the conversation we have to have. Yeah, yeah, because this is the way it went. Look at how it went. It did not go well for Mike Huckabee's side. And I would invite anyone who thinks that they can do a better job than Mike Huckabee to step forward.

And please, let's have the conversation. It's not about humiliation or ridicule. It's just about understanding, hearing the sides. And if Mike Huckabee and his side thinks that they are the righteous actors, they shouldn't be ashamed of their position. And they shouldn't be like omitting or hiding facts that are inconvenient to their argument. Like, just present all the data and then let's just have a, have a discussion about it, you know? I do. So I think I'll leave with Jude four, the verse that I refer to a lot in modern times, particularly as it pertains to people who claim to be acting in the name of God. Jude is one chapter.

So, you know, Jude four is the fourth verse in the one chapter. For certain people have crept in unnotice who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only master in Lord Jesus Christ. Another translation says, turned the liberty of our Lord into a license for immorality. And that is, that is, that is, that is what we see is a lot of people using the name of God to build. And I'm not saying that's the Jews. Definitely not making that case. I think it is Mike Hacobie. I think he is perverting the grace of our Lord to justify very immoral things, know them by their fruit.

And we have to be careful as Christians. And, you know, I'm predominantly speaking, well, I'm only on this point, only speaking to Christians. When you come into that relationship and you have the blood of Jesus and you have the helper, you're kind of without excuse. And so you have a duty, I think, to understand what would Jesus do? And again, the core question, the only question that matters is who do you say that I am? And if you love Israel and you want Israel to receive the promises of the Bible, then you need to pray that Israel comes into a relationship with Jesus.

And that is, because that's the only way they can be reconciled for their sin. I'll leave it there. We have a couple of rumble rants. Thank you guys. You know, we're doing this largely without ads and without any sort of monetization. Ghost and I are doing this because we want to. So we appreciate the support, AKA Liu. Thank you again, Ash and Gordon.

Love this, learning a lot. And One With Katz says, thanks for this breakdown, finding it very educational. Appreciate that. And we appreciate you guys. Thanks to the rants, guys. Yeah, absolutely. And with that, I think we will get out of here. And if you want more related content, tune in tomorrow at 11 a.m.

for the season finale of season two of the choice, chosen. The chosen is season two. It's not the finale of the choice. It's a finale, season two finale of the chosen, which we'll be discussing on our 16th episode, not counting the Christmas specials of the choice. So that's tomorrow at 11 here on Badlands. And when are you back after that? One of those shows, do you have?

Friday at 2 o'clock, 2 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. That's geopolitics of ghosts. Right on. All right, guys. Please hit the like button. You can also find both of our positions on all sorts of things in the Badlands News Brief every single day, every Monday through Friday, every single weekday. Badlands.com. Totally different experience over there in the substack.

So if you're not signed up, you're not checking out the substack, we definitely appreciate. We would definitely encourage you to do that and appreciate all the support over there. All right, we're going to get out of here. Hit the like button. Thanks, everyone. Have a great week. Thank you so much for joining us. And don't forget to hit the thumbs up on this video.

And a special thank you to all of our advertising partners. Please remember to shift your dollars to support those businesses that support Badlands Media.