Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 651 | End Times & the Fight for America’s Future | Guest: Steve Deace

Episode Date: July 28, 2022

Today we're talking to our friend Steve Deace, BlazeTV host of the "Steve Deace Show," about some deeply theological and political subjects. We start with a discussion on eschatology and where Steve thinks we are right now in terms of the end times. And, Steve gives historical context for what's going on in America, and we discuss whether or not the West will actually survive the "Spirit of the Age." To that end, we talk about how to succeed as a Christ-centered movement while also having allies that we disagree with on big topics like the definition of marriage. Lastly, Steve tells us what he thinks the next 10 years will have in store for America and the West as a whole. --- Today's Sponsors: Annie's Kit Clubs — all subscriptions are month-to-month, & you can cancel anytime! Go to AnniesKitClubs.com/ALLIE & get your first month 75% off! HealthyCell — get 20% off your first order at HealthyCell.com/ALLIE, use promo code 'ALLIE'! Blaze Socks — get your Blaze patriotic socks at BlazeSocks.com, use promo code 'ALLIESOCKS'! --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise – use promo code 'ALLIE10' for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this Steve Day's show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.

Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. I've got a treat for you today. I'm talking to one of your favorite guests. And that is Steve Dase. Per usual, he's bringing the fire. We're going to talk about eschatology, aka the in times, where he thinks we are in the timeline of eternity. where he thinks this country is and what we can do realistically about all of the problems that we are

facing. As usual, this episode is brought to you via our friends at Good Ranchers American Meat delivered right to your front door. Go to good ranchers.com slash alley. That's good ranchers.com slash alley. All right, before we get into that conversation, just a couple things. If you love this podcast, please leave us a five-star review wherever you listen. Subscribe on YouTube if you haven't already. Don't forget, we have lots of wonderful merch. You can see that if you're watching on YouTube, you can see the stickers, my razor respectful ruckus, Millennials Against Low Rise Jeans. Politics Matter because policies matter because people matter.

And of course, be a salmon. Tell me what you think our next sticker should be because I have this nice little space right here on my laptop that really actually bothers me, that I want to fill with another sticker. We've also got T-shirts and we've got hats. We've got other fun things coming. we'll link the merch in the description of this episode. So check that out. And if you haven't listened to the other episodes from the beginning of this week, do so because they're really important. But without further ado, here is our friend, Steve Days. Steve, thanks so much for joining us. Typically, we were talking about the news of the day. But today I want to talk more big picture. Give us your assessment of where we are and the timeline of eternity.

That is a fascinating question because I have held, I think, in the course of my walk, every, all three of the major traditional historical eschatological views, the premil, the ah mill, the post mill view. And I think there are theological merits to all of them. And I frankly kind of dismissed a lot of the premil view for many years, mainly because I just thought it made people nuts. and, you know. And the sense that people were constantly waiting for Jesus to come back.

And I never really understood with the sentiment of conspiratorial sinister notions attached to your eschatology. I mean, don't we want Jesus to come back? Like I remember there is a, I don't, it's not my show. So I won't mention John Hage's name. but I watched a video of his oh I just did I'm sorry I watched a video of his several years ago where and it was all Bush was still president and it was about so this was really soon after my conversion okay and I'm reading and watching everything you know I'm trying to learn I'm trying to be transformed by the renewing of my mind I mean I'm like I'm neck deep I'm watching and listen

every podcast every show I watched everything on TBN I think I finally recovered from that Okay. And so I watched this video from Hagee talking about Iran building a nuclear reactor and they're going to attack Israel and this will be the war of Gog and Magog. Okay. And I found that be fascinating, right? Yeah. Then the second half of the video, though, was Hagee telling us to lobby the Bush administration to preemptively bomb Iran so that they don't and blow up their reactor so they don't attack Israel. And that got me to thinking after I watched this, Sally. So wait a minute. This is it. This is, 6,000 years of recorded human history. Yeah.

All right. The proto-evangelian is going to finally be fulfilled. Christ will return to ultimately put his foot on the neck of the serpent once and for all. Cast him into the lake of fire. We don't want it. But if Bush bombs Iran, the whole thing is off. Yeah. All right.

And God's like, whoa, didn't see that coming. Yes. Blindsided. Yes. But I will say the last couple of years, really. since March 16th of 2020, I have found myself many evenings alone in my man cave after everybody goes to bed watching pre-millennial eschatology videos on YouTube. And it's not that I am isogetically interpreting my eschatology through the lens of events of the day. It's that the way my mind works,

it's very logical. And so things need to seem possible to me, even fantastical things, otherwise I won't grasp them. And I can finally grasp the notion that should there be, a rapture-level event. The denial and mass formation psychosis that would take place from those who remain after the fact, we've lived through that with COVID. And so

I have found myself newly re-intellectually curious about that particular view. That's a long-winded answer to say, I don't know. I do know where we are historically. We are on the precipice of the end of Western civilization,

which has had numerous names. It used to be called Christendom, but we're on the precipice of that. We are really the last outpost here in the U.S. So you don't believe the pendulum is swinging back theory? No. I think there will be revival or bust. And I think bust can take several different forms. I think what I see is more and is more of a French revolution sentiment, you know, more of a vol populie and with with one angry mob, replaced. the other one and this is the sense of urgency that I have with my audience and when I go speak around the country is I am an ugly American. I prefer Taco Bell to authentic Mexican and I'm

I can tell you any day of the year how many days it is until the college football season begins. Okay. I love the accoutrements of being an ugly American. I greatly enjoy it. I like complaining about the fact that Gaston moved me to a hotel that was 15 minutes further away and so I had to shower earlier and I got to complain about that. Okay. I love that stuff. All right. So when I say this, I say that with this in mind. I want to continue to chill and do the ugly American thing. But the idea that they're going to say to us now, we're going to chest bind your daughters. We're going to castrate your sons. We're going to, your votes aren't going to count. we're going to drive you out of using a car into a vehicle that technology you cannot afford

and can't recharge on the road and can't drive even if you could afford it more than 300 miles on on a highway in a given day. You're not going to grow your own food. You're not going to eat meat. You're going to eat the crickets. We're going to have no borders. You're going to be overrun by illegals. The idea that the people who own 200 million guns, Alley, are just going to sit in

their homes forever and say, you know, I guess that there's just, we just sit here and take it. That's not history. Yeah. And so I think we have a window right now to re-instill the values of the American Revolution. If we don't take advantage of that, what does that look like? What rights come from God? No, but like how do we get there? This is where platforms like what we possess here and churches that understand and know what time it is,

those sorts of institutions in different, in different, you know, criteria, of course, You're dealing with one that is a specific spiritual institution, and we're more of a specific informational institution. But this is where your alliance of Patrick Henry's and Thomas Paines come together and recognize what time it is. And that if we're going to stand up to what was the spirit of the age in their day, King George the 3rd, that it was going to require appealing to a higher power than the people. And that's where divine providence, the governor of the universe, our rights come from God.

We have no king but Jesus. Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. Okay? There you go. And we have a window right now that we can, I think, unite a very unique coalition around those themes. If we miss it, what will happen is the French Revolution will occur. And that's where an angry mob rises up against the aristocracy and throws the church in with the aristocracy because the church never delineated itself from the aristocracy.

and we bring out guillotines and we get rid of the Virgin Mary in the Cathedral of Notre Dame and replace it with the goddess of reason. We don't want to happen. We don't want the reign of terror to happen. Yeah, we don't want that to happen. And I think we're about a generation away from that. If we don't, if, you know, you're a new parent, I'm an older parent. My kids are now getting married and getting ready to grow up and I'm going to be a grandparent

in the next few years. If we don't aggressively and peaceably use the remaining institutional liberties we have to push back on this spirit of the age. I fear we're going to sentence your children and my children and grandchildren to having, according to what history says, to confront this unpeaceably. And I don't want that to happen. And so I'm on, that's my mission right now is to try to rally our people to aggressively confront this. Yeah. But peaceably. Here's my question about the coalition, because you talked about this kind of broad coalition coming together, pushing back against all the destruction that you're talking about. You mentioned chest binding daughters, castrated,

sons, all this craziness that is being pushed upon us. But you also talked about revival, our rights coming from God, no king but Jesus, which I agree. Those are the principles of the pushback that we're talking about. But it is not, these are not the principles of a lot of people that we are linking arms with. I mean, there are people like our colleague, Dave Rubin, that we agree on on very important things, but on other really important things, like this concept of gay marriage, we don't. So how. How? do we partner effectively with people who do not align with the principles that we believe are integral to an effective pushback? What does that look like? So this has been one of the biggest

debates in a post-Reformation world. When Christianity was democratized post-Reformation, a lot of these questions weren't debated between Augustine and the Reformation because Rome was the center of the Christian universe. Yeah. And it was deeply embedded and aligned with the culture from the formation of the Holy Roman Empire to push back against the Muslims to the time of the Reformation. Post-Reformation now, this gets democratized. And a lot of these dilemmas of early Christians in the first and second pre-constantine centuries that they had to navigate, these questions suddenly come into the fore again. And we had some groups like Anna Baptist. We know them today as Mennonites and Amish. They said, we have no place for cultural engagement at all. And they

completely just retreated essentially from that world, right? The doctrine of the separation of church state actually, as we know it today, actually came out of the Reformation from guys like John Knox who were concerned about the intertwining of Rome with government and how that could put down Christian descent. And so these arguments have been had before. I bring up this history to give your audience confidence. This isn't new. It's going to be new to us in America. But in the history of Christianity, this has actually been far more of the challenge because we've never had a society that was inspired and founded on Christian principles before like this one was. So it's new to us, but it is not new. So let's look through history. And what I encourage people

to do is to divide things into three different realms. What we can receive, what we must redeem, what we have to reject. Okay. So there are the things that God's word are very clear about. We must reject those things, regardless of who they come from, how much we like everything else, a particular person stands for when they when they move into an area that god rejects we don't condemn them necessarily individually but that particular vestige of their activity behavior out activism worldview we say that's a no-go for me can't do that and here's why in fact i have to oppose that i'm fine still being with you on everything on the other things we agree with but on this one i am going to oppose you and here's why then there is what we must redeem what is very like an

institution you mentioned marriage that clearly is divinely inspired, has been completely warped and distorted by the spirit of the age. We have a duty as ambassadors of Christ to redeem the things that come directly from him. And so those things I think are pretty clear too. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Marriage is also a gift of common grace that even society. cultures that do not follow Christ, understood.

Wow, there is a difference between male and female. This institution and union is important for the perpetuation of humanity and for the stability of society. Correct. So that is something that even if someone doesn't agree with the Bible, it doesn't have the special grace that comes from Christ, they should be able to understand, especially a conservative, should be able to understand this has to be preserved for us to get everything else that we want. Absolutely correct.

And then there's what we can receive, the customs of the community or the country and the culture in which we're in, taking part in those things that may not have any specific redemptive value, you know, here in the state of Texas, high school football and a Friday night is a ritual, right? So taking part in the high school program in my community that everybody's a part of and going to the games and being a part of that. I mean, as long as I don't make it, you know, I don't have that replace my responsibilities in life, getting deeply embedded in that as part of my relationship with the culture. I can receive that as long as it doesn't become an idol, right? And I think when we do those things right, then you run into situations like what happened with Dave.

And what's funny, though, is after that whole ruckus, I saw a clip where Dave was at a conference with a couple of non-Messianic Jewish thinkers and Sir Rob Omari. And he was specifically asked, should America return to being a Christian country? And after working his way through it after a while, he eventually came to the conclusion that the answer was yes. And it was because of the recognition of the common grace or as it was, known to our founders in the Blackstone era, natural law, as, you know, the recognition that that still is the best way to live. And that is why Dave is awesome, by the way, because most people cannot separate what they see as their identity or something as personal as sexuality

and a union from the kind of objective and logical knowledge of where our rights come from. And that is part of why he can be great to partner with on this, because he has. still able to see what is true even when we disagree with him on something so fundamental. I absolutely agree. There was a very eclectic, unique coalition formed in 1776. Yeah. I mean, Thomas Payne would have kind of been your secular libertarian of that era. And if that culture was capable of producing something like that, because it was not a secular culture in any way, he would have been the closest.

He would have been far more friendly to notions of the French Revolution, all right, than the American Revolution. You had devout Christians like Patrick Henry, Benjamin Rush, right? You had great thinkers who had a myriad of religious views like Thomas Jefferson. For their era, and for the context of the latter 18th century, that was about as diverse and eclectic of a group of thinkers there in Philadelphia that summer that you could possibly amass. And yet they recognized that ultimately there was a law higher than them that they had to appeal to. and they all didn't recognize and agree necessarily why they had to appeal to it, okay? But they recognized that that law existed. Here's the advantage they had over us.

They weren't better people than us. About a third of the people that signed that document about all men are created equal went home to their slaves. Right. Okay. They had sin, there are founding fathers that are unredeemed that are in hell as we speak. Okay. There were challenges amongst them.

But the thing that the meta challenge, they lived in a pre-Darwinian world. So the idea that believing human nature was basically good in progressing to some ultimate good wasn't even on their ideological palette. They would have debated how holy and righteous and involved is God. Is God a kid with an ant-hill, theism, basically. Is God directly involved, the sovereign of the universe? So they were debating the nature of God, which caused them to lift their character up. Right.

We debate the goodness inherently of man, which causes us to drop our integrity and character down. That is the summit that we have to overcome in our era, is that level of, that influence of human nature being basically good is the biggest challenge that we have to overcome. Gosh, that's so true. And also, they all believed in some kind of transcendent authority. They believed that we came from somewhere, that our rights came from somewhere. They at least believed in Providence. That's why they often called God Providence. And so that is a debate that is at least contained in some kind of idea of moral order.

Today, as you're saying, we have a much more fundamental disagreement. Are we cosmic accidents? Are we created by a God who put us here for a purpose? Who says who we are and why we are here. What right and wrong is, what good and bad is, what good and evil is? they weren't having that fundamental debate then. We are having that fundamental debate today, which is why we are so polarized, ultimately. It all goes back to a difference in what we believe about human nature, as you said,

a difference in what we believe about morality and truth. And that is also a little bit of why I don't fear this kind of broad coalition that you're talking about with people who are just like anti-woke liberals and those of us who are truly conservative. I'm not saying that I fear that. But I am a little bit concerned. Say we push forward together these people with the different perspectives but are generally against the same things. My question is, are we going to agree on what to build from there? Because I do think some of the people who are anti-woke liberals or they're against critical race theory and DEI and things like that, but they're generally still left wing.

At the end of the day, I do think that they kind of hate people like you and me. Like they still think that they're better than people like you and me. They're still a little bit more open. So are we going to agree on what the future really looks like and how to build that and what the foundation is? My fear is that they think that we're just going to be able to go back to 1995. Right. And I just don't think that that's possible. So that's a little bit of my concern.

I agree. And I also, though, think we have one fight to fight at a time. The argument you're talking about, I'm looking forward to that argument. Yes, that's true. We're now having an affirmative one. Right. Now we're on offense. We're now having.

We know what we're against. Yes. We don't want that. We are having the argument about, well, like the founders did. Right. Is God a kid with an anthill? All right? Or is he directly involved in the sovereign of the universe?

We're in an era right now. And what you articulated has been the longstanding challenge on the right. I've often said that the Republican Party, for example, is not a big tent. It is a big tarp. And there's a difference. A tent has stakes in the ground. so that the center will hold. A tarp is just a temporary covering that you go to to escape the external conditions.

Democrats get elected. Here comes the acid rain. All non-communists run under the tarp. This is why Republicans are, well, they used to be until recently. The greatest minority, I can't even do that right now, the greatest minority party of all time. Because everybody was united on, that is terrible and we can't go there. Then Republicans would win and get majorities,

and they couldn't govern because people did not fully agree on what now to do in And so there wasn't a tent. There wasn't stakes holding it in the ground. It was a tarp. And the center then wouldn't hold when too many people would get underneath it. So that is a longstanding challenge on the right. The biggest challenge we have right now is cultural survival. Because you used a word a minute ago that I think is very key, and that is transcendence.

The founders came out of an era where the pagan societies of Europe were still written about in history. books, all right? Men like Boniface, you know, evangelizing the Norseman, St. Patrick evangelizing Ireland. These things were still contemporary history books from the last few centuries in the era in which they lived. So they understood what paganism was, which was a perversion of transcendence, but an appeal to it nevertheless. But it's a perversion of it, but it's an appeal to it. We are arguing with something today, I would have said 10 years ago, today's progressives are really just, it's just the old paganism, re-hashed. We're going to go back to a pre-Western understanding of the world, okay? Right. Now we've, we have quickly devolved. It's nihilistic now. It's demonic now.

What's the difference between pagan and demonic? The pagan understands and recognizes the need for or the, or the worship of transcendence. Again, it's a, it's a warped, perverted version of it, but they appeal to it. The nihilist, so you get somebody like Ein Rand, who thought, you and I were morons and idiots. It comes up, though, with her own philosophy called objectivism because she recognized, as a pagan, there need to be something. So she's asserting a lot of our thoughts from a common grace or natural law perspective. She just called it her own philosophy, right?

We're way past Eden now. We're way east of Eden now. We're over the cliff. And now we're going straight to the demonic. There is no transcendence. You do you. You determine your own gender. You determine your own identity.

You determine your own truth. be like God. We're actually now, we went so far past Eden, we're actually now back in the garden. I was about to say. We've done an inverted 180 demonically. And that's where we are right now is the truth is chloroformed in this culture. Wherever you go, it's a truthless society. And the idea that you would appeal to a unifying truth, I remember when I went back and did

the original research I did on masking during COVID at its height. and I found every study that had ever been done on masking since the Spanish flu till about April of 2020 all showed they never work. And I remember thinking to myself, I'm going to go on the air and present these. And people, I'm going to, my, this is good. People are going to love me for this. I mean, they don't want to wear these things. I'm going to free people. No. I got, except from our own people, I got the exact opposite react. How dare you take my shibboleth away from me? How dare you invade my space, my truth, that there, is no jurisdiction beyond your own. That's the language of Lucifer. Isaiah says, I will quotes the devil and says, I will become like the most high. I will ascend. I will be God.

And that is what we have in our culture today. And that is a culture. And when it gets to that point, Allie, it is at the two minute warning of the game. Yep. I wrote about in my book the exchange of the God of Scripture for the God of Self. And that's what it is. It's kind of an oxymoron to say self-transcendence, but that is kind of what they believe. Our national symbol used to be a bald eagle, all right? Oxymorons with no self-awareness whatsoever. Right. That's the national symbol today.

Right. Exactly. And it leads to every kind of moral perversion and cultural conflict that we have, this idea of the God of self. I also, I talk about my book that when you worship yourself, of course you determine your own truth. You believe that you're perfect. Any failures or any flaws that you have are just kind of seen as quirks or maybe something that you inherited from trauma or because of society or the patriarchy or because of capitalism. But really inside,

I mean, you talked about that post-Darwinian idea that we are inherently good and that we can progress towards something better. Women are hearing this every day that if we just, if you dig deep enough inside that that perfect goddess can be manifested and that perfect goddess really believes what your gender is, who you're really supposed to be. I can have Vogue and Proverbs 31 at the same time, that kind of stuff. Yes. And so it really is dangerous, but it's being packaged, I think, to women in a way that is not really political, but in a way that sounds liberating, that you are, you can become your true self, you can become your own God. But it is just a reiteration of how Satan tempted Eve. You can be like God if you do this, women are believing the same lie today, but people in general are. I mean,

that's how we have gotten to where we are. And the men are back to the garden now. Yeah. I mean, the entire time Eve is being tempted, where is Adam? Yeah. He is right there. Yeah. He has been, he has been bestowed vicar of creation on God's behalf directly by God, literally, like God took a sword, all right, and said, all right, Adam, Neil, all right? Yeah. And knighted him, all right, vicar of creation. You will rule in my place. You are lord of this creation. All right, small L, you will name the animals.

I give you dominion. You may now go and subdue it, go fruitful, multiply. You have dominion over this creation. And at any point does Adam assert that headship while Eve is being tempted? No, he is passive the entire time. And then when his passivity is what ultimately leads to the fall, because he doesn't step in as God's proxy in this situation, He does not step in.

He then turns around and tries to blame the woman for his failure when he is confronted for that passivity by God. Does this not what is playing out in our culture today over and over and over again? Over and over and over again. There's nothing new under the sun, Alley. There's just new people under the sun that haven't heard it yet. And this is where we can take,

back to a previous question you gave, this is where we can go to this broader coalition and make our points in a way that they would understand. if I believe human nature is basically good and is therefore progressing to an ultimate good, when I see things in the Constitution like a general welfare clause, I will turn that into a good ideas clause or a best of intentions clause, right? And I'll just, I'll greatly expand the definition of that because I'm basically good. So I can decide what general welfare means.

I can, I can decide how general that welfare should get as a, opposed to if I admit going in that I am not basically good, there is a God and I am not he, she, or it. I'm not God. Then I will then have a humility that will cause me to wonder, what does general welfare clause actually mean? And when the people wrote that phrase, what did they mean it to mean? There's all kinds of things about the Constitution that we warp today. Yeah. And that a lot of this broader coalition wants to reign back in. But this is where we can provide the context. The reason this needs to be reigned back in is because we are acting as if human nature does not need to be reigned back in. And that is what John Adams meant when he said

this constitution is only for a moral and religious people, a people that would recognize there is a God and I am not he and therefore I should be more humble in the thoughts that I have about how to govern myself. That's the entire basis of self-governance. You can't have self-governance if people are not voluntarily constrained to some kind of transcendent moral order. You need tyranny if people are unable to constrain themselves or be constrained by God. And that is, of course, where we are headed. With the moral anarchy and the chaos that is being waged by the spirit of the age, we are asking for some kind of order.

We're asking for the government to tell us what to do, to give us a talisman, like the mask, to show us what virtue is, to give us identity and purpose. That's part of why we are where we are, which is also part of the reason why it is so egregious for people who identify as Republicans to vote to codify something like so-called gay marriage. All right. So now you've abandoned this idea that there is a God who creates truth, who creates order, who creates morality, who gave us our rights, because that God also defined marriages between a man and a woman. So you're actually abandoning him as the authority, which you're. who are abandoning him as the giver of rights, which now, okay, now the government is the giver of right. So you're basically in the same exact position as a Democrat is. And people don't kind of

seem to understand that connection. They think conservatism is just freedom to do whatever you want to. That's not the basis of conservatism or the basis of America. So tell me what it looks like then to kind of build this broad coalition, to have like this kind of big tarp party where you're protecting the anti-communist, but also to call out, you know, the ineffersonals. You know, the ineffectiveness or the hypocrisy of the Republicans and the conservatives who don't understand the moral order that we're fighting for? Do you think it is like counterproductive to criticize the people that are on our side 80% of the time, but against us 20% of the time? So it depends on what's in that other 20%. Yeah. Okay. I mean, when Reagan famously coined the phrase

you know, 30, 40 years ago, the person who's not my 80% or the person who's my 80% friend is not my 20% enemy, it meant something different because we all understood most of it was going to be in that 20% were not convictions but positions. It's the convictions that are in the other 20% now. So we have to reject that. I would actually argue, you know, I know I mock it a lot on Twitter, but just as, and I have not been a registered Republican for like eight years, okay, but when people ask me about a third party, I often will retort, have you tried a second party first? Okay. instead of the uniparty that we have. Yes.

I mean, I actually would suggest we try a big tent. We have actually not tried it. We have just tried a tarp. We have tried a loose coalition of shared grievances without any actual shared affirmations of what to do when our grievances win the day. What do we do instead? Okay. And so I actually would suggest let's try a tent.

We put some stakes in the ground. Okay. you don't necessarily have to within there are some things obviously if you're into harming children on any level you're out okay or innocence on any level you're out but within those stakes if you're willing to live under those stakes you can have your own different views you can go your own certain ways ultimately there is a jurisdiction we're not god either we don't want to create an inquisition we want a lawful society not a tyrannical one okay let's put a few stakes in the ground and say these are our non-negotiables.

Everything else, we're totally fine negotiating with you on. In fact, even if you disagree with us on our non-negotiables, on a few of our non-negotiables, if you're good on our other non-negotiables, we still have a moral obligation to stand for those things at the exact same time, right? So, I mean, even if, let's go back to the Rubin situation again. And let's say that situation, his... Or CPAC. Or CPAC?

The, you know, Marshall App. Let's say the situation with, but I like using Dave because it makes it personal to our audience and it also shows them that we're willing to hold ourselves accountable to the way we do everybody else, right? Let's say the situation with David deteriorated to the point that there was a separation between him and us, formal, like on a business level, relationship level, it deteriorated at that point. But let's say, though, he continued on the path he was on in so many other areas. As believers, we don't have an, we just like I don't, I can't, I can't,

compromise what I believe to affirm Dave. I can't compromise what I believe to condemn him either. The absolute works both ways. I mean, that's why the Bible refers to itself as a double-edged sword, all right? It's piercing you at the same time. It's piercing internally as it is others externally. One of the things I love about the book of Romans, I think it's the greatest single theological treatise in the history of humanity. It is Paul, it is intellectual zenith with the inspiration at the Holy Spirit. But there is a rhythm to it. Almost like every other or every couple chapters, it's almost like he can sense, yeah, you're getting a little haughty as I'm destroying every argument against Christianity. So I'm going to turn this around on you now, Christian,

and see, you know, like Christ does to his disciples, will you desert me too, right, at the feeding? And so even if that, even it had come to the point of a formal separation, that, the relationship was no longer tenable because of this one issue. We would still have a moral obligation to stand with Dave when he was standing with moral righteousness, even if he no longer wanted to fellowship with us. You see what I'm saying? It was. It was. works both ways. And I think what we don't do well is what I just said, that. All right, we, and so this is where we fray our own coalition. I have no problem saying Donald Trump was a historically good president on immigration, on foreign policy, and on energy, the three things right now that are

existentially threatening us as a society and total upheaval. I also have no problem saying he was cosmically bad on COVID, which opened the door for them. to take power and then threaten us on these other things. Yeah. Okay? And so I know a lot of people want to know, are you with me all the time? No. Are you against me all the time?

No. And that's a very Christ-like existence. The same Christ who during the day would go and confront Pharisees to their face at the temple. When Nicodemus comes to him as a Pharisee in the dead of the night and has earnest questions to ask and really is a seeker of truth, he doesn't say, hey, weren't you one of the people that I just slapped around earlier today? No, he says, come on in.

All right? I think that's what we need to do well. We need to hold the line at both ends of the line. All right? I will not compromise what I believe to affirm you, but I won't compromise what I believe to condemn you. Russell Moore is no more righteous than Robert Jeffers. They're the same guy.

Robert Jeffers turned his church into a shrine to Donald Trump in America. I love America, but I don't go to the church of George Washington, and neither did he. by the way. All right? So I'm not an American idolater. I am fine if God judges America and we go away because we deserve it. Blessed the Lord giveeth and the Lord take it the way. Blessed be the name of the Lord. Now I'm not going to create a self-fulfilling prophecy and just say, since we deserve it, I'm not going to engage, you know, like the classic veggie tales where Jonah just grabs the drink and sits by and waits for the sulfur to fall on Nineveh. I'm not going to do that either.

Okay. But Russell Moore now saying, well, Trump doesn't deserve credit for appointing the justice of the Doverturn Row. That is idolatry. All right, Cheeto Jesus doesn't save, okay? And Orange Man isn't always bad. These guys are not on the opposite side. Russell Moore and Robert Jeffers are the same guy. Also, Russell Moore, I know this is not really the point of what you're saying. He knows better.

He was saying that Alito was a George W. Bush appointee. Okay, we understand that, but it wasn't just him. He's not the only one who wrote the opinion. Obviously, the majority is thanks to Donald Trump and whether you like it or not, Mitch McConnell. And how did we get Alito? We got Alito because that was one. was the first time the Republican base truly rose up in opposition to George W. Bush. He was going to appoint his pal Harriet Myers to that position instead. That's how we got Alito

is the base said, no, no, no, we want somebody who is a certified, no more David suitors, no more stealth candidates, we're never doing this ever again. So even his presentation is deceitful on multiple levels. All right, the same pastor who says, who misinterprets Romans 13 to say it means we must submit to government no matter what it does to us. It doesn't mean that. That's a heresy. As is Russell Moore, though, he's denying Romans 13 when it says, give honor to whom honor is due. Give honor to the public official to whom honor is due. Trump is due honor for appointing those justices. To deny him of that is every bit as heretical as to teach Christians that they are to submit to anything a pagan government commands of them because that's what Romans 13 is saying.

That's not what it's saying. Yeah. Yeah. That's exactly right. Wow. There's a million other things I could ask you, but we don't really have time. Okay, where do you think, realistically, the next 10 years looks like as far as the political and cultural scene, do you see us pulling the pendulum back? What does it look like 10 years from now?

Maybe give us an optimistic and a pessimistic vision or just your realistic one. I really think, and I don't believe my generation is more. morally superior to the boomer generation. Yeah. Gen X. Gen X. Yes. But I think whether boomers are willing to accept retirement and allow another generation

to take over will be a huge portion of your answer. And here is why. If you were, if you're over 50, the minute Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, and I'm close, I'm close to 50, okay? The minute Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, it was 1986 all over. again. Vladimir Putin is a fiend. That's why my parents' neighborhood, which I'm sure is filled with boomer

Republicans, has Ukrainian flags everywhere. It's 1987 all over again. It's 19. And you can't see, you don't know what time it is anymore. It's the same time it always was. And that's where we have to be sons of Izacar, men who came to King David, who understood the times and what to do about them. Every generation has a tap out moment.

When it's your turn, you guys had a great run, and it's time to move on. the idea that we just there's no more silent majority anymore and the country can't afford our silence any longer we gotta be loud right okay so get out of the idea of a silent majority I'm just gonna sit around and watch Fox News all day long and all night long

and then I'll wait and vote Republican to save me the red wave there are some of our some of our boomer friends God bless them they're gonna be in camps with their grandkids but they'll be patting them on the head saying I'm telling you the red waves come in to save us any day now we have to we need a generational changeover

so that our tactics and perspectives are refreshed. We've got even people within our own network saying, you hate America if you don't want to dump another $100 billion down the Ukraine rat hole. All we've done is enrich Vladimir Putin. His country is wealthier than it's been in eight years. He has more prestige on the world stage. Everything he wanted to happen has happened. And we've crippled ourselves.

But again, if it's 1987 and I'm still watching Rocky 4, if eyes can change, then news can change. If I'm still watching Rocky 4, I don't see that. We have to move on and see the era, not for the era that we thought it was or it used to be for what it actually is. That's where I think, you know, everybody's tried to solve the riddle of Ron DeSantis. Yeah. Where does this guy with this, did he get, you know, testicular fortitude injections?

What, is he, did he, I mean, who does his Bible studies? Where does it really come from? You know, I really think a lot of it is just a basic craven understanding from, because a guy from another generation who's like he's like he's like we got to like slap pie we got to start knocking some skulls yeah we're post argument here we're not arguing with these people anymore we have to confront them and i think if you are just in an era where we before we were post argument you're having a hard time adjusting your and it doesn't mean you're bad it just means every generation has a tap out moment and i think our ability to to aggressively but successfully confront this will

largely be determined by whether the generation that has shown it cannot do it or doesn't understand how to do it will move aside so that a generation that's at least willing to try it will then step into that void. Every audience that I talked to, I just talked to Moms for Liberty a little bit ago and they're an organization started last year, 37,000 members now because of- I see all their stuff on social, man, they're awesome. I mean, they raise a respectful ruckus. And I gave basically like a rallying cry, speech to them. And it's so interesting how much this resonates to people today saying things, which I absolutely believe is true, like anyone who stands between us and our children, we will remove from power. Period. Period. Strip them of their authority

and their titles and their self-importance. And there is nothing that can stand in our way. And we are pushing back and we are fighting back. And we're not going to stop. We're not going to stop. People want that. They want people to fight back. That's why they like Ron DeSantis because he is going on the offense. And I know a lot of boomer Republicans may seem uncomfortable with that, but I also know boomer Republicans who are for it. They like Donald Trump because of that. They like Ronda Santis. And they're like, you know what? I am tired of this. They've got their grandkids. And they're saying, hmm, I also don't want my granddaughter to be, you know, have a chest binder or my, you know, grandson to be castrated. And so it's possible also for that generation

to wake up. But I agree with you that the leadership does not come. from the 70 and 80 year olds. It was never meant to, by the way. Right. It was never meant to. It'll be a major surprise if it's Gen X that is like leading the way because you guys are sometimes the forgotten generation. We are because we were just chill, man.

We just sat around in our flannel listening. When we went to college, you got Pearl Jam's 10 and Nirvana's never mind as your orientation packet, man. You just sat around and you chilled out, you know? It gave us a lot of good music. So I'm thinking for that. So did the boomers, by the way. So did the boomers.

Maybe the best era of music if we're being on. So did the boomers, but millennials are to think for Justin Bieber and can really anything surpass that. I don't know. And Taylor Swift. No comment. I've already offended the older generation. I'm going to have the younger one try to like me as long as I can.

No, I'm just kidding. I'm with you on the 70s to 90s music. That's almost everything that we listen to in our house. So I'm with you there. And I am for your, I don't know if I can call it an optimistic vision of the future, but it's an empowering one. And I think that's how a lot of people feel right now. Yes.

We believe that Jesus is coming back no matter your eschatology, but that is not me that we sit in our hands and wait. That's not why we're here. Right. So thank you for that. Thank you for the rallying cry. Tell everyone where they can find you. Tell them about any projects that you've got your new movie, the many, many books that you've written, all that. Yeah, we've got. So I don't know when, can I ask, when is this going to run? Because that will determine what I say next. Okay. So we are finishing right now a movie based on my 2016 book and nefarious plot. We're in final post production. It is actually the story leading up to the book, which is about a demonic takeover of America. It's screw tape letters, but not about the individual take down demonically, but a cultural one by a demon general from hell named Lord Nefarious. And in our movie, you will learn where Lord Nefarious comes from, where the book manuscript comes from. It's kind of a prequel that leads right into the book. All right.

And so we're finishing the post production on that right now. And then we'll begin working on distribution for the film. Had several major studios offer us distribution deals, but we decided we wanted to finish the movie first because they might try to exert some kind of control over the content if we sign the deal before the movie was done. So we're very pleased with that footage, though. This will not be your grandmother's Christian movie.

Okay? This is going to be, and you might be too young to remember these days, but this would be like if you grew up reading the Frank Peretti novels, which in evangelical subculture, that was the horror stuff your parents let you read. All right? Imagine a Frank Perretti novels. Peretti book. You can't read Harry Potter, but here. Yes, yeah, but here, read the real stuff about demons taking over, yes. But this is like if a Frank Peretti novel was written into a film, and that's what this will be. Yeah. And I think it's going to be, it'll be very faith-based, but it'll be very aggressive. Well, I must have missed the casting call for that. I know that you've seen my acting abilities with Elizabeth Warren.

I got to tell you, next movie that you make, I'm here. I'm ready. I'm ready for auditions. I'm glad you brought. that up, sister, because that was not a parody. That was an impersonation. I was like, I hope you don't move to a cul-de-saccon by a Subaru anytime soon after I saw that. You, that was too scary of the neighborhood, Karen. I kind of got a little freaked out watching that, actually. Yeah, well, unfortunately, I know, I know a few. And I just, I just had that, I had that wig already and it was just perfect and ready to go. So, well, thank you, Steve, so much. I encourage everyone to listen to your podcast. Your podcast is one that you don't just get informed. There are a lot of podcasts you you can listen to and get informed, but there are a few podcasts that actually make you smarter,

and that is yours. Wow. That's the best compliment you could give me. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Yep. Thanks so much. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos.

If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.