The Pour Over Today - TPO Explains | What Is War?

Episode Date: April 4, 2026

Readers of The Pour Over pick a topic to have explained, and Jason or Kathleen have to get Joe, or in this case, our very first and very special guest Jonathan Pokluda, host of Becoming Something podcast, to understand it in less than 30 minutes… This week, Jason and Kathleen are explaining war. Looking to support us? You can choose to pay ⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠ Check out our sponsors! We actually use and enjoy every single one. Cru Wild Alaskan HelloFresh Safe House Project QAVA CCCU Upside Mosh LMNT Bible Gateway Plus Life Application Study Bible Unto Compelled Podcast I Choose Love

Today's episode is brought to you by our lead sponsor, Crew. Hey, I think we just dive into it. We are here with Jonathan, J.P. Pekluda. He is a pastor at Harris Creek in Waco, host of the Becoming Something podcast and his true claim to fame. He is the number one all-time referer to the poor over. Welcome, JP. Thanks for coming on. I knew it.

I knew it was number one. Yeah. And I still have nothing to show for it. But that's okay. That's what, well, you get a, you get a look at Kathy and all her, her swag. Yeah, that's a privilege. Somehow, Kathy got all of my gifts. I don't even get it.

It doesn't make sense to me, but whatever. Well, J.P., you are our first guest, so bear with us as we fumble through whatever having a guest on this podcast looks like. And we figured we'd lobby a softball. We're going to talk about what, what is war? What is it? When is it war? Yeah. Listen, in my world, that is a softball.

You could have been like speaking in tongues or transubstantiation. War, we'll take it. So, Kathleen, why did we pick this? Okay. We've been writing about the conflict in Iran. When it first started, we spent not an insignificant amount of time talking about, can we call it a war? The writers were kind of going back and forth, trying to find other ways to describe it,

using the word conflict a lot until one of our writer's stuff was like, I think, I think we just have to call it a war guys. Like, it's getting weird that we don't call it a war, which kind of just brought up what's the threshold for calling a conflict a war. JP, as a, I'll say, avid consumer of the pour over will project that title on you. Do you, I'm assuming you did not notice when we went from calling it a conflict to a war. Do you notice any of that stuff with the poorover or think about how we're framing things like that. A word choice. I don't know any of that stuff.

I'm not sure what constitutes that. But no, I mean, just to answer the question as far as that particular case, I did not notice that you went from calling it a conflict to a war. Yeah. When you're thinking about stuff like that ongoing throughout the world, do you, are you cognizant of how you use the terms? I mean, I've had the question, like, hey, is this a war? And people are like, hey, this is, you know, you hear a lot. in the conspiracy circles of this is going to be World War III. And so then that kind of, I think, engages my brain of like, well, at what point is it a war?

And there's conflict in the Middle East, really, and it has biblical ramifications from that time, from the Bible times. There has been fighting over there over land. And it's the land that, you know, it's the promised land, really. is where the fighting is happening. And so all of that tends to get interest from believers, Christ followers, Christians. And then on top of that, you have prophecy. People are texting Ezekiel and, hey, this is end time prophecies. And Trump is short for trumpets.

And they're making strange connections trying to insinuate, you know, in times prophecy and whatnot. That's kind of the world I live in where, sure, wars and rumors of wars is what it says in the scripture. Right. Yeah, we, some of those people have our email too. Yeah. We hear from them. I bet.

All right. So what is war? I'll pose that question both you. I'll give us a tighter definition. But JP, what, what's war? Military conflict between governments. That's good. It would be my short.

Yeah. My short definition. I mean, honestly, my gut reaction would have been. like if two parties are shooting at each other for an extended period of time. Yeah. And, you know, I would say, so there's two things. There's the common definition, which is what you guys have described. Like, hey, there's explosions, troops, conflict, and its two countries, hey, this is a war.

Then there's the official definition, which is in the U.S., war is something official that is declared by Congress. and the tension is that everyone, including Congress and government officials, uses the common definition. But then there are these moments where they'll be like, this isn't a war. And we've seen some of that with Iran recently. This war is not a war. Right. Yeah. Like that's almost the sentence verbatim that you have heard.

And yet everyone in the Trump administration, Republicans, Democrats, liberal, conservative outlets, everyone uses the term war. So has Congress declared war? Well, let's get into it. This is, so this is my next question for you. When is the last time that you guys remember Congress declaring war? I'm not up to date on congressional transcripts. No, no.

Is it the Gulf War or Desert Storm? Okay, okay. So let's play a little game. Is it war? We'll go through history. We'll start way back. War of 1812, is it a war? Yes. Well, it feels like a trick question, so I'm going to say no, because I'm a contrarian.

Hey, that's a good instinct. You're wrong this time, but keep that gut instinct as we go through these. The war of 1812 was Mexican-American war? Was it a war? No. I'm going no. Yeah, another war, and this was a declared war. You led me astray.

You were like, keep that mind. You should have said, but wait till after the next one. So you get the annexation of Texas from the Mexican-American War. All right, Civil War. Go with your gut here, JP. Is it a war? Not a war. And interestingly, so this was law enforcement action.

And it was not a war because to declare war, you have to have an opposing government or nation that you're declaring war on. And the whole position of the union, which is you guys are both Southerners. She's from Alabama and you're down in Texas. But, you know, so my position as part of the union and not the Confederacy is that it was just rebellion, insurrection inside the country. And so we couldn't declare war. Declaring war would have been like legitimizing the opposing stance. The Confederacy. You guys are trying to get me canceled, man.

Civil War is not a war This is the end This is the end of any influence I have That's right All right, I'll go through the Spanish-American War Was a war, World War I was a war World War II War War

War, okay Yes, now we move into What about the Korean War? Not a war, no way Not a war Vietnam I don't know now I mean it's in the name

So again, this is the tension. That's the tricky thing. That's how they get you. Yeah. They call it, they name it a war so that you know it's not a war. They didn't call it the Vietnam kerfuffle. Right. And literally there are official monuments that is like monument for Vietnam War veterans.

Not a war. Interesting. And we keep going. I'll give away the punchline. Gulf War, Operation Desert Storm. War on Terror. Not a war. That was a authorized.

use of military force. War in Afghanistan, another not war authorized use of military force. Iraq war, same thing. Iran, it was, Iran is thus far simply a response by the commander-in-chief to an imminent threat, not a war. Hey, it's Zan from the pourover. I've been making a purposeful effort to eat more seafood because I know it's packed with nutrients and I feel better when I do.

but finding quality seafood where I live is a feat. That's why I started ordering from Wild Alaskan. They deliver 100% wild caught, never-framed seafood like Coho Salmon and Pacific halibut, straight to my door. It comes perfectly portioned and frozen right off the boat, locking in taste, texture, and nutrients like Omega-3s, so it's both delicious and super easy to prep a quick, nutritious dinner for my family. My first box from Wild Alaskan Company definitely made me realize,

Not all fish is the same. Get seafood you can trust. Go to wildalaskan.com slash TPO for $35 off your first box of premium wild caught seafood. That's wildalaskan.com slash TPO for $35 off your first order. Yeah. I wonder if the average listener knows why. I was listening today as to why we used military force. And I was like, oh, yeah.

In Iran? This is about, yeah. Why did we respond? Why do we not declare war? Well, so you're saying the same thing for Korea and Vietnam. Like if it's not a war, did we just call it a response for those two? Yeah. So Korea is really where things started to change.

Korea, so North Korea invaded South Korea. And the United Nations, newly formed United Nations after World War II, said, hey, you're not allowed, you're not allowed to fight. North Korea leave, you know, don't do that invasion. and North Korea was like, nah, we're going to do it. And so the U.S. stepped in as it was considered police action. So like international police action. So the U.S. military comes in not to fight a war on behalf of the U.S., but to be the international police and say, hey, we're breaking up this conflict.

So a little different than Iran, if you're saying that one was imminent threat. So everything changed after World War II. Yeah, they just stopped declaring wars. Yeah. So you had World War II was declared war. And since then, we have not declared war. And really, it's come down to like, we don't, we don't, Congress doesn't need to declare war. And there's political baggage to signing your name on declaring war.

And effectively, Korea and then Vietnam, there was war, but you didn't have to call it war. and so you avoided that baggage and still got the outcome. And so it's war has stopped being declared and it, best I can tell, it just will not be declared anymore. Because, I mean, after 9-11, the next day there was a authorized use of military force granted by Congress. And like that seems like the time it would have been. I would have thought there was a war declared after 9-11. Like, is this surprising to you, J.P., that we haven't declared war? I kind of think you guys are making stuff up.

I'm not convinced. I would have thought for sure after 9-11. I mean, yes. Is the fact that the Korean War was not a war and the Vietnam War was not a war? Is that surprising to me? Yes, I am dumbfounded, for sure. Flabbers are guested. That's right.

I mean, we're talking semantics, but here's, I'll outline the, the debate and why, like, why? Why would you want to or why would you not want to? Yes, well, and so why you would want to, well, maybe let's start with saying like what happens when war is actually declared. So there's a lot of laws that kind of like kick into effect when Congress actually declares war. And it basically gives the president a lot of unilateral authority. to restrict civil liberties so, like, it can institute curfews, can script soldiers,

detain or deport non-citizens. That's what happened with Japanese internment camps. And so there's all these new laws that kick into place. There's also just a lot of scrutiny, and the Congress doesn't like signing their name, all these politicians signing their name and saying, like, I endorse this. this war. Would they? I don't even know if our Congress would agree on something. Well, so what has happened, there's in the modern era, there's this just kind of new posture of instead of saying we're going to give a blank check of we're at war with China, is they declare these, you know,

authorized use of military force. So instead of saying we're against China, it's saying, we're allowing the president to take military action on this specific thing. But it's semantics because you'll get these kind of narrow authorizations that then every president across administrations way stretches. So, for example, the authorized use of military force after 9-11 is still in effect today. It was 60 words, and it was basically like, hey, protect the country, and has been used by every president since to justify military action in 19 different countries. But Congress is not repealing it because it gives them this kind of political shield

where they can say, well, we're so opposed to the war in Iran, you know. And so it provides them this political cover of they've kind of ceded the authority of declaring war and waging war with the president, and which allows them to criticize the war and only act kind of after the fact as opposed to sticking their neck out there. Is the cynical view of how Congress is, you know, viewing this authority? So, okay, so your hypothesis then is that it won't happen again, which rings true to what you're saying also is that, hey, I don't know if Congress would agree on anything because it has to be unanimous. No. So declaring war is remarkably, it just needs a simple majority in both chambers and then signed by the president. It's harder to overturn a veto than declare war.

Definitely. Yeah, you need two-thirds of both chambers to overturn a veto. Declaring war is, in terms of things Congress can do, relatively simple in theory. I wonder if it's one of those things that it's their perception that's frowned upon, Because it seems like in hindsight, those people are seen as favorable. Like if you've led a country into, you know, military victory that seems like it's a positive thing in the record books. But if you've led the country into a long, drawn out war where there's not victory. I just don't know that it matters to the historian. if it's called a war or not.

You know, it's like, it's like, I mean, if we, if we didn't, or I'll just say me, if I didn't know that the Vietnam War was not a war, I don't know that that realization changes anything that I believe to be true about the Vietnam War. That makes sense. So that's my question, and I think you just answered it for you, is this is semantics, and we can talk about why the semantics exist and kind of the argument. but does it matter, should it matter to us as believers, how we think about or speak about or would it change?

Does the fact that the Iran war is actually not a war, or at least not a war yet, change how you think about it, speak about it, lead your congregation in any way? I mean, the only thing, and I don't know, you know, I'm naive to these realities because I've never lived through them, but I guess if it was declared war and then, some of those civil liberties were changed as a result of it being declared war, then it does change the shepherding aspect and what we're talking about on a Sunday morning.

Short of that, then I don't know that the label changes anything in regards to what's being communicated to the body, how we're shepherding small groups, you know, how we're teaching the Bible. No, I don't think it does. It might change some things that happen in this room that I'm in right now. I mean, if we're having a conversation around a podcast, I brought in a friend from Iran this week. And so, you know, the conversation that we're having is a result of the conflict. So that might that might be impacted by it. Yeah. All right. Let me briefly explain why why this debate exists. So the current state of how the United States gets into conflict is basically the president unilaterally

initiates some military action. And the relevant law is the War Powers Act of 1973. And that was Congress's attempt to claw back some of this authority to declare war with an acknowledgement of how modern warfare exists. So it says the president can take military action as the commander-in-chief and kind of go do whatever they want, but they have to notify Congress within 48 hours.

They have to withdraw the troops within 60 days unless Congress authorizes it, and they have to make every attempt to let Congress know before the conflict begins. So that's the backdrop of how these things happen. In reality, every president has basically completely ignored all those things. And they say, hey, I'll notify you within 48 hours,

but I'm going to notify eight of you that have the top, the gang of eight, which is like the party leaders who have the top security clearance. So they go, they initiate some military action. They, you know, send the secretary of state or send a letter to eight people in Congress and kind of check that box. And then there's a conflict happening.

And then they'll go to Congress and either just outright ignore the 60 days or they'll go to Congress and ask for funding for the deployed troops. And there's tons of political pressure to say, hey, these, you know. Support the troops. That's right. And they're like, they are deployed. They're over there. So don't abandon the troops is what it feels like. and then in terms of saying, hey, you have to let us know ahead of time if possible,

they all just say, hey, sorry, there's too many of you. It was classified. We couldn't let you know. And so this creates this debate around whether or not this is. Like a president should be able to just do that? Yeah, okay. So the one side says, no, the founding fathers were wise and, separating these powers. And Congress can declare war and the president commands the military.

Those are intentionally separate, you know. The other side says this is, this is just reality of modern day warfare because the founding fathers were envisioning, you know, 19-year-olds holding muskets on a ship sailing towards you. And modern warfare is hypersonic missiles and jets and cyber attacks and all that. The president has real-time classified intelligence briefings. Most of Congress does not. And also the ability, the knowledge that the U.S. can just respond quickly and kind of do things on just one person's instinct is a great deterrence to war of saying,

like, if the world knew that no military action could happen from the U.S. until unless they agreed on something. Yeah, unless Congress agreed on something, there would be an expectation that like, yeah, it's not going to happen. I can answer a question around just like, I feel like the buzzword right now is nuclear war.

You know, you brought up cyber attacks. Like, I think your definition of war was, you know, people shooting at each other, which really doesn't happen much anymore. I mean, they're launching things from hundreds of miles away. And so the, you know, ground, you know, hand-on-hand combat is a rarity. But the buzzword today is

nuclear war. And the fighting, as I understand it, in Iran is around them not being able to have, us trying to prevent them from having nuclear weapons. What do nuclear weapons do? Like, that's what I, is kind of a mystery to me. And I think I kind of like assume I know the answer to that, but like I'm not sure. You know, that could be a whole other episode. Yeah, that could be a whole other episode.

The I think the premises if one nuke were to get through, the devastation is so great that any amount of

war or any amount of effort and military action to prevent even the possibility of our enemies getting it is justified. And it totally, it totally changes the, the massive fear of the potential destruction and the lack of trust just. There's theological implications there because in, you know, Iran is currently a theocracy. And as the worldview is there, there is no losing because. if I die a martyr in military with that

worldview, then I win. Like I get, you know, a list of wonderful things that I've been hoping for my whole life. So there's no losing in that mindset. And so there are theological implications for

why our government doesn't want them to have nuclear weapons. Yeah. Totally. With over 1,000 translations in every type of decorative addition, it's easy to forget how many people can't even get their hands on a single copy of the Bible

in their native language. This is why we've partnered with Crew. Crew has missionaries in almost every country, but they need more Bibles. One missionary said, I have never seen such a thirst for the Word of God in my country. Let's quench that thirst.

For just $24 a month, you can provide three people with Bibles every month. As a bonus, Crew will provide meals to 12-hungry individuals through their humanitarian ministry and send you a free TPO coffee mug. Simply text pour to 71326 or visit give.cru.org slash pour. Again, that's texting P-O-U-R to 71326 or give.cru.org slash P-O-U-R. Message and data rates may apply, available. to U.S. addresses only.

J.P., let's go to Christian perspective. What's your thought? And I'll ask you as well, Kathleen, like, how should Christians think about war and respond to news about a war that is far away and yet still war? I think we should pray for peace. You know, that is a fruit of the spirit.

It is, you know, peace is, you know, peace is God's first desire. And so there's a sub question there is like, should we go to war? Is war ever okay? And I would say it depends on what you mean by should because I don't, because there's not war in heaven and we're traveling back to Eden, meaning we are moving back to paradise. We are moving to this place where war doesn't exist. So in that sense, it should not exist. But we live in the second best reality because of Genesis chapter 3 where sin has entered the world. The world is broken as we know it. And there are things that the scripture instructs us to navigate that won't exist in heaven, but do exist here, things like divorce as an example.

You know, I don't think there's divorce and there's not divorce in heaven. And yet there's this provision for it. The Bible speaks into it here in this second best world, this broken world. world, the world that sin has come into. And because sin has entered this world, there is conflict, and conflict escalates to fighting, and fighting escalates to war. So when fighting, when two people, and maybe two heads of government do not get along, then, you know, they can incite their military forces, and now their military is fighting their military, you know, the other military, and at some point that could be declared war. And so God has sent people to war there or to fighting, to conflict.

You know, when I say war, I don't mean the Congress approved aspect of it. And so I think a Christian looks at it, seeks to understand the facts. This is where the poor over can be helpful. And then praise for God's will to be done. done, but not in a flippant, like, oh, and the Lord's will be done, but really seeking to know the heart of God to the point of like, what is his will in this? What does he desire in this? And I think, you know, right now I'm just kind of where my headspace has been is resist the urge to think you know everything, you know, because we're constantly being miscommunicated to

and dissuaded by things that we believe to be fact, but may not be. And so, you know, as you navigate the facts really seek to understand what's truly happening. That's good. That's good. For me, I don't know which pillar it would fit into. You know, my favorites above all love and choose humility. I think it's hard for me, it's hard for me to look at something and say, oh, you know, this isn't a war because Congress hasn't approved it. It's just a conflict and not think about like there are still, you know, troops that have died and people that are away from their families.

And whether it's a war or not, like that doesn't minimize that. And I don't know. It's kind of a picture of how we get lost in the semantics of things and forget like the humanity of things, you know? Yeah. So, yeah, that was kind of what I was thinking about. Yeah. Even when the casualties, and that doesn't look like you, you know, there's still someone created in the end. image of God. Right. And, and in, let's say you say they're wicked, well, God takes no delight in the

perishing of the wicked, you know? And, and so he doesn't want anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. So. Yeah. Yeah, totally. I, man, the getting caught up in the semantics is, and even the debate we are having amongst the writing staff of like, this is not a war, we value truth. We're going to, you know, we're going to avoid the term. There are people that are avoiding the term. So, and it's technically correct to eventually saying it's like we're, we're losing clarity. And I do think there's some, some aspect of like, you know, if it, if it looks and feels and sounds like war, not calling it a war is maybe doing bad things to your heart and mind and soul and how you're responding to the, the real.

of the situation. And, man, I was just, I was convicted, thinking through, or confronted with my utter lack of control with this and saying, like, the premise of learning about how wars starts today is it really comes down, a war in the U.S. can be started by one person. And that person is not me. And I can do my best to have my voice heard in some small. I can vote for that person. But ultimately what it comes down to is I can pray.

I can pray for the wisdom and discernment of that person and for peace to prevail. And it is hard to accept the lack of control I have over this. But I'm grateful that we have a big God who listens to prayer. Yeah. Right. That's good. Well, this was fun. Having a guest, JP, appreciate you being our, you know, our inaugural guest on TPO explains.

Love the pour over big fan. Everybody go read it. What are you doing these days and how can people connect with you? Yeah. So we're still doing becoming something podcast and still writing books and still doing, I answer, you know, I get asked over 2,000 questions every Friday on Instagram. So at J. Pocluda at Instagram or on Instagram. Instagram and still preaching God's Word every Sunday, most Sundays, and still at it. Leading the church, serving the church.

Man, well, thanks for being available. Yeah. Thanks for having me. Yeah, it was great to meet you virtually. Likewise. Blessings. If you're interested in hearing real stories from real Christians, compelled podcast uses gripping, immersive storytelling to bring Christian testimonies to life. Take Rod Adkins, who is sentenced to

500 years in jail when he was just 19. Ron led a white supremacist prison gang and spent a decade alone in solitary confinement. But even in that silence, a still, small voice broke through. Listen to Ron tell his entire story on the Compelled podcast in episode number 49, titled Sentenced to 500 Years in Prison. Catch it on your favorite podcast app or visit compelledpodcast.com.