July 24, 2025 • 44 mins
On In The Market with Janet Parshall this week we examined whether or not the numbers of abortions being reported in the United States is really accurate or if those numbers are being inflated to support the narrative of those who support this deadly practice. Our guest helped us get to the bottom of this important matter. Then we shared the insight of a guest who is an expert on climate issues who addressed the reality of EV’s and why a new report says that most Americans do not want EV’s contrary to what we were being told in the media just a year ago. He also explained the shift in national policy which led to cuts in the subsidies for wind and solar power. The veil between our world and the unseen world is not nearly as thick as we tend to believe it is. Once again, we turned to a highly respected pastor and expert on the issues surrounding spiritual warfare to answers more of your most challenging questions and encourage us all to live aware but not fearful of the enemy’s tactics. A chance encounter led a French man to turn his back on his deeply held atheistic beliefs and embrace the truth of the gospel. He joined us to share his incredible story and how God drew him to Himself. He shared his struggle to come to the truth and how God met him at every point along that journey. Your tray tables were in their upright position as we took you on another radio flight down under. Our favorite Scottish apologist joined us once again for another discussion of the challenges facing believers outside the United States and how they are standing for truth in the face of increased rejection. We have come to the end of another week, and it is time once again to join Janet and Craig as they stretch our understanding of to use God’s word to stand for truth in this increasingly confusing age by examining more of the news of the week.
Become a Parshall Partner: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/inthemarket/partners
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:00):
Hi friend, thank you so much for downloading this podcast
and I truly hope you hear something that encourages edifies, equips, enlightens,
and gently but consistently pushes you out there into the
marketplace of ideas. But before you start to listen and
before you go to the marketplace, let me just tell
you about this month's truth tool. And it is a
perfect fit for both the marketplace and getting out there.
It's Ray Comfort's book. Why? Jesus? If you listen to
(00:22):
the broadcast with any regularity, you know we love Ray.
He is bold, unashamed of the gospel. And yet in
such a winsome way, he delivers a truth narrative to
the man in the street, so to speak. He's written
the book Why Jesus? To Teach You How to Walk Through,
by examples and through real conversations he's had on how
to share the gospel in exactly the same way. Listen,
(00:43):
we're called to go and tell. It's not an opt in,
opt out clause. That's where we're supposed to go. And
in truth, how can we keep this good news to ourselves?
So I want you to have Why Jesus as this
month's truth tool. So you'll get some fire in your
bones about going out and sharing the good News of
the gospel of Jesus Christ. We're listener supported radio. My
truth tools are a way of saying thank you. When
you give a gift to the program to keep us
(01:03):
going financially, just call 877 Janet 58. That's 877 Janet
58 or online at in the market with Janet parshall.org.
Again it's called why Joy. And you can ask for
that over the phone. Or you can scroll down and
look for the picture at the bottom of the front
page of the website, clicking on Make Your Donation. That
way you might also consider becoming a partial partner. Those
(01:25):
are my friends and boy, they're growing by leaps and
bounds who give every single month. They always get the
truth tool. But in addition to that, they get a
weekly newsletter that has some of my writing and an
audio piece that only my partial partners get so prayerfully consider,
won't you? Whether you'll be a partial partner or just
a one time gift so you can get a copy
of Why Jesus 877, Janet 58 or online at In
(01:45):
the Market with Janet Parshall. Now please enjoy the broadcast.
S2 (01:52):
Welcome to In the Market with Janet Parshall. Today's program
is where Janet and her husband Craig take takes some
of the stories making headlines this week and offer their
insight and analysis. Before we get started, let's take a
quick look back at some of the highlights from the week.
S3 (02:11):
Everything is about visual and video, and the other side
is satanic demonic stuff glamorized and it's like hook them all.
They're young. I am dealing regularly with demonized Christians that
when all command to know when they took advantage of it,
it was when they were young they didn't know how
to fight back. And then by the time they get older,
it's like that just becomes normal for them. Voices, thoughts, ideas,
(02:36):
you know, talking to them and trying to guide them
because Jesus doesn't love you, etc.. So I go makes
perfect sense to me.
S4 (02:43):
There's a clip going around on X at the moment
from the late, great Christopher Hitchens, an atheist, but he
was in a discussion with John Lennox, a wonderful Christian,
and he said this. There's going to come a time
when Islamophobia will be the law. You won't be able
to say anything against Islam. And he says, you know
who's going to do it? It's going to be the
vicars and the progressives and all this kind of stuff.
(03:05):
And he was very left wing at one level. And
he said, it's always the barbarians only get into the
city when people open the gates from inside. And I
thought that was incredibly insightful. And I think that's what's happening.
S5 (03:18):
The companies that sell these abortion drugs, they have incentives
to inflate their numbers. You know, they want to make
it look like pro-life laws are weak. There's a big
quote unquote, demand for chemical abortion out there. So I'm
not really sure we can take their data at face value.
That said, you know, they do find that a lot
of abortions, I think close to 25% post-dobbs are happening
by telehealth. So this is an important policy issue that
(03:41):
pro-lifers should be aware of. You know, I think we
do need to certainly push back against this, but I'd
be very skeptical of the numbers at any pro-abortion group circulates.
S3 (03:50):
Under the 1970.
S6 (03:51):
Clear Air Act, it said that the the federal government
is responsible for pollution control, but they allowed waivers to
go in because some states, like California, had earlier laws,
and California has gotten more than 100 of these waivers
in the last 30 years. And now these are all cancelled.
All of these zero emissions mandates by 22 states are
(04:12):
now struck down. They can no longer tell their automakers
that to reduce pollution, they have to produce electric vehicles.
This is just this is just huge. Now California is
challenging this in court. But if they lose, all of
these Zev mandates are going to going to disappear.
S7 (04:31):
In that place of deep pain. The intellectual pursuits finally
clicked and made sense. And now I understood. Well, that's
why he had to die. Me? He died for me
to pay the penalty for my sin. And so this
is when the experience, the existential came to meet the
intellectual and I was all in. I say, all right,
this is the message. This is the truth. I'm. I
(04:52):
ask for forgiveness. I give you my life. And from
that point on, the guilt evaporated and I lived the
true spiritual renewal. So the experiential and the emotional came
to meet the intellectual respectability that had been placed there
by my investigation in the first place.
S2 (05:09):
To hear the full interviews from any of those guests
go to In the Market with Janet Parshall and click
on past programs. Here are some other stories making headlines
this week.
S8 (05:19):
China and the European Union held a tense summit on Thursday,
dominated by trade concerns and Ukraine.
S9 (05:27):
Volkswagen has reported a $1.5 billion first half hit from
tariffs and cut its full year sales and profit margin forecasts.
S10 (05:35):
Pressure is growing for South Korean officials to reach a
deal on tariffs after Japan's success in striking a trade
agreement with the US this week.
S2 (05:45):
Janet and Craig have lots to share, and they'll put
the first story on the table when we return to
get more information or to download the podcast of any
of the interviews, go to. In the market with Janet Parshall.
S1 (06:08):
The world needs hope and we have the greatest news
ever told. But how do we share it effectively? That's
why I've chosen Why Jesus by Ray comfort is this
month's truth tool. Transform your approach to evangelism through step
by step guidance and real life examples. As for your
copy of Why Jesus, when you give a gift of
any amount to in the market, call 877 Janet 58.
(06:28):
That's 877 Janet 58 or go to in the market
with Janet Parshall. Happy Friday to you friends. This is
in the market with Craig and Janet Parshall. Things change
on Friday. Mr. Parshall joins me and we walk together
through the marketplace of ideas, learning to apply the whole
truth of the whole gospel to the whole world around us,
(06:49):
Thinking critically and biblically is not a multiple choice test.
It is a both and. When we come to faith
in Christ, our mind is renewed. And so this is
really about thinking about the world around us. What has
God said? How do we measure the vain and hollow
ideas that are being marketed out there? How do we
recognize real truth? And so that's really what a maturing
Christian does, is learns how to take and walk with
(07:12):
Jesus and apply his word, not just on Sundays when
we're amending and underlining in our Bibles, but Monday through Sunday,
where we're applying everything he's ever said to us through
his precious word, taught to us through the power of
the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, to be able
to influence and occupy until he comes. So we're going
to start with a little AI story verb AI. That's
(07:32):
a brand new app. It was launched by a polling
company called Generation Lab. And guess what? It's now offering
to pay young people $50 a month for their data.
I think that's awful cheap, but I digress. So NBC
had a reporter that decided to tell us more of
how this new app works. Have a listen.
S11 (07:52):
Imagine being able to build anything just by thinking about it.
Meet base 44.
S12 (07:58):
We live in a world where attention is currency, and
while we swipe and tap and scroll somewhere behind the scenes,
tech companies are making billions. But what if you could
get a cut? Cyrus Beschloss thinks that time is now.
S13 (08:12):
I think we're now in the place where we can
start to let people actually profit off of their own attention,
off of their own behavior, because they own it, and
it's valuable.
S12 (08:22):
Cyrus is the founder and CEO of Generation Lab, a
data intelligence company that studies young people and the trends
shaping the future. NBC news and other organizations have worked
with him in the past on political polling, but their
new project, called verb AI, takes things to a whole
nother level.
S13 (08:38):
We say to you, hey, that information here is super
valuable to us. We would love to find out more
about you.
S12 (08:44):
And by valuable they mean 50 bucks a month. That's
how much he pays people to download a phone tracker
app that logs pretty much everything from what you browse
to what you buy, with a few exceptions, like private
messages and financial information. And that data feeds into an
AI platform similar to ChatGPT, except the AI is kind
of a clone of you, and will let pollsters or
(09:04):
advertisers figure out your preferences by asking your digital twin directly.
S13 (09:10):
I want to know about 18 to 34 year olds
in the swing states, what news they're watching in September, October,
and November of this year. Um, and it will automatically
draw from the the relevant respondents, um, who we've been tracking.
S12 (09:28):
And unlike traditional polls and surveys, which Cyrus says are
built on guesswork, they're finding what people say they do
sometimes doesn't actually match reality. Like its name suggests, verb
measures action, not intention, directly from people's phones.
S13 (09:43):
Traditional polling is like asking a patient to describe their symptoms.
This is like an MRI.
S12 (09:49):
And when you dive in, verb can answer questions about
all kinds of behaviors, from favorite hobbies to preferred news sources.
Ask verb what foods and snacks somebody prefers, and it
will comb through the person's data to find out. So
now it's not just looking through what was purchased. It'll
go into their social media and and their search history
(10:10):
to figure out what they're interested in.
S13 (10:11):
Exactly.
S12 (10:12):
Sarah's team hopes to get 1000 people to install phone
trackers this month, and 5000 by the end of the year.
He says users can pause or opt out at any time.
When I was growing up, the options I had was
to donate plasma like I needed money. I needed 20 bucks,
I would donate plasma, get hooked up to a centrifuge,
and like, give my blood. And now you're talking about
(10:34):
giving 50 bucks for for attention, right?
S13 (10:37):
Think about how intentionally people treat going to give plasma. That's, uh.
You're not doing that unconscious. We've basically been having our
plasma taken out of our arms every time we open
up our phone, and we haven't been getting paid for it.
S12 (10:53):
When you stop and think about it, it's an uncomfortable reality.
And yet, in an increasingly digital world, it's one with
real money at stake.
S1 (11:03):
Wow. That is a wake up call. First of all,
when somebody decides to donate their plasma, they do that voluntarily.
Most people, when they get on some of these platforms,
don't have a clue that they are involuntarily surrendering their material.
Their information is important to them. By the way, if
you do the math, that's 600 bucks a year really
for absolutely turning yourself into a pre Chinese social credit system.
(11:26):
No thanks. You're going to have somebody track what you
do so they can take that information. By the way
you think this is important. Have you ever seen the
pictures by the way of what the plants look like
in Northern Virginia? The new data centers that are being built.
We talked to Steve Gorham earlier this week and he
talked about the fact that they've already broken ground. Meta,
aka Zuckerberg, has broken ground in northern Louisiana, and the
(11:48):
energy to run that data center is more than all
of the energy used to take care of the energy
needs of New Orleans. Why? Why do they keep all
of that data? Because that data, my friend, is worth something.
$50 is chump change. And I cannot believe that there
are people who allow themselves to be tracked so their
their behavior can be monitored. So somebody down the road
(12:10):
apiece can sell you something or can make money off
of who you are. This is so very dangerous. And
by the way, this is how it always begins. We're
going to show you the bright, shiny thing. We're going
to invite you in, and we're going to make it
enticing because we're going to give you $50, and then
we're going to take all of your information, turn around,
and they'll sell it. For what? I mean, really wake up.
This is a story where people are making a deal
(12:31):
with the devil and don't even know what the devil
looks like.
S14 (12:33):
Yeah. First of all, it's interesting that they would pick
that particular part of Virginia. What a lot of people
don't realize is that for a long number of years, uh,
there have been several, uh, network centers around the country.
One of the biggest is in Northern Virginia and has
(12:56):
been for many, many years for the entire internet infrastructure,
the physical infrastructure, uh, that has given us internet access
across the country. That's the part that people don't think about,
is the connectivity between these network systems in in obscure buildings.
We drive by them all the time. We don't realize
(13:17):
that those are the hubs of what's going on, because
we think the internet is something invisible, and in one
sense it is. In another sense, it depends on physical
infrastructure to do its job in terms of internet. Now,
this aspect and what we're talking about here in terms
of giving up data. There's there's this feeling, I think,
(13:42):
and particularly of a younger generation that, you know, what's
the big deal about data? If I can't see it,
if it can't hurt me physically, um, and if it
doesn't take money out of my bank account and it
doesn't put a nail in my tire on my car.
S1 (13:57):
And it doesn't hurt me while you're taking it.
S14 (13:58):
Big problem here. And, hey, I could get 50 bucks
for this. Okay. You know, um, well, the problem is
this information is power, and it's also value. You know,
for years, I have argued in Washington that, ladies and gentlemen,
Silicon Valley says, hey, it's free. Just sign up. But
(14:19):
it isn't free. Because for years they've been accumulating our data.
And now you find out what the real value of
your data is. It does have a value. And if
something is of value and you're giving it up without
being paid, by the way, for years and years and years,
then it hasn't been free. So I think that helps, uh,
pop the bubble that we're dealing with a, um, a
(14:42):
gift from Silicon Valley in terms of what it's providing
to us in terms of social media. Now they're finally coming. Uh,
I think, uh, transparently to the table saying, okay, we
all knew that your value, your data was worth a
lot of money to us. And, hey, you know, one
person's data, then you multiply it by 100 million that
(15:05):
are on a social media platform, and then you realize that,
in fact, they can sell it and distribute it to
advertising firms who then target and know you better so
they can target you and suffocate you with ads about
what they think you want. And by the way, as
we heard that, um, those the description of the system, um,
(15:30):
do you realize how nefarious this really is?
S1 (15:32):
100%.
S14 (15:33):
It's not getting, um, a genetic clone because that's an
organic process. Uh, this is a machine which has been
built and then coded by a human being with certain
preferences and biases to look for certain things and make
certain conclusions about you based on a handful of metrics.
(15:57):
But that isn't you. That's part of you. And that's
a system that woefully does not understand you, but tells
you that it does.
S1 (16:05):
Well, I'm not interested in being tracked by anybody, thank
you very much. And when you do this, when you
accept this $50, they have the right now to follow you. Now,
if you all the conversations we've had about Communist China
and the social credit rating system that they use there,
I'm not interested. And by the way, it's a pittance.
It is. In fact, it's laughable to say they're going
to take $50 and give it to you so they
(16:26):
can track your information. They'll turn it around and sell
it for millions. Because this information, as you pointed out
so well. Can't feel it, taste it, touch it. But
it's all there. It's being taken from you on a
regular basis, stored in massive warehouses all across the country
because it's worth money to somebody. Chinese, by the way.
Couldn't wait to get their hands on this. They're hacking
all the time to get this exact kind of data.
(16:49):
You know, just I think it's a matter of being cautious,
of looking well to the ways of your household, of
being slow to surrender all the information you want to surrender.
S14 (16:56):
You know, Saddam Hussein, um, there are a lot of
arguments about whether or not he had weapons of mass destruction,
but he did have plans, and this is undisputable. We
did find plans when we invaded Iraq, um, of their
poisoning perfume bottles and then sending them over to the
United States. So if you find through data online and
(17:20):
it's sold on the black market and on the dark
web that most Americans use a certain kind of deodorant
and you start poisoning Reasoning that you can have a
devastating effect in a very short period of time.
S1 (17:36):
When we come back, let's talk about a plan that
was unveiled this week from the white House dealing with
artificial intelligence. It really ties nicely into what we were
just talking about. This is in the market with Craig
and Janet Parshall on Friday back after this. So the
(18:05):
white House published a plan on Wednesday. And I'm just
going to tell you in full disclosure my $0.02. And
it's probably all it's worth. There's an upside and there's
a downside to this. Let me just give you the facts.
And then Craig and I are going to talk about this.
So apparently this plan calls for the export of American
AI technology abroad and a crackdown on states deemed too
(18:25):
restrictive to let it flourish. That is according to a
document that Reuters is talking about, according to a summary
of the draft plan seen by Reuters, the white House
will bar federal AI funding from going to states with
tough AI rules and ask the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC,
to assess whether state laws conflict with its mandate. It's
(18:48):
also going to promote open source and open weight AI
development and, quote, export American AI technology through full stack
deployment packages and data center initiatives led by the Commerce Department.
So you can see all of the agencies that are
now turned on to this and the roles that they're
going to play. So the plan is going to focus
on empowering American workers through AI enabled job creation and
(19:11):
industry breakthrough. Let me read that sentence again. Focus on
empowering American workers through AI enabled job creation and industry breakthrough. Um,
Janet Egan is a fellow at the center for a
New American Security, said that the plan represents a marked
shift in strategy from a primarily restrictive approach to AI
(19:34):
under President Biden, to a focus on answering the question,
how do you start spreading the infrastructure and the technology
that will underpin the globe? So, first of all, you know,
I've got a problem where you're going to restrict funding
to a state where you, whoever you is in this story,
decide that the state is too restrictive for AI. If
(19:55):
you miss my conversation with Doug Smith Monday, our one,
let me encourage you to download the podcast and listen
to the conversation. It's with Doug Smith. His website is
that.com easy to remember that Doug Smith's dot com. And
what's so marvelous about Doug is that he is absolutely
grounded biblically. But he's a software engineer. So he's worked
behind the tech curtain. And he tells me chilling stories
(20:17):
every time we get together about how these tech companies
hire people to monitor our behaviors. Some of the brightest
psychological and and psychiatric minds in the country. Are there
teaching these social platforms how to engage, how to get
you to stay attention, like we just heard in that
NBC story, to keep you going there. And then we
also talked a lot about AI, how right now it's
(20:40):
all about introducing the bright, shiny things. Isn't that fun?
You can watch robots play a soccer game. Isn't that fun?
You can watch a robot run a race. And isn't
it good that we can do robotic surgeries? Yeah, absolutely.
And now we've got a new report out. And this
was the focus of my commentary this week from MIT,
of all places, that says the longer you're using things
like ChatGPT, the more you're dumbing down your brain. Objective
(21:03):
scientific metrics are showing people absolutely are not thinking. The
more we surrender to AI, I think there should be
some restrictions. And I'm all for those states that have decided,
as the people speak, through their legislative process in that state,
that they want to be more restrictive when it comes
to AI technology. So, Craig, that's the downside for me.
I don't see I want to make sure there are
(21:24):
safeguards in place, not just we become the leading export
of AI technology. And the implied in this, by the way,
is an arms race with China. It's an AI race
with China of a different kind. And so the United States,
under this administration wants to beat China to the punch
and wants to make sure that we're the AI leaders
of the globe. China has already said we are and
will continue to be the AI leaders of the world.
(21:44):
I also take umbrage with a statement that says that
somehow this is going to be about helping jobs. I
can't understand that focus on empowering American workers through AI
enabled job creation and industry breakthroughs. If you have AI
doing the job, don't you push the human being off
the assembly line? So I've got some real concerns about this.
(22:05):
Your thoughts?
S14 (22:05):
Well, there there's half a loaf given to Silicon Valley
in the big tech companies. By the way, AI is
not everybody's business, although ChatGPT is, um, a singular, um,
one of the original founders of what has exploded into
the AI revolution. Uh, although artificial intelligence has been. Uh,
(22:29):
researched and, uh, templates for it have been, uh, go
all the way back to, you know, the the mid
part of the 20th century in theory. But now it's
exploded in reality. But it's not an every man's opportunity
to get in commercially, because the same so-called big five
(22:51):
tech companies that are such a preponderance, uh, of heavyweights
on Wall Street and in the information cyber sphere of
the internet are the same ones that are primarily driving
AI research and implementation. And I'm talking about Microsoft Meta,
(23:16):
also known as Facebook. Google. Amazon. Apple. You got five
companies that for many, many years have ruled the information
platform world where if you want to get information or
share information, uh, online, in terms of your thoughts, your opinions,
(23:37):
or getting your thoughts or opinions of others, you got
to deal with these five companies. Only five. We're not
talking about 500 or even 50. We're talking about five.
And those are the same five who are, uh, primarily
responsible for moving AI ahead now. So that's just one
more trophy in their trophy case that they're controlling. Now,
(24:00):
half a loaf has been given to them in terms
of incentives to grow this. As to your concern as mine,
as you well know about restrictions and guardrails, there is
something in there that we can talk about. And I
think there's a good side.
S1 (24:15):
Okay. We're going to take a break and come right back.
This is in the market with Janet Parshall. Craig partial
is with me. We're going to have Craig give a
quick response to the something good that's in that bill.
And then we're going to continue on other topics as well. Again,
Doug Smith was my guest, our one. He's written wonderfully
on this topic. One of his books is called unintentional,
and he really talks about the way to control people,
(24:37):
to spend more time on the screen, the manipulation done
by these outlets as well. It's important, you know, buyer beware.
That's what we're saying back after this. Let me give
a big shout out to our partial partners. Thank you. Friends,
partial partners are becoming the backbone of this ministry. They're generous.
(25:00):
Monthly gifts allow us to provide relevant, compelling programming every day.
When you become a partial partner, you'll receive private emails
directly from me. A weekly audio message only. You will
hear a special behind the scenes updates as well. Become
a partial partner today by calling 877 Janet 58 or
go to in the market with Janet Parshall. So let's
continue with the idea again. Wednesday, the white House unveiled
(25:22):
this idea for American AI technology wants to be the
leader in the world. And Craig just talked about some
of the half loaf that was there. You had something
else you wanted to add to this? What are your thoughts?
S14 (25:32):
Yeah. Then the other half of loaf goes to folks
like me who have been very vocal on the need
to have guardrails. Used the word that you used. And
that's popular on Capitol Hill. And that is some rules
for the road and the half a loaf that the
policy statement from the president goes to that indicated that
(25:56):
the policy of the United States government through the executive branch,
the president and the Oval Office, is that AI systems
not be built on and won't be supported if they
have ideological bias. That is to say, they go in
with an idea that they're going to censor certain information
and propagate other information based on a worldview, um, that
(26:19):
that is going to be verboten. However, remember, this is
an executive order and a policy statement, and it doesn't
have the teeth of a congressional statute. Exactly. Congress is
the one that needs to establish the guardrails. The president
knows that. The white House knows it. Everybody in Washington
knows it. Now, the question is, will Congress do the
job well?
S1 (26:38):
And that's going to be a great conversation. In fact, again,
hearkening back to my conversation with Doug Smith on Monday,
our one download this. You really want to hear what
he has to say. He's really to have a man
who's biblically minded, grounded in the word, and also a
guy who worked behind the curtain is a very rare
but much needed combination in these latter days. And it
really and truly is important for us to understand us,
(26:59):
to understand the manipulation that's taking place. So if it moves,
just not just the bully pulpit, not you, rah rah
to the business world and international trade issues, but really
and truly, you start to put the meat on the
skeleton that was introduced in the report this week. I'm
going to be curious to see what happens with Congress,
and this will be an opportunity for us to kill
once and for all. Section 230, and we'll see whether
(27:21):
or not that happens. Remember, the idea behind section 230 was, oh,
don't touch the brand new shiny things. They can't be sued.
Oh really? Because now, for example, if you go to grok,
you've got 12 year olds who can get on that
porn website and they shouldn't be sued if for in fact,
they're luring kids into pornography. Dot dot dot I'll put
the ellipse there. We'll continue that conversation for another day.
(27:42):
One of the things we like to do on Friday
is we like to talk about what Matthew 715 says.
Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly are ravenous wolves. The reason we have these conversations,
so that you will recognize that sound right there, the
howling of ravenous wolves. The Bible tells us in the
latter days we're going to see more, not less, of this.
(28:03):
And the only way you'll recognize the howling of the
wolf is you begin to study wolves. What they say,
what they believe. And then you have to compare it
with the straight stick of truth. It is why I
continually hearken back to the clarion call for us to
be Bereans and to test all things. So there's a
Texas House representative and his name is James Talarico. He
calls himself a proud progressive. Apparently he got training as
(28:28):
a pastor. But I just want you to. And this
has nothing to do with his politics. I don't care
if he sells ice cream. I'm much more concerned. And
the only reason this time I said the name is
because I wanted you to know that clearly. He was
invited as a guest to speak at a church, and
what he had to say was very interesting. Interesting is
one thing, but does it come into alignment with the
truth of Scripture is a whole other thing? Have a listen.
S15 (28:49):
First way we can tell that Jesus was a feminist
is through his actions. So in the Christian faith, we
don't just think of Jesus as a hippie teacher or
a political radical. We understand Jesus as the personification of
the divine. However you define that God on earth, God
in space and time, the logic of the universe made flesh.
(29:14):
So what Jesus does can tell us just as much
as what Jesus says. And throughout the Gospels, Jesus is
constantly subverting first century gender norms by talking with women,
learning from women, healing women, trusting women. The longest conversation
Jesus has with anybody in the whole Bible is with
(29:36):
the Samaritan woman at the well. When a violent mob
of men threatened to stone a woman to death for adultery.
Jesus intervenes and calls out their hypocrisy. When a bleeding
woman cries out for help in a bustling crowd, Jesus
stops to hear her and to heal her. And when
(29:58):
a woman decides to do theology instead of doing housework,
Jesus affirms her decision. Jesus honors her choice. In fact,
the the only person to ever beat Jesus in a
debate in the Bible was the syrophoenician woman. Think about that.
The only person to teach Jesus something was a woman.
(30:21):
Even the Son of God had something to learn from
one of God's daughters. The church should start to listen
to them again. His closest relationships were with women, particularly
Mary Magdalene, his most loyal lieutenant. The only disciples who
didn't desert Jesus during the crucifixion were the women of
(30:42):
the group. And consequently, they're the only ones to witness
the resurrection. Author Dorothy Sayers put it that women were
the first at the cradle and last at the cross.
Through these real, real relationships with real women in real life,
Jesus is revealing the feminism of God.
S1 (31:05):
Well, as a woman, I am utterly offended by what
I just heard. Um, there's so many things to break down,
by the way. There were there were not just women
at the cross. John was at the cross. Dorothy Sayers
women were there at the cradle, and they were at
the cross. Didn't say it was women, only there was
women there at both. But there were women and men
at the cradle. Women and men at the cross. Um,
(31:27):
I find it interesting when he talks about the Samaritan woman,
by the way, that Jesus calls out the hypocrisy of
men and notice the sin of omission, he cuts off
the rest of the story. What did he do to
the Samaritan woman? Okay, he pointed out the fact that
she was caught in sin. Where's your husband? I don't
have any. Jesus says you're absolutely right. You don't have
a husband. And then he reminds her that she needs
(31:49):
to walk away from her sinful life. And you know what?
She's so excited that Jesus didn't end the story by
pointing a finger at what this state representative or this
US representative calls the hypocrisy of men that, in fact,
Jesus revealed to the Samaritan woman who she was. What
does she say when she finally leaves that encounter where
Jesus reveals his messiahship to her, she runs to the horde,
(32:12):
the city, and she says, let me tell you about
the one who's told me everything I've ever done. That
wouldn't have happened if the story ended with Jesus pointing
out the hypocrisy of the men. So this is what
wolves do. They eat part of a carcass. They leave
the rest to rot. So they took part of the verse.
This guy takes part of the verse and he doesn't
take the rest of it. And he out of that
(32:32):
conjures up the idea that Jesus was a feminist. Now
I take umbrage with the word feminist, and I have
debated the biggest feminists in this country for decades. And now,
by a feminist, does it mean that Jesus saw their
roles as important and invaluable? Okay, you could say that.
But if you take a 21st century interpretation of that
word and you superimpose it on Jesus of Nazareth, he
wasn't a feminist by any stretch of the imagination. Did
(32:55):
he set women free? He sets all captives free. Did
he see them as equal and important in his kingdom?
He absolutely did. And by the way, it wasn't just
Mary Magdalene whose story has been wrongly told for years
and years and years and years and years. She wasn't
a prostitute. She had seven spirits who occupied her. But
because of a homily that was taught about A.D. 500,
(33:16):
we've turned her into a prostitute. Shame on us. She
wasn't by any stretch of the imagination. That's not what
the Bible says. But again, this idea that it was
the Syro-phoenician woman who, quote, won a debate against Jesus. Math.
Jesus is God. God is Jesus. And apparently a syrophoenician
woman is beating God in a debate hardly by any
(33:39):
stretch of the imagination. Craig. Your thoughts?
S14 (33:42):
Um, yeah. Uh, a a gob smacking, uh, series of
conclusions that are absolutely unbiblical. I certainly will pray that
this gentleman sit down with the Bible and actually read
it in context. You know, the best commentary. And we've
always said this of the Bible is the Bible itself
(34:03):
And the best way to get context is to read
all the gospels and then compare them, because they all
are saying and describing the same savior. Um, and by
the way, Jesus didn't go through the highways and byways
looking for opportunities to break up the gender norms of
that society or that time and place, but rather as
(34:26):
the as the ground under the cross is flat and
all are welcome to receive the benefits of what Jesus
did on the cross, regardless of whether you're male or
female or your nationality, or what your background is, or
what your how high your sins are. We're all sinners. Uh,
the ground is not only flat there, the ground was
(34:47):
always flat where Jesus stood. He didn't go out to
break up gender norms. What he did is he wasn't
concerned about gender norms. He wasn't concerned about, uh, the
political attitudes of those that didn't like him or didn't
agree with him, he was there to proclaim the gospel,
the good news and the truth of who God was
(35:10):
and the principles that God expects his children to follow
and believe. And so in this, in the case of
the Syrophoenician woman, by the way, um, where Jesus is
stopped by a Greek, a woman who's not a Jew,
and that's important, that's critical. And he misses it completely.
(35:30):
She's a non-Jew who stops him and says, look, I've
got a daughter. She has a demonic spirit. She needs
you to heal her of this spiritual, demonic, uh, occupation.
And what Jesus says is very important because if you
don't read with the understanding of the Holy Spirit and
(35:52):
in context of the entire Scripture, and take a high
view that this is God's Word rather than just another book,
you'd be led to the beliefs that this particular pastor had.
But Jesus said, let the children be filled first, for
it's not good to take the children's bread and throw
it to the little dogs. It's kind of a parable
we can talk about when we get back.
S1 (36:13):
Absolutely. Again. All right, so this was a man. He's
currently sitting as a representative from the state of Texas
in the House of Representatives. He has a background training
as a pastor. Uh, and apparently this is his interpretation
of Jesus being a feminist. Does it come into alignment
with Scripture? Test all things fellow Bereans? More after this.
(36:50):
So again, I just played audio that I would characterize
as wolf ravenous wolves comes to you in shepherds clothing.
This is a man who serves in the US House
of Representatives, comes from Texas. Background. Training. He went to
Austin Presbyterian Theology Seminary. Apparently that's his background. He proudly
calls himself a progressive. So he's got a progressive interpretation
(37:10):
of Scripture and just pled the case. He thought effectively,
I'm sure that Jesus was a feminist, and he points
out that the only person to ever quote beat Jesus.
His words, not mine, in a debate in the Bible
was the syrophoenician woman. Now remember, Jesus is God. It's
God incarnate. I'm quite sure that no one beats God
(37:31):
in a debate on anything, at any time, on any issue.
But this progressive representative slash pastor says no, this is
the one time Jesus got taught something she won in
the debate. Craig. That's where you pick it up in Scripture.
S14 (37:46):
So Jesus gave a little bit of it. It sounds
like a parable. He said. He responded not by saying, no,
I won't do that because you're not a Jew or
I'm busy. He said, quote, let the children be filled first,
for it's not good to take the children's bread and
throw it to the little dogs. Now that seems to be.
Unless you know scripture, that seems to be a curious phrase.
(38:07):
And yet, in the context of of of his day,
there were those, particularly the Pharisees, who considered non Jews
to be dogs. Exactly. They were the underclass. As a
matter of fact, you were not allowed to go into
the home of a Gentile, of a non-Jew. You'd be
deemed to be unclean as a result of that.
S1 (38:28):
Thank you God, I was not born a woman, a Gentile,
or a dog. A famous prayer of the rabbis of
the first century.
S14 (38:34):
So he uses that phrase. Is he calling her a
dog or is he making another point? Well, let's see
what she says. Because he he after saying that, she
responds and she says, yes, Lord. Now catch that. Not. Yeah, okay. But, uh, yeah,
(38:55):
if I have to be a dog, I'll be a dog.
Her response is yes, Lord. That ought to catch our attention.
This is why she's approaching him. He she knows has
the power of God. He is. She is addressing him
as Lord and then says, yet even the little dogs
under the table eat from the children's crumbs. Meaning I'm
(39:17):
humbling myself under your lordship for the sake of my daughter.
What is he? What does Jesus respond? Then he says
for this saying, in other words, how you responded and
how I know your heart is, because remember, Jesus is
not man. He is man and God. And so he
sees into the human heart. And there's verse after verse
(39:39):
and episode after episode of the Gospels to show and
prove that fact. So he sees where her intentions are,
her humility before the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
And he says, go your way. The demon has gone
out of your out of your daughter. And when she's
come out to her house, she finds the demon gone
and her daughter lying on the bed.
S1 (40:00):
So in other words, the daughter is healed because of
the syrophoenician woman's faith.
S14 (40:04):
Now wider context. Jesus didn't consider Gentiles dogs, but the
Pharisees and Sadducees did. The ruling class at the time did.
Jesus was there to speak truth to that context, always
speaking the truth and the truth of God. As a
(40:25):
matter of fact, not only did he not look down
on Gentiles as dogs, he praised the faith of the
centurion who said, you don't even have to come to
my house. I and I think he was referring to
the fact that he knew Jews were very cautious about
going into the house of a Gentile. But he also
(40:45):
knew that this man had the power of God because
he said, look, I say to my men, go and
do such a thing, and I know they will do
exactly as I command. What you say I know, will
happen to my servant who is sick, and I know
you will heal him by simply saying your word. And
Jesus says, in all of Israel I have not found
(41:06):
such faith. And that was a non-Jew. So context is
so important. How do you get context? By reading all
of scripture and putting it together.
S1 (41:15):
Not picking and choosing. You know, even those closest to
him struggled with this idea that the gospel message should
be given to the Gentiles. The messages. There were all
kinds of experiences to the Jew first, and then the Gentiles,
the Gentiles.
S14 (41:29):
He was saying to the Jews first. He was called
to the house of David. Right. Is his primary task,
but not just to. Because otherwise why, after resurrection would
he have said, go into all nations and spread the word?
S1 (41:42):
Right. Well, even talk we hearken back to the Samaritan
woman before Jesus walks specifically purposely into Samaria. Samaria were
deemed by the Jews to be half breeds, and it
goes back to a story of interbreeding between Jews and
other people groups. And they thought that they were half
breeds and you didn't want to go there. And they worshipped.
The Bible says in that passage when he's talking to
the Samaritan woman at Mount Gerizim, we worship on Mount Zion.
(42:04):
So in other words, you're castaways. We don't want anything
to do with you. And Jesus goes into what they
would have called enemy territory on purpose, not by accident,
by foot. He walks into Samaritan territory, and he did
so not just to help this one particular woman, caught
in the throes of unrepentant sin, to recognize her need
for forgiveness and a Savior. That recognition that all of
(42:26):
us must have at some point in time. But he
was exemplary to those who were traveling with him. That look,
this message goes everywhere. It doesn't just go to the Jews,
it goes to the Gentiles as well. But you know,
the Syrophoenician woman. I find it very interesting that this
is a you know, the homosexuals like to call them
clobber passages where we go, oh, they're going to quote
Leviticus at me now, they're going to quote Romans, and
(42:47):
they're going to clobber me with what the scripture says.
He just made an excellent point. From Genesis to Revelation,
the profundity of marriage as defined by one man and
one woman is repeated over and over and over and
over and over again. Uh, the clobbering comes when you
beat yourself up, thinking that those verses don't meet what
those verses mean. But what I find interesting is that
the Syro-phoenician story is often used by progressives as somehow
(43:09):
radically redefining Jesus. What is it about this story where
they miss it by a mile?
S14 (43:15):
Because they take it out of context. As a matter
of fact, the church fathers who took over in terms
of teaching and preaching after all of the apostles had
gone to heaven, they were all dead. And the Church
Fathers took over. They had to face tremendous heresy. And
one of the tricks they said the Church Fathers did
in their writings is that the heretics love to take
(43:37):
one verse or one fact out of context in the scriptures,
and build an entire theology on it. That trick is
still being used today.
S1 (43:46):
That's a great point. Nothing new under the sun, by
the way. I think the definitive, definitive argument on this
is found in Scripture, where we read with such clarity
that in Christ Jesus. Now, therefore, and this is important
for us to remember, so to the declaration that Jesus
was a feminist. Well, I don't think so, because what
we read in Scripture is there is neither Jew nor Gentile.
This goes right to our point about the gospel. Jesus
(44:07):
didn't see a distinction, neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave
nor free, nor is there male and female. For you
are all one in Christ Jesus. Jesus didn't look at
divided categories. We do that. We put in boundaries and
divisions between people. Jesus didn't and doesn't. For God so
loved the world that he gave his only son, that
(44:29):
whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Either this representative or progressive is right, or the Word
of God is right, but they are mutually exclusive approaches.
Berean test all things. Have a great weekend. We'll see
you next time.
Hi friend, thank you so much for downloading this podcast
and I truly hope you hear something that encourages edifies, equips, enlightens,
and gently but consistently pushes you out there into the
marketplace of ideas. But before you start to listen and
before you go to the marketplace, let me just tell
you about this month's truth tool. And it is a
perfect fit for both the marketplace and getting out there.
It's Ray Comfort's book. Why? Jesus? If you listen to
(00:22):
the broadcast with any regularity, you know we love Ray.
He is bold, unashamed of the gospel. And yet in
such a winsome way, he delivers a truth narrative to
the man in the street, so to speak. He's written
the book Why Jesus? To Teach You How to Walk Through,
by examples and through real conversations he's had on how
to share the gospel in exactly the same way. Listen,
(00:43):
we're called to go and tell. It's not an opt in,
opt out clause. That's where we're supposed to go. And
in truth, how can we keep this good news to ourselves?
So I want you to have Why Jesus as this
month's truth tool. So you'll get some fire in your
bones about going out and sharing the good News of
the gospel of Jesus Christ. We're listener supported radio. My
truth tools are a way of saying thank you. When
you give a gift to the program to keep us
(01:03):
going financially, just call 877 Janet 58. That's 877 Janet
58 or online at in the market with Janet parshall.org.
Again it's called why Joy. And you can ask for
that over the phone. Or you can scroll down and
look for the picture at the bottom of the front
page of the website, clicking on Make Your Donation. That
way you might also consider becoming a partial partner. Those
(01:25):
are my friends and boy, they're growing by leaps and
bounds who give every single month. They always get the
truth tool. But in addition to that, they get a
weekly newsletter that has some of my writing and an
audio piece that only my partial partners get so prayerfully consider,
won't you? Whether you'll be a partial partner or just
a one time gift so you can get a copy
of Why Jesus 877, Janet 58 or online at In
(01:45):
the Market with Janet Parshall. Now please enjoy the broadcast.
S2 (01:52):
Welcome to In the Market with Janet Parshall. Today's program
is where Janet and her husband Craig take takes some
of the stories making headlines this week and offer their
insight and analysis. Before we get started, let's take a
quick look back at some of the highlights from the week.
S3 (02:11):
Everything is about visual and video, and the other side
is satanic demonic stuff glamorized and it's like hook them all.
They're young. I am dealing regularly with demonized Christians that
when all command to know when they took advantage of it,
it was when they were young they didn't know how
to fight back. And then by the time they get older,
it's like that just becomes normal for them. Voices, thoughts, ideas,
(02:36):
you know, talking to them and trying to guide them
because Jesus doesn't love you, etc.. So I go makes
perfect sense to me.
S4 (02:43):
There's a clip going around on X at the moment
from the late, great Christopher Hitchens, an atheist, but he
was in a discussion with John Lennox, a wonderful Christian,
and he said this. There's going to come a time
when Islamophobia will be the law. You won't be able
to say anything against Islam. And he says, you know
who's going to do it? It's going to be the
vicars and the progressives and all this kind of stuff.
(03:05):
And he was very left wing at one level. And
he said, it's always the barbarians only get into the
city when people open the gates from inside. And I
thought that was incredibly insightful. And I think that's what's happening.
S5 (03:18):
The companies that sell these abortion drugs, they have incentives
to inflate their numbers. You know, they want to make
it look like pro-life laws are weak. There's a big
quote unquote, demand for chemical abortion out there. So I'm
not really sure we can take their data at face value.
That said, you know, they do find that a lot
of abortions, I think close to 25% post-dobbs are happening
by telehealth. So this is an important policy issue that
(03:41):
pro-lifers should be aware of. You know, I think we
do need to certainly push back against this, but I'd
be very skeptical of the numbers at any pro-abortion group circulates.
S3 (03:50):
Under the 1970.
S6 (03:51):
Clear Air Act, it said that the the federal government
is responsible for pollution control, but they allowed waivers to
go in because some states, like California, had earlier laws,
and California has gotten more than 100 of these waivers
in the last 30 years. And now these are all cancelled.
All of these zero emissions mandates by 22 states are
(04:12):
now struck down. They can no longer tell their automakers
that to reduce pollution, they have to produce electric vehicles.
This is just this is just huge. Now California is
challenging this in court. But if they lose, all of
these Zev mandates are going to going to disappear.
S7 (04:31):
In that place of deep pain. The intellectual pursuits finally
clicked and made sense. And now I understood. Well, that's
why he had to die. Me? He died for me
to pay the penalty for my sin. And so this
is when the experience, the existential came to meet the
intellectual and I was all in. I say, all right,
this is the message. This is the truth. I'm. I
(04:52):
ask for forgiveness. I give you my life. And from
that point on, the guilt evaporated and I lived the
true spiritual renewal. So the experiential and the emotional came
to meet the intellectual respectability that had been placed there
by my investigation in the first place.
S2 (05:09):
To hear the full interviews from any of those guests
go to In the Market with Janet Parshall and click
on past programs. Here are some other stories making headlines
this week.
S8 (05:19):
China and the European Union held a tense summit on Thursday,
dominated by trade concerns and Ukraine.
S9 (05:27):
Volkswagen has reported a $1.5 billion first half hit from
tariffs and cut its full year sales and profit margin forecasts.
S10 (05:35):
Pressure is growing for South Korean officials to reach a
deal on tariffs after Japan's success in striking a trade
agreement with the US this week.
S2 (05:45):
Janet and Craig have lots to share, and they'll put
the first story on the table when we return to
get more information or to download the podcast of any
of the interviews, go to. In the market with Janet Parshall.
S1 (06:08):
The world needs hope and we have the greatest news
ever told. But how do we share it effectively? That's
why I've chosen Why Jesus by Ray comfort is this
month's truth tool. Transform your approach to evangelism through step
by step guidance and real life examples. As for your
copy of Why Jesus, when you give a gift of
any amount to in the market, call 877 Janet 58.
(06:28):
That's 877 Janet 58 or go to in the market
with Janet Parshall. Happy Friday to you friends. This is
in the market with Craig and Janet Parshall. Things change
on Friday. Mr. Parshall joins me and we walk together
through the marketplace of ideas, learning to apply the whole
truth of the whole gospel to the whole world around us,
(06:49):
Thinking critically and biblically is not a multiple choice test.
It is a both and. When we come to faith
in Christ, our mind is renewed. And so this is
really about thinking about the world around us. What has
God said? How do we measure the vain and hollow
ideas that are being marketed out there? How do we
recognize real truth? And so that's really what a maturing
Christian does, is learns how to take and walk with
(07:12):
Jesus and apply his word, not just on Sundays when
we're amending and underlining in our Bibles, but Monday through Sunday,
where we're applying everything he's ever said to us through
his precious word, taught to us through the power of
the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, to be able
to influence and occupy until he comes. So we're going
to start with a little AI story verb AI. That's
(07:32):
a brand new app. It was launched by a polling
company called Generation Lab. And guess what? It's now offering
to pay young people $50 a month for their data.
I think that's awful cheap, but I digress. So NBC
had a reporter that decided to tell us more of
how this new app works. Have a listen.
S11 (07:52):
Imagine being able to build anything just by thinking about it.
Meet base 44.
S12 (07:58):
We live in a world where attention is currency, and
while we swipe and tap and scroll somewhere behind the scenes,
tech companies are making billions. But what if you could
get a cut? Cyrus Beschloss thinks that time is now.
S13 (08:12):
I think we're now in the place where we can
start to let people actually profit off of their own attention,
off of their own behavior, because they own it, and
it's valuable.
S12 (08:22):
Cyrus is the founder and CEO of Generation Lab, a
data intelligence company that studies young people and the trends
shaping the future. NBC news and other organizations have worked
with him in the past on political polling, but their
new project, called verb AI, takes things to a whole
nother level.
S13 (08:38):
We say to you, hey, that information here is super
valuable to us. We would love to find out more
about you.
S12 (08:44):
And by valuable they mean 50 bucks a month. That's
how much he pays people to download a phone tracker
app that logs pretty much everything from what you browse
to what you buy, with a few exceptions, like private
messages and financial information. And that data feeds into an
AI platform similar to ChatGPT, except the AI is kind
of a clone of you, and will let pollsters or
(09:04):
advertisers figure out your preferences by asking your digital twin directly.
S13 (09:10):
I want to know about 18 to 34 year olds
in the swing states, what news they're watching in September, October,
and November of this year. Um, and it will automatically
draw from the the relevant respondents, um, who we've been tracking.
S12 (09:28):
And unlike traditional polls and surveys, which Cyrus says are
built on guesswork, they're finding what people say they do
sometimes doesn't actually match reality. Like its name suggests, verb
measures action, not intention, directly from people's phones.
S13 (09:43):
Traditional polling is like asking a patient to describe their symptoms.
This is like an MRI.
S12 (09:49):
And when you dive in, verb can answer questions about
all kinds of behaviors, from favorite hobbies to preferred news sources.
Ask verb what foods and snacks somebody prefers, and it
will comb through the person's data to find out. So
now it's not just looking through what was purchased. It'll
go into their social media and and their search history
(10:10):
to figure out what they're interested in.
S13 (10:11):
Exactly.
S12 (10:12):
Sarah's team hopes to get 1000 people to install phone
trackers this month, and 5000 by the end of the year.
He says users can pause or opt out at any time.
When I was growing up, the options I had was
to donate plasma like I needed money. I needed 20 bucks,
I would donate plasma, get hooked up to a centrifuge,
and like, give my blood. And now you're talking about
(10:34):
giving 50 bucks for for attention, right?
S13 (10:37):
Think about how intentionally people treat going to give plasma. That's, uh.
You're not doing that unconscious. We've basically been having our
plasma taken out of our arms every time we open
up our phone, and we haven't been getting paid for it.
S12 (10:53):
When you stop and think about it, it's an uncomfortable reality.
And yet, in an increasingly digital world, it's one with
real money at stake.
S1 (11:03):
Wow. That is a wake up call. First of all,
when somebody decides to donate their plasma, they do that voluntarily.
Most people, when they get on some of these platforms,
don't have a clue that they are involuntarily surrendering their material.
Their information is important to them. By the way, if
you do the math, that's 600 bucks a year really
for absolutely turning yourself into a pre Chinese social credit system.
(11:26):
No thanks. You're going to have somebody track what you
do so they can take that information. By the way
you think this is important. Have you ever seen the
pictures by the way of what the plants look like
in Northern Virginia? The new data centers that are being built.
We talked to Steve Gorham earlier this week and he
talked about the fact that they've already broken ground. Meta,
aka Zuckerberg, has broken ground in northern Louisiana, and the
(11:48):
energy to run that data center is more than all
of the energy used to take care of the energy
needs of New Orleans. Why? Why do they keep all
of that data? Because that data, my friend, is worth something.
$50 is chump change. And I cannot believe that there
are people who allow themselves to be tracked so their
their behavior can be monitored. So somebody down the road
(12:10):
apiece can sell you something or can make money off
of who you are. This is so very dangerous. And
by the way, this is how it always begins. We're
going to show you the bright, shiny thing. We're going
to invite you in, and we're going to make it
enticing because we're going to give you $50, and then
we're going to take all of your information, turn around,
and they'll sell it. For what? I mean, really wake up.
This is a story where people are making a deal
(12:31):
with the devil and don't even know what the devil
looks like.
S14 (12:33):
Yeah. First of all, it's interesting that they would pick
that particular part of Virginia. What a lot of people
don't realize is that for a long number of years, uh,
there have been several, uh, network centers around the country.
One of the biggest is in Northern Virginia and has
(12:56):
been for many, many years for the entire internet infrastructure,
the physical infrastructure, uh, that has given us internet access
across the country. That's the part that people don't think about,
is the connectivity between these network systems in in obscure buildings.
We drive by them all the time. We don't realize
(13:17):
that those are the hubs of what's going on, because
we think the internet is something invisible, and in one
sense it is. In another sense, it depends on physical
infrastructure to do its job in terms of internet. Now,
this aspect and what we're talking about here in terms
of giving up data. There's there's this feeling, I think,
(13:42):
and particularly of a younger generation that, you know, what's
the big deal about data? If I can't see it,
if it can't hurt me physically, um, and if it
doesn't take money out of my bank account and it
doesn't put a nail in my tire on my car.
S1 (13:57):
And it doesn't hurt me while you're taking it.
S14 (13:58):
Big problem here. And, hey, I could get 50 bucks
for this. Okay. You know, um, well, the problem is
this information is power, and it's also value. You know,
for years, I have argued in Washington that, ladies and gentlemen,
Silicon Valley says, hey, it's free. Just sign up. But
(14:19):
it isn't free. Because for years they've been accumulating our data.
And now you find out what the real value of
your data is. It does have a value. And if
something is of value and you're giving it up without
being paid, by the way, for years and years and years,
then it hasn't been free. So I think that helps, uh,
pop the bubble that we're dealing with a, um, a
(14:42):
gift from Silicon Valley in terms of what it's providing
to us in terms of social media. Now they're finally coming. Uh,
I think, uh, transparently to the table saying, okay, we
all knew that your value, your data was worth a
lot of money to us. And, hey, you know, one
person's data, then you multiply it by 100 million that
(15:05):
are on a social media platform, and then you realize that,
in fact, they can sell it and distribute it to
advertising firms who then target and know you better so
they can target you and suffocate you with ads about
what they think you want. And by the way, as
we heard that, um, those the description of the system, um,
(15:30):
do you realize how nefarious this really is?
S1 (15:32):
100%.
S14 (15:33):
It's not getting, um, a genetic clone because that's an
organic process. Uh, this is a machine which has been
built and then coded by a human being with certain
preferences and biases to look for certain things and make
certain conclusions about you based on a handful of metrics.
(15:57):
But that isn't you. That's part of you. And that's
a system that woefully does not understand you, but tells
you that it does.
S1 (16:05):
Well, I'm not interested in being tracked by anybody, thank
you very much. And when you do this, when you
accept this $50, they have the right now to follow you. Now,
if you all the conversations we've had about Communist China
and the social credit rating system that they use there,
I'm not interested. And by the way, it's a pittance.
It is. In fact, it's laughable to say they're going
to take $50 and give it to you so they
(16:26):
can track your information. They'll turn it around and sell
it for millions. Because this information, as you pointed out
so well. Can't feel it, taste it, touch it. But
it's all there. It's being taken from you on a
regular basis, stored in massive warehouses all across the country
because it's worth money to somebody. Chinese, by the way.
Couldn't wait to get their hands on this. They're hacking
all the time to get this exact kind of data.
(16:49):
You know, just I think it's a matter of being cautious,
of looking well to the ways of your household, of
being slow to surrender all the information you want to surrender.
S14 (16:56):
You know, Saddam Hussein, um, there are a lot of
arguments about whether or not he had weapons of mass destruction,
but he did have plans, and this is undisputable. We
did find plans when we invaded Iraq, um, of their
poisoning perfume bottles and then sending them over to the
United States. So if you find through data online and
(17:20):
it's sold on the black market and on the dark
web that most Americans use a certain kind of deodorant
and you start poisoning Reasoning that you can have a
devastating effect in a very short period of time.
S1 (17:36):
When we come back, let's talk about a plan that
was unveiled this week from the white House dealing with
artificial intelligence. It really ties nicely into what we were
just talking about. This is in the market with Craig
and Janet Parshall on Friday back after this. So the
(18:05):
white House published a plan on Wednesday. And I'm just
going to tell you in full disclosure my $0.02. And
it's probably all it's worth. There's an upside and there's
a downside to this. Let me just give you the facts.
And then Craig and I are going to talk about this.
So apparently this plan calls for the export of American
AI technology abroad and a crackdown on states deemed too
(18:25):
restrictive to let it flourish. That is according to a
document that Reuters is talking about, according to a summary
of the draft plan seen by Reuters, the white House
will bar federal AI funding from going to states with
tough AI rules and ask the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC,
to assess whether state laws conflict with its mandate. It's
(18:48):
also going to promote open source and open weight AI
development and, quote, export American AI technology through full stack
deployment packages and data center initiatives led by the Commerce Department.
So you can see all of the agencies that are
now turned on to this and the roles that they're
going to play. So the plan is going to focus
on empowering American workers through AI enabled job creation and
(19:11):
industry breakthrough. Let me read that sentence again. Focus on
empowering American workers through AI enabled job creation and industry breakthrough. Um,
Janet Egan is a fellow at the center for a
New American Security, said that the plan represents a marked
shift in strategy from a primarily restrictive approach to AI
(19:34):
under President Biden, to a focus on answering the question,
how do you start spreading the infrastructure and the technology
that will underpin the globe? So, first of all, you know,
I've got a problem where you're going to restrict funding
to a state where you, whoever you is in this story,
decide that the state is too restrictive for AI. If
(19:55):
you miss my conversation with Doug Smith Monday, our one,
let me encourage you to download the podcast and listen
to the conversation. It's with Doug Smith. His website is
that.com easy to remember that Doug Smith's dot com. And
what's so marvelous about Doug is that he is absolutely
grounded biblically. But he's a software engineer. So he's worked
behind the tech curtain. And he tells me chilling stories
(20:17):
every time we get together about how these tech companies
hire people to monitor our behaviors. Some of the brightest
psychological and and psychiatric minds in the country. Are there
teaching these social platforms how to engage, how to get
you to stay attention, like we just heard in that
NBC story, to keep you going there. And then we
also talked a lot about AI, how right now it's
(20:40):
all about introducing the bright, shiny things. Isn't that fun?
You can watch robots play a soccer game. Isn't that fun?
You can watch a robot run a race. And isn't
it good that we can do robotic surgeries? Yeah, absolutely.
And now we've got a new report out. And this
was the focus of my commentary this week from MIT,
of all places, that says the longer you're using things
like ChatGPT, the more you're dumbing down your brain. Objective
(21:03):
scientific metrics are showing people absolutely are not thinking. The
more we surrender to AI, I think there should be
some restrictions. And I'm all for those states that have decided,
as the people speak, through their legislative process in that state,
that they want to be more restrictive when it comes
to AI technology. So, Craig, that's the downside for me.
I don't see I want to make sure there are
(21:24):
safeguards in place, not just we become the leading export
of AI technology. And the implied in this, by the way,
is an arms race with China. It's an AI race
with China of a different kind. And so the United States,
under this administration wants to beat China to the punch
and wants to make sure that we're the AI leaders
of the globe. China has already said we are and
will continue to be the AI leaders of the world.
(21:44):
I also take umbrage with a statement that says that
somehow this is going to be about helping jobs. I
can't understand that focus on empowering American workers through AI
enabled job creation and industry breakthroughs. If you have AI
doing the job, don't you push the human being off
the assembly line? So I've got some real concerns about this.
(22:05):
Your thoughts?
S14 (22:05):
Well, there there's half a loaf given to Silicon Valley
in the big tech companies. By the way, AI is
not everybody's business, although ChatGPT is, um, a singular, um,
one of the original founders of what has exploded into
the AI revolution. Uh, although artificial intelligence has been. Uh,
(22:29):
researched and, uh, templates for it have been, uh, go
all the way back to, you know, the the mid
part of the 20th century in theory. But now it's
exploded in reality. But it's not an every man's opportunity
to get in commercially, because the same so-called big five
(22:51):
tech companies that are such a preponderance, uh, of heavyweights
on Wall Street and in the information cyber sphere of
the internet are the same ones that are primarily driving
AI research and implementation. And I'm talking about Microsoft Meta,
(23:16):
also known as Facebook. Google. Amazon. Apple. You got five
companies that for many, many years have ruled the information
platform world where if you want to get information or
share information, uh, online, in terms of your thoughts, your opinions,
(23:37):
or getting your thoughts or opinions of others, you got
to deal with these five companies. Only five. We're not
talking about 500 or even 50. We're talking about five.
And those are the same five who are, uh, primarily
responsible for moving AI ahead now. So that's just one
more trophy in their trophy case that they're controlling. Now,
(24:00):
half a loaf has been given to them in terms
of incentives to grow this. As to your concern as mine,
as you well know about restrictions and guardrails, there is
something in there that we can talk about. And I
think there's a good side.
S1 (24:15):
Okay. We're going to take a break and come right back.
This is in the market with Janet Parshall. Craig partial
is with me. We're going to have Craig give a
quick response to the something good that's in that bill.
And then we're going to continue on other topics as well. Again,
Doug Smith was my guest, our one. He's written wonderfully
on this topic. One of his books is called unintentional,
and he really talks about the way to control people,
(24:37):
to spend more time on the screen, the manipulation done
by these outlets as well. It's important, you know, buyer beware.
That's what we're saying back after this. Let me give
a big shout out to our partial partners. Thank you. Friends,
partial partners are becoming the backbone of this ministry. They're generous.
(25:00):
Monthly gifts allow us to provide relevant, compelling programming every day.
When you become a partial partner, you'll receive private emails
directly from me. A weekly audio message only. You will
hear a special behind the scenes updates as well. Become
a partial partner today by calling 877 Janet 58 or
go to in the market with Janet Parshall. So let's
continue with the idea again. Wednesday, the white House unveiled
(25:22):
this idea for American AI technology wants to be the
leader in the world. And Craig just talked about some
of the half loaf that was there. You had something
else you wanted to add to this? What are your thoughts?
S14 (25:32):
Yeah. Then the other half of loaf goes to folks
like me who have been very vocal on the need
to have guardrails. Used the word that you used. And
that's popular on Capitol Hill. And that is some rules
for the road and the half a loaf that the
policy statement from the president goes to that indicated that
(25:56):
the policy of the United States government through the executive branch,
the president and the Oval Office, is that AI systems
not be built on and won't be supported if they
have ideological bias. That is to say, they go in
with an idea that they're going to censor certain information
and propagate other information based on a worldview, um, that
(26:19):
that is going to be verboten. However, remember, this is
an executive order and a policy statement, and it doesn't
have the teeth of a congressional statute. Exactly. Congress is
the one that needs to establish the guardrails. The president
knows that. The white House knows it. Everybody in Washington
knows it. Now, the question is, will Congress do the
job well?
S1 (26:38):
And that's going to be a great conversation. In fact, again,
hearkening back to my conversation with Doug Smith on Monday,
our one download this. You really want to hear what
he has to say. He's really to have a man
who's biblically minded, grounded in the word, and also a
guy who worked behind the curtain is a very rare
but much needed combination in these latter days. And it
really and truly is important for us to understand us,
(26:59):
to understand the manipulation that's taking place. So if it moves,
just not just the bully pulpit, not you, rah rah
to the business world and international trade issues, but really
and truly, you start to put the meat on the
skeleton that was introduced in the report this week. I'm
going to be curious to see what happens with Congress,
and this will be an opportunity for us to kill
once and for all. Section 230, and we'll see whether
(27:21):
or not that happens. Remember, the idea behind section 230 was, oh,
don't touch the brand new shiny things. They can't be sued.
Oh really? Because now, for example, if you go to grok,
you've got 12 year olds who can get on that
porn website and they shouldn't be sued if for in fact,
they're luring kids into pornography. Dot dot dot I'll put
the ellipse there. We'll continue that conversation for another day.
(27:42):
One of the things we like to do on Friday
is we like to talk about what Matthew 715 says.
Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly are ravenous wolves. The reason we have these conversations,
so that you will recognize that sound right there, the
howling of ravenous wolves. The Bible tells us in the
latter days we're going to see more, not less, of this.
(28:03):
And the only way you'll recognize the howling of the
wolf is you begin to study wolves. What they say,
what they believe. And then you have to compare it
with the straight stick of truth. It is why I
continually hearken back to the clarion call for us to
be Bereans and to test all things. So there's a
Texas House representative and his name is James Talarico. He
calls himself a proud progressive. Apparently he got training as
(28:28):
a pastor. But I just want you to. And this
has nothing to do with his politics. I don't care
if he sells ice cream. I'm much more concerned. And
the only reason this time I said the name is
because I wanted you to know that clearly. He was
invited as a guest to speak at a church, and
what he had to say was very interesting. Interesting is
one thing, but does it come into alignment with the
truth of Scripture is a whole other thing? Have a listen.
S15 (28:49):
First way we can tell that Jesus was a feminist
is through his actions. So in the Christian faith, we
don't just think of Jesus as a hippie teacher or
a political radical. We understand Jesus as the personification of
the divine. However you define that God on earth, God
in space and time, the logic of the universe made flesh.
(29:14):
So what Jesus does can tell us just as much
as what Jesus says. And throughout the Gospels, Jesus is
constantly subverting first century gender norms by talking with women,
learning from women, healing women, trusting women. The longest conversation
Jesus has with anybody in the whole Bible is with
(29:36):
the Samaritan woman at the well. When a violent mob
of men threatened to stone a woman to death for adultery.
Jesus intervenes and calls out their hypocrisy. When a bleeding
woman cries out for help in a bustling crowd, Jesus
stops to hear her and to heal her. And when
(29:58):
a woman decides to do theology instead of doing housework,
Jesus affirms her decision. Jesus honors her choice. In fact,
the the only person to ever beat Jesus in a
debate in the Bible was the syrophoenician woman. Think about that.
The only person to teach Jesus something was a woman.
(30:21):
Even the Son of God had something to learn from
one of God's daughters. The church should start to listen
to them again. His closest relationships were with women, particularly
Mary Magdalene, his most loyal lieutenant. The only disciples who
didn't desert Jesus during the crucifixion were the women of
(30:42):
the group. And consequently, they're the only ones to witness
the resurrection. Author Dorothy Sayers put it that women were
the first at the cradle and last at the cross.
Through these real, real relationships with real women in real life,
Jesus is revealing the feminism of God.
S1 (31:05):
Well, as a woman, I am utterly offended by what
I just heard. Um, there's so many things to break down,
by the way. There were there were not just women
at the cross. John was at the cross. Dorothy Sayers
women were there at the cradle, and they were at
the cross. Didn't say it was women, only there was
women there at both. But there were women and men
at the cradle. Women and men at the cross. Um,
(31:27):
I find it interesting when he talks about the Samaritan woman,
by the way, that Jesus calls out the hypocrisy of
men and notice the sin of omission, he cuts off
the rest of the story. What did he do to
the Samaritan woman? Okay, he pointed out the fact that
she was caught in sin. Where's your husband? I don't
have any. Jesus says you're absolutely right. You don't have
a husband. And then he reminds her that she needs
(31:49):
to walk away from her sinful life. And you know what?
She's so excited that Jesus didn't end the story by
pointing a finger at what this state representative or this
US representative calls the hypocrisy of men that, in fact,
Jesus revealed to the Samaritan woman who she was. What
does she say when she finally leaves that encounter where
Jesus reveals his messiahship to her, she runs to the horde,
(32:12):
the city, and she says, let me tell you about
the one who's told me everything I've ever done. That
wouldn't have happened if the story ended with Jesus pointing
out the hypocrisy of the men. So this is what
wolves do. They eat part of a carcass. They leave
the rest to rot. So they took part of the verse.
This guy takes part of the verse and he doesn't
take the rest of it. And he out of that
(32:32):
conjures up the idea that Jesus was a feminist. Now
I take umbrage with the word feminist, and I have
debated the biggest feminists in this country for decades. And now,
by a feminist, does it mean that Jesus saw their
roles as important and invaluable? Okay, you could say that.
But if you take a 21st century interpretation of that
word and you superimpose it on Jesus of Nazareth, he
wasn't a feminist by any stretch of the imagination. Did
(32:55):
he set women free? He sets all captives free. Did
he see them as equal and important in his kingdom?
He absolutely did. And by the way, it wasn't just
Mary Magdalene whose story has been wrongly told for years
and years and years and years and years. She wasn't
a prostitute. She had seven spirits who occupied her. But
because of a homily that was taught about A.D. 500,
(33:16):
we've turned her into a prostitute. Shame on us. She
wasn't by any stretch of the imagination. That's not what
the Bible says. But again, this idea that it was
the Syro-phoenician woman who, quote, won a debate against Jesus. Math.
Jesus is God. God is Jesus. And apparently a syrophoenician
woman is beating God in a debate hardly by any
(33:39):
stretch of the imagination. Craig. Your thoughts?
S14 (33:42):
Um, yeah. Uh, a a gob smacking, uh, series of
conclusions that are absolutely unbiblical. I certainly will pray that
this gentleman sit down with the Bible and actually read
it in context. You know, the best commentary. And we've
always said this of the Bible is the Bible itself
(34:03):
And the best way to get context is to read
all the gospels and then compare them, because they all
are saying and describing the same savior. Um, and by
the way, Jesus didn't go through the highways and byways
looking for opportunities to break up the gender norms of
that society or that time and place, but rather as
(34:26):
the as the ground under the cross is flat and
all are welcome to receive the benefits of what Jesus
did on the cross, regardless of whether you're male or
female or your nationality, or what your background is, or
what your how high your sins are. We're all sinners. Uh,
the ground is not only flat there, the ground was
(34:47):
always flat where Jesus stood. He didn't go out to
break up gender norms. What he did is he wasn't
concerned about gender norms. He wasn't concerned about, uh, the
political attitudes of those that didn't like him or didn't
agree with him, he was there to proclaim the gospel,
the good news and the truth of who God was
(35:10):
and the principles that God expects his children to follow
and believe. And so in this, in the case of
the Syrophoenician woman, by the way, um, where Jesus is
stopped by a Greek, a woman who's not a Jew,
and that's important, that's critical. And he misses it completely.
(35:30):
She's a non-Jew who stops him and says, look, I've
got a daughter. She has a demonic spirit. She needs
you to heal her of this spiritual, demonic, uh, occupation.
And what Jesus says is very important because if you
don't read with the understanding of the Holy Spirit and
(35:52):
in context of the entire Scripture, and take a high
view that this is God's Word rather than just another book,
you'd be led to the beliefs that this particular pastor had.
But Jesus said, let the children be filled first, for
it's not good to take the children's bread and throw
it to the little dogs. It's kind of a parable
we can talk about when we get back.
S1 (36:13):
Absolutely. Again. All right, so this was a man. He's
currently sitting as a representative from the state of Texas
in the House of Representatives. He has a background training
as a pastor. Uh, and apparently this is his interpretation
of Jesus being a feminist. Does it come into alignment
with Scripture? Test all things fellow Bereans? More after this.
(36:50):
So again, I just played audio that I would characterize
as wolf ravenous wolves comes to you in shepherds clothing.
This is a man who serves in the US House
of Representatives, comes from Texas. Background. Training. He went to
Austin Presbyterian Theology Seminary. Apparently that's his background. He proudly
calls himself a progressive. So he's got a progressive interpretation
(37:10):
of Scripture and just pled the case. He thought effectively,
I'm sure that Jesus was a feminist, and he points
out that the only person to ever quote beat Jesus.
His words, not mine, in a debate in the Bible
was the syrophoenician woman. Now remember, Jesus is God. It's
God incarnate. I'm quite sure that no one beats God
(37:31):
in a debate on anything, at any time, on any issue.
But this progressive representative slash pastor says no, this is
the one time Jesus got taught something she won in
the debate. Craig. That's where you pick it up in Scripture.
S14 (37:46):
So Jesus gave a little bit of it. It sounds
like a parable. He said. He responded not by saying, no,
I won't do that because you're not a Jew or
I'm busy. He said, quote, let the children be filled first,
for it's not good to take the children's bread and
throw it to the little dogs. Now that seems to be.
Unless you know scripture, that seems to be a curious phrase.
(38:07):
And yet, in the context of of of his day,
there were those, particularly the Pharisees, who considered non Jews
to be dogs. Exactly. They were the underclass. As a
matter of fact, you were not allowed to go into
the home of a Gentile, of a non-Jew. You'd be
deemed to be unclean as a result of that.
S1 (38:28):
Thank you God, I was not born a woman, a Gentile,
or a dog. A famous prayer of the rabbis of
the first century.
S14 (38:34):
So he uses that phrase. Is he calling her a
dog or is he making another point? Well, let's see
what she says. Because he he after saying that, she
responds and she says, yes, Lord. Now catch that. Not. Yeah, okay. But, uh, yeah,
(38:55):
if I have to be a dog, I'll be a dog.
Her response is yes, Lord. That ought to catch our attention.
This is why she's approaching him. He she knows has
the power of God. He is. She is addressing him
as Lord and then says, yet even the little dogs
under the table eat from the children's crumbs. Meaning I'm
(39:17):
humbling myself under your lordship for the sake of my daughter.
What is he? What does Jesus respond? Then he says
for this saying, in other words, how you responded and
how I know your heart is, because remember, Jesus is
not man. He is man and God. And so he
sees into the human heart. And there's verse after verse
(39:39):
and episode after episode of the Gospels to show and
prove that fact. So he sees where her intentions are,
her humility before the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
And he says, go your way. The demon has gone
out of your out of your daughter. And when she's
come out to her house, she finds the demon gone
and her daughter lying on the bed.
S1 (40:00):
So in other words, the daughter is healed because of
the syrophoenician woman's faith.
S14 (40:04):
Now wider context. Jesus didn't consider Gentiles dogs, but the
Pharisees and Sadducees did. The ruling class at the time did.
Jesus was there to speak truth to that context, always
speaking the truth and the truth of God. As a
(40:25):
matter of fact, not only did he not look down
on Gentiles as dogs, he praised the faith of the
centurion who said, you don't even have to come to
my house. I and I think he was referring to
the fact that he knew Jews were very cautious about
going into the house of a Gentile. But he also
(40:45):
knew that this man had the power of God because
he said, look, I say to my men, go and
do such a thing, and I know they will do
exactly as I command. What you say I know, will
happen to my servant who is sick, and I know
you will heal him by simply saying your word. And
Jesus says, in all of Israel I have not found
(41:06):
such faith. And that was a non-Jew. So context is
so important. How do you get context? By reading all
of scripture and putting it together.
S1 (41:15):
Not picking and choosing. You know, even those closest to
him struggled with this idea that the gospel message should
be given to the Gentiles. The messages. There were all
kinds of experiences to the Jew first, and then the Gentiles,
the Gentiles.
S14 (41:29):
He was saying to the Jews first. He was called
to the house of David. Right. Is his primary task,
but not just to. Because otherwise why, after resurrection would
he have said, go into all nations and spread the word?
S1 (41:42):
Right. Well, even talk we hearken back to the Samaritan
woman before Jesus walks specifically purposely into Samaria. Samaria were
deemed by the Jews to be half breeds, and it
goes back to a story of interbreeding between Jews and
other people groups. And they thought that they were half
breeds and you didn't want to go there. And they worshipped.
The Bible says in that passage when he's talking to
the Samaritan woman at Mount Gerizim, we worship on Mount Zion.
(42:04):
So in other words, you're castaways. We don't want anything
to do with you. And Jesus goes into what they
would have called enemy territory on purpose, not by accident,
by foot. He walks into Samaritan territory, and he did
so not just to help this one particular woman, caught
in the throes of unrepentant sin, to recognize her need
for forgiveness and a Savior. That recognition that all of
(42:26):
us must have at some point in time. But he
was exemplary to those who were traveling with him. That look,
this message goes everywhere. It doesn't just go to the Jews,
it goes to the Gentiles as well. But you know,
the Syrophoenician woman. I find it very interesting that this
is a you know, the homosexuals like to call them
clobber passages where we go, oh, they're going to quote
Leviticus at me now, they're going to quote Romans, and
(42:47):
they're going to clobber me with what the scripture says.
He just made an excellent point. From Genesis to Revelation,
the profundity of marriage as defined by one man and
one woman is repeated over and over and over and
over and over again. Uh, the clobbering comes when you
beat yourself up, thinking that those verses don't meet what
those verses mean. But what I find interesting is that
the Syro-phoenician story is often used by progressives as somehow
(43:09):
radically redefining Jesus. What is it about this story where
they miss it by a mile?
S14 (43:15):
Because they take it out of context. As a matter
of fact, the church fathers who took over in terms
of teaching and preaching after all of the apostles had
gone to heaven, they were all dead. And the Church
Fathers took over. They had to face tremendous heresy. And
one of the tricks they said the Church Fathers did
in their writings is that the heretics love to take
(43:37):
one verse or one fact out of context in the scriptures,
and build an entire theology on it. That trick is
still being used today.
S1 (43:46):
That's a great point. Nothing new under the sun, by
the way. I think the definitive, definitive argument on this
is found in Scripture, where we read with such clarity
that in Christ Jesus. Now, therefore, and this is important
for us to remember, so to the declaration that Jesus
was a feminist. Well, I don't think so, because what
we read in Scripture is there is neither Jew nor Gentile.
This goes right to our point about the gospel. Jesus
(44:07):
didn't see a distinction, neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave
nor free, nor is there male and female. For you
are all one in Christ Jesus. Jesus didn't look at
divided categories. We do that. We put in boundaries and
divisions between people. Jesus didn't and doesn't. For God so
loved the world that he gave his only son, that
(44:29):
whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Either this representative or progressive is right, or the Word
of God is right, but they are mutually exclusive approaches.
Berean test all things. Have a great weekend. We'll see
you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.