Hosts define "Holocaustianity" as a modern Western religion where the Holocaust serves as a founding myth, demanding absolute reverence akin to biblical sacrifice. They argue that while starvation and disease are well-documented, gas chambers and cremation ovens—lacking robust primary sources—dominate cultural memory because they function as symbolic burnt offerings to atone for Nazism. Citing figures like Bishop Williamson and John Piper, the discussion highlights how this narrative replaces Golgotha with Auschwitz, forcing Christians into a false dichotomy between moral inclusion and national sovereignty. Ultimately, the episode warns that faithful believers risk being labeled anti-Semitic if they reject this "new scripture" derived from Nuremberg trials rather than biblical truth. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Holocaustianity as a Religion00:15:09
Leave us a five star review on your favorite podcast platform.
I get it.
It's annoying.
Everybody asks, but I'm going to tell you why.
When you give us a positive review, what that does is it triggers the algorithm so that our podcast shows up on more people's news feeds.
You and I both know that this ministry is willing to talk about things that most ministries aren't.
We need this content for the glory of God to reach more people's ears.
Today, we're focusing our attention on the most important and sacred religion.
Presently, here in the West, that is, of course, Holocaustianity.
It's not Christianity, it's not Hinduism or Buddhism or Islam or even atheistic secularism, but rather the most significant, important, vital, and sacred.
And I'm using that last word intentionally sacred, truly considered to be holy, not to be trifled with, not to be crossed.
Not to be blasphemed.
That religion today in the West is Holocaustianity.
It is the view that the Holocaust is our most sacred founding myth for the West in present times.
It is the religion that virtually everyone subscribes to.
You can blaspheme Jesus Christ.
You cannot blaspheme the Holocaust.
You can make fun of Satan.
You can dress up as Satan.
I mean, think about that for a second, guys.
Every Halloween, we literally have.
A national holiday that is celebrated by the vast majority of the citizens of our country, in which they dress up children as fun, dress up as devils, they dress up as ghouls and goblins and ghosts, and some people literally dress up as Satan himself.
What would happen though if you cross, you go against the real sacred religion of the West, Holocaustianity?
What happens if someone dresses up not as the devil?
But they dress up as Adolf Hitler.
What kind of reaction would they get?
We actually saw this on the news just this last Halloween.
There were some individuals who dressed up as Nazis, and it became a global, worldwide story in outrage.
And our point is not to say that the Holocaust never happened.
We're not to say that the suffering of a particular people is permissible.
We're not saying any of those things.
But we're.
Going to be delving into in today's episode is that this is more than history.
It is held as a religious conviction.
I'll say that again.
This is more than just a historical event.
When it comes to the Holocaust, it is viewed and held and cherished as a religious conviction.
In fact, it's really the only religious conviction left in the modern West that is held with.
Respect with reverence, fear, and trembling, where blaspheming and going against it is actually still punishable, penalized in serious ways.
Why?
Why?
That's our focus today.
Tune in now.
Here we are.
Here we are.
Wes, you're going to lead us off.
I'm excited for this episode.
You've got a lot of quotes pulled up from, you know, Jews, rabbis, but also from evangelical pastors.
We're going to cover the full gambit.
When preparing the thumbnail for this episode, there's a tool that I use in Canva that uses AI to stretch out an image so you can get a little bit more border if you need to, to just simply fill it out.
And on the thumbnail, you'll see a picture of a Nazi soldier contrasted with Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
Bonhoeffer as the saint.
And the soldier as the bad guy.
And I went to try to use this tool on the soldier to get a little bit more direction downward to just fill out the image better.
Canva refused to do that because there's a swastika in the picture.
Right.
It wouldn't matter if it was something lewd.
It wouldn't matter if it was communism.
It wouldn't matter, Republican, Democrat.
Almost nothing else could be in that image.
And the tool would refuse, basically, to work.
Pornography would have been fine if you had an image of the devil.
An image of the devil?
It would have been fine.
A blaspheming image of Jesus.
Right.
All of that would have been fine.
Mm hmm.
There's one little symbol that can't be in there that it refuses to make, it refuses to draw, it refuses almost in some ways to even utter the name of.
The Amazon show, The Man in the High Castle, is a fictional story of if Japan and Germany had won World War II.
And after they got done filming it, they took all the uniforms and the flags that had the swastika on them and they actually burned them.
It wasn't just, hey, let's put this back, maybe, you know, Schindler's List 500, we can pull these back out of the closets and reuse.
It was no, we're literally going to burn every single swastika we made for this show just because it's so.
Horrible.
Real quick, if you've ever watched The Man in the High Castle, again, Wes, you know, he described it perfectly.
It's a fictional, futuristic, you know, show that's imagining what would have happened if Hitler won the war and how atrocious it would be and how terrible it would be.
Everyone who, you know, is goose stepping in their backyard, you know, and the whole world is now speaking German.
It really is the best way to understand it if you've never watched it, it's the.
Political and historical equivalent of the Hands Made Tale.
So, if you think culture, Hands Made Tale, right?
What is the Hands Made Tale?
It's the book that was then revised into a Hulu series.
And it's basically liberal caffeine for leftists and progressives to use as a boogeyman, as a scare tactic to say, We can't possibly let conservatives,
let alone Christians, ever have the levers of cultural power here in the West, in Europe, or in America, because if they do, there'll be forced pregnancies and women will be subjugated as slaves and all these kinds of things.
And the Hands Made Tale, when you think of the way that liberals have used it, it's gotten just kind of infinite mileage.
Well, the man in the high castle is basically the same thing.
Just instead of on the cultural side of the aisle, it's more on the historical side of the aisle.
Exactly.
But the point being, I know of no other show that made any other type of costume or symbol.
They literally at the end had to go through and say, We have to burn this.
This is so evil, we can't even keep it around.
What I want to start with doing is defining what we mean and what we refer to by the Holocaust.
One of the things we're not going to do in this episode is get into the history, the details, and specifics and give our opinion about what happened.
And the reason for that is that we are not historians.
If we're going to do that, we would have someone who is a historian, someone who has spent their life dedicated to studying World War II and the history, and could make a very informed, reasonable estimation and an argument for how things actually happened.
But, Joel, you're a pastor.
I've worked in politics.
We're all critics of culture.
That's our lane.
We're going to analyze this from a theological lens, a cultural lens, a religious lens, but we're not going to come in here and say, and we think this is what happened and this is what happened.
And if you trace these shipments and look at this, that's not what we're going to do.
And one encouragement would be we're not the experts.
And you don't have to be either.
You don't have to have an opinion, and most certainly not a strong one.
You can say, maybe it did, maybe it didn't.
However, whether it did or did not, say that it even did.
Here's the deal what it has become as a religion is the problem here.
Amen.
And with that, maybe it did, it didn't.
In terms of what I think Wes is referring to, like the Holocaust even happening, my strong recommendation to everyone who is a listener is I don't think you have to assess.
Historically, the Holocaust on a pass fail system.
So, I don't, I would not recommend it's not my position.
And so, I would not recommend that you would take this position either.
You know, taking the position to say the Holocaust didn't happen at all, right?
I mean, that would be in terms of positions that are defensible, that would be a really, really difficult position to defend.
And some of the guys more on the fringe who have over the years said something along those lines.
Usually end up getting slaughtered by historians and different, you know, primary sources and this, that, and the other.
So I would recommend not, if you're going to take a position on the history, on the details and claims themselves of what did or did not happen, I think my only recommendation, because that's not going to be the focus of today's episode, but my only recommendation is if you see it, and most people do actually, but if you see it as a pass fail, Where it's either the Holocaust didn't happen at all and it's completely all of it fabricated,
or it's six million Jews and counting year after year.
We actually find out it's more, you know, and never less, you know, 5,999,000, you know, blasphemy, heresy.
I just think that that's silly.
I'll just be honest.
I think that's silly.
Using that as your metric, it must be six million plus, or complete denial outright, you know, the whole thing has been fabricated.
I just think that's ridiculous.
I don't think that you have to take either of those approaches.
So I think you can say, you know what?
I think something happened.
I think there are enough sources.
Something happened.
And I believe it was significant.
I believe that there were several aspects of it that were inherently immoral, things that were wrong.
But the big focus that I would like to shift the conversation to is well, there have been plenty of atrocities that have happened throughout history.
There have been plenty of ethnic cleansings, tragically.
There have been plenty of mass murders.
There have been plenty of this, plenty of that.
But one and only one has forged the entire ethos for all of the West and is treated not merely as a tragic historic event, but treated as a religion on religious, spiritual grounds that have shaped politics and culture and everything for the past 80 years.
That, I think, is a good question.
So, asking the question, did the Holocaust happen at all?
I don't think that's a good question.
But asking the question, why this historic tragedy?
Why has this one had the influence, the impact, and completely governed Western society in all of its choices politically, economically, culturally, religiously for almost a century now?
That is a question worth exploring.
And that's what we're going to do today.
Yep.
So, for the purposes of this episode, we're going to say, hey, this is how it occurred.
And so, I'm going to read the description.
This is from Wikipedia.
For a little bit of just context, what we're referring to, what we're taking as what some have called the received account.
The Holocaust, known in Hebrew as the Shoah, literally translates catastrophe, was the genocide of European Jews during World War II.
From 1941 to 1945, Nazi Germany and its collaborators systematically murdered some six million Druze across German occupied Europe, around two thirds of Europe's Jewish population.
The murders were committed primarily through mass shootings across Eastern Europe.
And poison gas chambers in extermination camps, chiefly Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka, Belzec, Sorbibor, Chelminel, and occupied Poland.
Separate Nazi persecutions killed millions of other non-Jewish civilians and prisoners of war, POWs.
And so those were typically gypsies, Russians, homosexuals, those that were mentally deficient, and others.
And so sometimes they get bucketed together, and the range is given 6 to 11 million.
This word in Hebrew, Shoah, catastrophe, it actually has a symbolism of a burnt offering.
We'll get to that a little bit later.
But the idea is there was a massive genocide that occurred in Eastern Europe, specifically targeted on the basis of race, that killed some six million Jews as well as several million other individuals, again, mostly on the basis of race.
These people were, as the narrative goes, the inferior race.
They were traitors.
They were Bolsheviks.
And so they carried out a systematic final solution in the waning years of World War II in order to exterminate these people as part of a final solution.
And that's what would be kind of called the received account.
That's what you've been taught in school.
That's what you've been educated in.
That's the movie that you've seen probably.
100 times at this point throughout your life.
Not the same movie, but 100 different movies.
It's like it's not the same movie, but it is the same movie.
But yeah, that's, I mean, from the education system, from academia, from the media, from entertainment and Hollywood, from various politicians, from various pastors, you know, like at every level, you've been completely submerged in the most terrible thing that has ever occurred in all of history this one event.
And, um, And the motivation of trying to inhibit this from ever happening again is the number one guiding principle for every decision anyone should ever make from here on out.
Right.
Yeah.
That's where we are.
Yeah.
And I would just say, as a matter of history, and I really do think history, and I think many historians say this as well, is history is as much of an art as it is a science in the sense of, like, on one hand, you're collecting the facts, you're looking through primary source documentation, but on the other hand, you're drawing meaning from it, you're drawing lessons from it.
And as it relates to, you could say, the Holocaust, I think slavery is another good example of this.
When a story, a matter of history, becomes black and white, it's a good indication that that has become now a myth, that that has become a cultural legend, a cultural tradition, in the sense of it being black and white, there being an absolute good and an absolute bad.
The Myth of American Isolation00:06:36
And as a society, we're always telling stories and forming myths and legends.
America has many legends.
Sleepy Hollow, you know, things, stories like that are things that we tell ourselves.
Paul Bunyan.
Paul Bunyan.
John Henry.
Yeah, exactly.
So there are things like that that we say, hey, here's a story we're going to tell.
Maybe it's history, maybe it's half history, but we're telling it not even for the purpose of history, actually, right?
We're telling this to instill a lesson, to teach something about our children, something about ourselves and where they come from.
And I think that's really what we're trying to get at and address the ways in which, as we assume in this episode, a real historical event became that.
How did it move to A matter of primary source documentation and facts to a matter of sacrosanct.
Good versus evil.
Good versus evil, exactly.
And that's just something that just occurs in history.
And in presuppositional apologetics, one of the preconditions of intelligibility is actually a meaning in history.
That has to be true, that we have to look back in the facts of history and actually draw some meaning from them.
It's inevitable that we try to do that.
But the lessons that we draw from them.
Are built on presuppositions.
They're built on premises.
And what are those premises going to be?
Well, on one, you know, when it comes to an event like the Holocaust or slavery, you can actually attack the premises rather than attacking the facts of the matter.
You can actually say, hey, I'll give you the facts.
I disagree with how you're interpreting the history and the facts.
I disagree with the lens through which you view the facts.
And that's really what we're talking about here today.
Good point.
So, what I'm going to go ahead and do is I'm going to read some of the history of how, you remember, World War II ended.
Axis powers in the Western Front surrendered in May of 1945.
The Nuremberg trials occurred after that, and in 1948, Israel is established.
And I would say by about the 70s or the 80s, you have the narrative firmly a hold of the American psyche, which is fascinating because it didn't happen in Europe.
It didn't happen to, or it didn't happen in America.
It didn't happen to Americans.
It was two different peoples that were not American on different soil in a different war.
We didn't even liberate any of the extermination camps.
The allies on the Western Front only went so far.
And discovered concentration camps.
You can actually look at the maps that the US National Archives have laid out.
It was the Russian side that came through in their invasion from Eastern Europe and came in and found all of the extermination camps.
So it's not even like we found the Holocaust.
The primary, real quick, just to get this straight, you're saying that the primary sources for the concentration camps were the extermination camps.
Extermination camps, those primary sources were provided to us by Bolsheviks?
By the communists.
Great.
Okay.
Patton, Churchill, and others never were in extermination camps such as Auschwitz, Treblinka, and the others.
Those were on the eastern side in German occupied Poland where they were purportedly discovered.
Okay.
Not a good start, but yeah, go ahead.
Okay.
I'm going to read an extended section from an article on American Mantle called Holocaust Ianity by Sons of Korah, where he goes through the Holocaust memorial, the growth of these memorials across the West.
This modern creed, referring to Holocaust Ianity, found permanence in a rapid proliferation of Holocaust memorials covering reported Nazi.
Extermination camps, all located in Soviet aligned Poland post war.
Memorialization began in 1947 with the Ostwich Birkenau and Majdanek State Museums, followed by the Warsaw Ghetto Monument in 1948, each initiated by communist Poland's Soviet influenced Ministry of Culture and Arts.
Supported by Jewish survivor groups, these efforts aimed to preserve and showcase reports of atrocities by Nazi Germany, communism's wartime foe.
From 1947 to 1955, early Ostwich exhibitions also showcased anti Western depictions.
Of American urban poverty to equate capitalism with Nazism, reflecting Cold War efforts using post war propaganda to bolster communist regimes.
The founding of Yad Vashem in Israel in 1958 elevated the memorialization globally, canonizing the reported 6 million Jewish victims as a sacred legacy for their new state.
Remember, Israel is established in 1948, so less than five years into its existence, you have the establishment of a memorial.
Further monuments arose in Buchenwald in communist East Germany in 1958, followed by Treblinka and Sobibor in communist Poland in the mid 1960s.
After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, memorialization expanded with the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., in 1993, alongside revisions to Auschwitz's 1990 death toll adjustment from 4 million to 1.1 million, a shift that curiously left the 6 million Jewish death toll unaltered in the post war consciousness.
In the 21st century, memorialization surged with sites like Berlin's Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in 2005, Shanghai's Jewish Refugees Museum in 2007, and Amsterdam's National Holocaust Museum in 2024.
Today, Holocaust memorials and museums have arisen in at least 46 nations.
From Argentina to Australia, Belarus to Brazil, Croatia to Canada, and beyond to China, South Africa, and Mexico, forging a global mandate to educate and commemorate embedding the narrative's moral imperatives into cement and steel.
Again, that's an article, Holocaustianity on American Mantle.
When we think about what powers our modern world fighter jets, clean energy, even the foam that's in your hand we rarely stop to ask the question, what powers our power?
See, it all comes down to a handful of critical minerals.
And most of these minerals come from overseas.
Now that is a problem.
Saga Metals is working to fix this problem.
Their mission build a secure, independent future for North America by developing domestic sources of titanium, lithium, and uranium, the materials that our economy and defense depend on.
Their flagship project in Labrador, Canada spans 160 square kilometers with a 15,000 meter drill program.
Underway driving a potentially world class titanium resource.
Saga has also partnered with global mining leader Rio Tinto, which can invest up to $44 million in Saga's lithium project, a major vote of confidence.
Business Commandments and Supply Chains00:02:32
Now, Saga Metals trades publicly under SAGMF in the US and SAGA in Canada.
With the race to secure supply chains heating up, A company with assets like these won't stay under the radar for very long.
So learn more at SagaMetals.com.
Again, that's SagaMetals.com.
America is a country that was founded for the purpose of allowing Christians to do their duty before God and not to have their consciences ruled by the doctrines and commandments of men.
Reese Fund exists in order to see the Ten Commandments properly applied, not just as a plaque on the wall, but to actually be used in business as though they're commandments from God that we're supposed to obey.
Our goal is to find businesses and to buy them and to build them up.
We want to find manufacturing businesses and use them to make sure that we can maintain our capacity to do things here.
Reese Fund, Christian Capital, boldly deployed.
Hey friends, Grey Toad Tallow is a family business making skin care the way that it should be simple and clean.
The company began as a personal mission to find healthier, more affordable solutions to common skin problems without the chemicals that are found in most products today.
Now, that search led to crafting balms from grass fed, grass finished animals that were naturally rich in vitamins and healthy fats, which is exactly what your skin craves.
These balms fight dryness.
They calm eczema and psoriasis along with other stubborn skin issues without containing all the nasty toxins.
Gray Toad Tallow offers everyday soaps, balms, and beard balm for men.
To experience some of their products, grab a balm sample pack.
Each batch is made with care in their home and shipped directly to their customers.
For skin care, the way that God designed, natural, clean, and effective, visit graytoadtallow.com.
Use code WRITE15 for 15% off your order today.
Again, that's graytoetallow.com.
And if you want 15% off, then add the promo code WRITE15 today.
Identity Politics and Revisionist History00:15:04
Ah, Mexico.
When I think of Mexico, I think the agitators of World War II, for sure.
For sure.
But that really is fascinating.
South Africa.
South Africa.
You're talking about nations that literally weren't even involved.
And yet, in their country that was not involved, did not participate, one side or the other, they have museums, you know, this memorializing monuments to an event that has nothing to do with their country.
And yet, it's been made a staple, a kind of a cornerstone in their own nation's psyche and moral framework.
Why?
Why?
I mean, that really is interesting.
If there was any other event that was treated that way, we would question it.
We would push back.
We would say, it's not just the question of what really happened, it's the question of what is happening.
I feel like that when I, it's not what happened, it's what's happening.
Like, what is this narrative being used presently to accomplish?
What is the aim today?
That's to me, that seems like a worthwhile question.
It has to be mentioned that a big part of the proliferation of the narrative had to do with American Jews.
So, Jews that lived in America were horrified with what reported to them overseas.
And so, I'm going to read a list now of cultural propaganda pieces, including Schindler's list, that really gripped the American consciousness.
And it's worth saying, and this would be, I would say, probably any group.
If Mexicans internationally were exterminated, there would be a number of Mexican Americans that would say, We need to stand up for them, right?
Ukrainians that have lived in the United States when war broke out, they felt a certain allegiance to Ukrainians that were undergoing war from Russia.
But here in the United States, you had influential Jews in media and culture.
And in many ways, the events of World War II bought them kind of a bit of a hall pass.
It was very anti Semitism.
We just talked about this with Kevin MacDonald.
It was pretty rife in the 20s and the 30s.
Most World War II soldiers, I think it was 59% of them, they said they didn't want Jews in America.
So anti Semitism was very prevalent, most certainly in Europe, certainly in Russia.
Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution and even in America, but after this event happened and it was leveraged and used, criticism all of a sudden went to be a very serious thing.
Here's some of the accounts.
This is how it kind of grew in our national consciousness.
This institutional enshrinement, reading again from the same article, was amplified by a torrent of Holocaust related media, beginning with survivor accounts like Eugen Kogan's Der SS Stadt in 1946, Prima Levi's If This Is a Man in 1947, and fictional works like John Hershey's The Wall in 1950.
These are very early on.
These are Some of them not even a full year after Nuremberg, each weaving the reported Nazi persecution into global consciousness.
The 1960s and the 1970s brought historical studies like Raul Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews in 1961 and dramatizations like the miniseries Holocaust in 1978, which burned the narrative into public memory.
Claude Lassmann's Shoah, again, that's the Hebrew translation of Holocaust, in 1985, Art Spielman's Mouse in 1986, and Steven Spielberg's fictional masterpiece, Schindler's List, in 1993.
Blended testimony and storytelling, establishing the Holocaust story as the parable of good versus evil.
In 2012, Robert and Carol Reimer's Historical Dictionary of the Holocaust Cinema listed over 600 Holocaust related films, documentaries, and television productions demonstrating the narrative's profound reach in modern media.
In the digital era, works like Ken Burns, The U.S. and the Holocaust in 2022, and The Zone of Interest in 2024 continued to shape moral imaginations, ensuring the narrative's enduring grip on hearts and minds and fortifying it against those who dare to question.
Its claims.
The U.S. per capita has more Holocaust memorials than any other nation in the world, save Israel.
We have to admit, we are ground zero for this narrative.
This new religion, sure, there's memorials in South Africa, sure, there are in Mexico, Australia.
But it really is the U.S.
And as you noticed from the directors of those movies, Jews that live in America very much so felt the need to bring the narrative forward into movies, film, series, radio, books, memorials that you could attend.
We just have to be honest, that's how it was accomplished.
It's not just merely the fact that so many people died.
Millions upon millions of people, more, most certainly, than six million, died in the free state of Congo in the early 1900s, as I mentioned.
We talked about, we've talked about before, the Holmendorf.
Millions of Christian Ukrainians starved by Stalin's regime.
Communism itself, not in a singular event, but over the course of the early years of terror in the 1920s, killed between 20 to 30 million Russians, most of them Christian.
It's not just about the numbers.
It's not as though no genocide has ever killed more than a million.
We have this event that surpassed them all.
It's about who it was claimed to have been done to.
And those same people that identified with it, understandably, took that story and they went back and they made movie after movie, over 600.
We don't have 600 movies about the Battle of Midway against the Japanese, about Okinawa, Iwo Jima.
We have less than 100 of those.
It was their involvement in media and film.
We just have to be honest.
That's why the narrative is so prevalent.
And I want to point out something that's Also, more unique, which is that these films and these books that have been written aren't necessarily about the Jewish identity.
Actually, often they're about the American identity.
And what they do is they look back to the Holocaust and that history through the American lens.
Well, what does it say about America?
I think recently, in the last five years or so, there was an HBO series called The Plot Against America, actually.
And it was also a little bit of some counterfactual history or revisionist history where the isolationists in America at the time, so you think of like Charles Lindbergh and people who were saying, we don't want to go into the war.
They were actually pretty friendly to the Nazis and Hitler's regime, that they win.
And that they actually win, and America doesn't enter the war, and Nazism is actually brought over into America.
And it centers around a Jewish family, I think, in New York, some borough of New York City, and tells the story of their life as the swell of Nazism comes over.
And now they're seeing it right up, and it's come to their doorstep.
And it's obviously called the plot against America.
And so it isn't necessarily about the Jews over in Europe, it's actually about the Jews in America.
And so you have to.
Do this reckoning of, you know, even if you think about some of the memorials we've discussed in Argentina and South Africa, the difference is in America that it actually is foundational to the modern American identity.
Captain America, we, you know, we fight Nazis.
That is the American identity.
And so it is so deep seated in American history now that it's worth calling into question why did this change?
What happened?
What forces were at work to.
Change over time through this media and this influence, change America's view and America's view of itself.
That's a really good point.
Yeah, I mean, a lot of, you know, as a little kid, you know, you're growing up, you're reading, you know, about World War II or studying the history, you think of, you know, black and white pictures of soldiers, you know, storming beaches, and there's a sense of pride, you know, a sense of identity, like this is who I am, you know, and this is, you know, these are my ancestors, these are my fathers, this is.
That this is our claim, what we did.
And so it's really hard when something becomes personalized, when something becomes religious, when something becomes sensational, when something becomes foundational for your country's whole identity, then it's really hard to then investigate that from a place of objectivity without bias.
Because the moment that you even begin to question, it's not just that you're.
It's from both sides of the equation.
So, the moment that somebody questions something like the Holocaust, it's not just that they'll receive accusations from one side saying, So, you're trying to minimize the atrocities of Hitler.
No, you also receive accusations from the other side, usually the same people, but just two different tactics, where they'll say, You're trying to minimize the achievements of your great grandfather, of your own country.
People bled and died.
To do this great thing, and you're discounting it, and you're even bringing into question that your own fathers might be the bad guys, which very few people take that approach.
And I don't take that approach.
The furthest that I would even be willing to consider is not that our American fathers who entered the world were the bad guys, but I would push back and say, okay, but is this a war that we should have participated in the first place?
Should we have even entered?
The war.
And the reality is that, you know, on the ground at the time, everything has been sensationalized now.
Everything has become religious now.
But if you're able to turn back the pages of time and look at some of the polls, even political polls in America, it was not popular.
It wasn't until Pearl Harbor that America even seriously considered entering the fray.
Until then, people, the mainline consensus was it's not our fight.
It's not our fight.
I think of the propaganda.
No American boys will die in a European war.
Like that was a very common propaganda in World War I and World War II as well.
And then just going to quickly to your point about history and the reasonable question of should we have fought in that war, three other wars come to mind where no one challenges that questioning the war on terror, Vietnam, and Korea.
Oh, wait, those are the last three wars we fought in.
Right.
And it's perfectly fine to question those.
Another one would be the war, it's not war in the traditional sense, but the war on drugs.
Yeah, I mean, like that's what the, you know, political left and BLM and, you know, woke Marxists, you know, I mean, that's what they've been questioning for what, 15, 20 years.
And they kind of achieved their high watermark in 2020, 2021, and maybe 2022 underneath the Biden presidency was like, look at this terrible, terrible thing that we did.
We took drug addicts and criminals and actually gave them penalties.
Isn't that atrocious?
You know, and they actually, For a moment there, they were winning the propaganda war.
Like, I mean, seriously, there was a time where, I mean, every Fortune 500 company was putting a black square, you know, in replacement of their logo.
And everybody on their Facebook page, you know, was putting a black square for their profile picture.
People, but it wasn't just black people are oppressed.
Like, think about that for a second.
It was a revisionist history, not going all the way back to slavery and those kinds of things, but it was also a revisionist history on.
More recent policies, namely tough on crime policies, the war on drugs, the war on, you know, it was revisionist history.
It was saying, you know what, maybe America did the wrong thing.
Maybe we were too harsh.
Maybe we should not have been involved ourselves in these ways.
And so my point is just to say that every major, you know, mainline historical narrative has been up for questioning.
It has been picked apart to death, and no one bats an eye.
But then there's one historical event that is it's not just if someone questions it, people would push back and say, You're wrong on historical grounds.
No, it would be, You're wrong on moral grounds.
You're a monster.
You're sinister.
You're wicked.
How dare you?
That's unusual.
We're unable to see World War II for the tragedy that it was.
I have a lot of German lineage that was here in the United States for a long time.
And those that went to the Western Front to fight fought and killed their German relatives.
The United States and Germany at the time were both purportedly majority Christian nations.
So, majority Christian European nations slaughtered each other by the millions.
And for what?
Germany was never coming here.
Even today, when you hear the narrative of America only, I think we should be America first forever and America only for the time being.
We've got a lot of problems here.
That's what I saw someone.
America first forever, America only for now.
There could be a time where we could help out Nigerian Christians.
Yeah, maybe we should.
I'm not an isolationist.
In all times and all places.
I'm not.
But I look at how we have had our hand in every single affair around the world for 50 years.
And I'm like, you know what?
For now, maybe just mind your own business.
But Matt Walsh was saying America only.
And I saw someone come back and say, and they put a map up of, you know what?
Of course.
America covered in a swastika.
If we were America only, this is what would have happened.
Are you retarded?
Even the logistics.
So, again, practically, right?
So, take the religiosity, the religious fervor and sensationalism out of it.
Just looking at it on the historical grounds and the political logistics.
There is no way that Adolf Hitler and Germany were going to be able to completely conquer America on, you know, that's separated by an ocean.
It wasn't going to happen.
Germany is smaller than Texas.
And Hitler clearly said France to the French.
France.
England to the English.
America for the Americans.
America for the Americans.
It's this mythologizing, the blowing up.
And again, you lose the tragedy.
Hitler may.
They slaughtered each other.
He may have colonized some parts of Africa, I think is possible.
Yep.
But so did the British.
Likely for resources to help for militarization.
But so did the British.
So have we.
So you would have, if you looked at Africa, for instance, so did the French.
My goodness.
I remember as a teenager going and visiting Kenya and Tanzania.
Colonial Exceptions in Africa00:06:06
And they all spoke Swahili, but they would see mzungu, like a white person.
All the kids are pointing because you're a sight.
You stand out.
Some of them had never, if they were a young child, never seen a white person.
Before and you know, they would approach you.
I remember being asked, you know, the moment they realized that I couldn't speak Swahili beyond, you know, like, um, you know, like, you know, thank you very much, you know, I think, or you know, those kinds of things.
Um, the basics, uh, they would say, Well, do you speak French?
It's French, they say, French, French.
And I remember thinking, like, what, like, what is this country, you know, in the middle of Africa?
Why are they asking me if I don't speak Swahili?
It makes sense I speak Swahili, but like, why are they asking when they realize I don't speak Swahili?
If I spoke French, I say, oh, because they were colonized by the French.
That's why.
That makes sense.
So, my point is like, Africa, you would have had, you know, French colonies, which we have.
You'd have British colonies, you know, then maybe some American colonies and then some German colonies.
But beyond that, beyond that, and maybe Poland and maybe, you know, a couple places in Europe, but you would still have Great Britain.
You would still have France.
You would still have Spain.
And you certainly would still have.
America and to think that, you know, like that kind of argument from people, and we see it on social media.
You're citing something that happened just recently.
That kind of argument is, you have to understand it categorically, is no different from screaming feminists and leftists saying, you know, if Trump is elected, we're going to have, you know, all the women in America, you know, with bonnets and red dresses forced to carry babies for wealthy men.
Right.
Forcing, like, and that's laughable.
But I guess what I'm saying is that, you know, like not so much the leftists are going to left us, right?
They slithered across the floor leftily.
They're going to do what they're going to do.
But what's unique is that when leftists talk about, well, if Trump wins, you know, then you're going to have this oppression of women, citing the Hands Made Tale, and conservatives then would respond and say, that's ridiculous.
That's sensational.
That's hyperbolic.
That's not true.
But then when it comes to this issue, right?
Well, If America hadn't joined the world, the war, the entire world would be speaking German and there'd be swastikas everywhere.
Well, when it comes to that narrative, it's not just leftists who are promulgating it, but the conservatives actually all of a sudden reach across the aisle and join hands with them and are on the exact same page saying, You're right.
That's for sure what would have happened.
And there's no basis for it.
Yeah.
And on the point of America first, America only, isolationist, interventionist sort of scheme, if you look at the first 150 years, just as a matter of American history, you look at the first 150 years of our foreign policy.
You have the America first, America only isolationist view that's espoused in Washington's farewell address.
Early on, the country's in its nascency.
We need to establish our systems and establish our sort of governance before we start to involve ourselves in foreign affairs.
Then you go to James Monroe and you get the Monroe Doctrine.
And so, for those who don't know what the Monroe Doctrine was, it was essentially the idea that at the time you still had European colonization in the Western hemisphere.
So, you had France, who was up in Canada.
You had Spain, who was still down here.
And what the policy was is we don't want European powers in our backyard.
So our foreign policy is simply going to be protect our interests in the Western Hemisphere.
And that's it.
Then you get Roosevelt's, I think it's a corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which basically espouses the same idea.
Now we're all the way up to the turn of the 20th century, past the 20th century, and America's policy is still we don't want to get involved on the other side of the globe.
We only care about America and our backyard.
Then you look for the next 100 years to 120 years where we're at today, and it's been the exact opposite policy.
It's been, we are everywhere.
We have CIA and basically every government around the world, and we are not shy on policing nations we have virtually no interest in.
So, yeah.
And so, as a matter of history, actually, to say America first, America only, to say I'm quasi isolationist, there are certainly events where, yeah, there'd be an exception.
Like that, we should be a Christian nation.
Christians in Nigeria being objectively persecuted, that would be, I think, one exception.
If things weren't as terrible as they are right now, like let's say that we were a Christian nation, number one, we'd be minding our business and the exceptions would be few and far between.
We would mainly be concerned about our backyard.
There would be, from time to time, some of those rare exceptions where we go and get that oil.
No, when we go and actually protect people, predominantly because they're white, no, predominantly because they're Christian.
And Nigerians would actually fit the bill.
That would be a suitable example.
And so, like, again, just to use as an example why we are not strict isolationists for all time, that would be an exception that I think all three of us would agree with.
That we would say, yeah, let's go and save those Nigerian Christians and bring them here.
No, no, you don't get to come here, but ensure that you're not slaughtered and put to death.
So, that's something that you could do, which wouldn't even require that many people on the ground in terms of American troops.
If at all.
If at all.
But we're nowhere near that.
We are involved not just in a few isolated cases on very clear moral and religious grounds.
We're involved everywhere except for the places that might meet the standard of exception.
Yep.
Which is crazy.
Protecting Faithful Nigerians00:03:20
The silver is mine and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts.
Yet your retirement dollars keep shrinking daily as Washington prints money out of thin air.
Genesis Gold Group aligns financial guidance with godly principles when others serve only profit.
Their faith centered approach to gold IRAs stands apart in an industry that has forgotten what true stewardship actually means.
Why gamble your family's future on Wall Street's paper promises?
Your 401k and IRA deserve better protection.
Genesis Gold Group transforms your vulnerable retirement accounts into physical gold, something real, something tangible, something that God created.
With inherent value.
Their faith driven experts walk you through every step, helping you shield your life's work from the financial storms up ahead.
No high pressure tactics, no hidden fees, just guidance rooted in timeless principles of sound stewardship.
So the decision is simple watch your retirement evaporate through inflation or secure it in God's precious metal.
Take action now.
Go and visit rightresponsebiblegold.com.
You can visit today for your free book, The Bible and Gold, and join the thousands of believers who sleep soundly, knowing their future is anchored in something unshakable.
Again, that's rightresponsebiblegold.com, safeguarding your legacy with God's timeless treasure.
When it comes to your financial future, are you planning forward or backwards from your desired results?
What type of financial culture do you want to create for your family?
And for your children's children.
We are not called to be wise as doves.
Therefore, simpleton planning simply won't cut it.
Joe Garresey helps families develop and implement a long term culture of excellent financial management.
He starts with your goals, your tithing plan, your retirement, and the legacy that you want to build for your generations.
And then he works backwards to build a real actionable plan to get your family on track.
Now, many of my personal friends have benefited from the financial wisdom of Joe Garrison that he shared for their specific situations.
Do you want to work with someone who strives for alpha with your investing, hates taxes, and brokers insurance?
Start planning smart.
Call Joe Garrison at 615-767-2555.
Again, that's 615-767-2555.
Or you can find him by going to backwardsplanningfinancial.nm.com.
Again, that's backwardsplanningfinancial.n, as in Nancy, m, as in Ministries.com.
Suffering Pointing to Christ00:11:32
I want to get to the religious aspects of the Holocaust.
I referenced earlier that the Hebrew word for Holocaust is the word Shoah, which stands for a burnt offering.
And you have this symbolism all through the Old Testament that to cleanse the people, to atone for the people, You needed a burnt sacrifice.
You needed something that was consumed in whole.
I don't think it's a coincidence that you see as part of the Holocaust narrative that you had ash, you had chambers, you had smoke.
It's not just the world is not just stuff.
There are ideas and truths that are deeper than truth, that are truer than truth in symbols.
And so, again, we're operating with the assumption the narrative is as it stands gas chambers were used, ovens were used to cremate bodies to go ahead and get rid of them.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the central standpoint of this new Western religion.
Is a religion that similarly has sacrifice, burnt offerings, smoke, the death of the innocent to atone for the sins of the many, a new original sin, Nazism.
I mean, it's a word that.
Real quick, that's so insightful that you said.
I just want to pause for a moment because when you think of, again, from like a logistical standpoint, and if you're thinking of like, I want to steal man, a particular narrative that is the most defensible, has the most primary sources, you know, it's the most credible and easy to prove.
And I'm on the side of, you know, I think that an atrocity took place and I think that it was very bad and I want it to be etched in people's minds.
I want them to remember this never again mentality.
If that's all you're trying to accomplish, then why not stick with what is most provable, what's most defensible and say, look, a ton of people, right?
You could say hundreds of thousands, or, you know, some people are going, of course, to say millions, but a ton of people, regardless, many, many people.
Died and they died of starvation, they died of firing squads, they died of disease because they were malnourished and not taken care of, and you know, these kinds of things.
And so, tons and tons of people died.
But that's not when you think of the main narrative, right?
When you think of the Holocaust, you don't merely think, all right, this might be included in the mental image that comes to mind, but it's not, this is not all you think.
You don't just think of disease, of starvation.
And of executions by firing squad.
The quintessential picture is gas chambers and ovens.
It's ash, it's fire, it's smoke.
And that's, you know, I'm just without making a claim one way or the other, it is historically settled that that at least has the least support.
So, regardless of taking a clear, hardline stance, it did happen.
Or it didn't happen, or it happened with this many people.
No, it happened with that many people.
Now, my point is just to say that that element of the Holocaust has the least primary sources, the least provable data in order to support.
So you're taking.
Because there's no evidence left.
There's no bodies that are buried.
Correct.
It's a logistical problem.
This seems a high quantity of bodies to bury.
That's what you're getting at with the least support.
Yes.
So to say the weakest part of it is it just simply would be logistically impossible.
And yet.
The portion of the narrative that has the least historical support, the most difficult to prove, is the exact portion of the narrative that is most seared into the conscience of every culture on the planet, including, I would argue, especially Americans.
So, why is the least provable element the most memorable and most frequently talked about and depicted in films and all these kinds of things?
And I think the point that you're making, Wes, I bring all that back to you, but I think the answer is because it's that element is uniquely religious.
Right.
Fire, burnt offerings.
That's a great point.
Similar to if you're familiar with George Washington's story about him chopping a cherry tree with one swing of hands.
Yeah, like the things that you were, or him tossing a penny, throwing it all the way across the Potomac, which if you've ever been to the Potomac, is completely unreasonable to think that a man could do that.
But these are the things you remember.
Why?
It's the stories that we tell.
We're trying to tell something.
Religious about it.
George Washington as this godlike figure in American history.
And so, yeah, and so we can look at many different stories and see those same kind of elements, the most unbelievable or most unverifiable elements actually becoming the things that are most known.
The cornerstone.
Listen to this quote from Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson.
He says this The new religion, speaking of Holocaustianity, is very seductive.
It is very soft and sweet and sticky.
And it's easy to go with it and lose the Christian faith.
You have a new and different faith, a happy, clappy faith where everybody's nice and everybody's sweet.
The only sin still left is Nazi sin.
Hitler is the devil.
The six million are the Redeemer, and that's deadly.
It's got nothing to do with the Christian faith except that it's a clever imitation because you get Auschwitz instead of Golgotha and the gas chamber instead of the cross.
That's deadly.
Can I blaspheme our Lord Jesus Christ?
Does anybody worry?
No problem.
Blaspheme as much as you'd like.
Can I blaspheme against the Holocaust?
Horror, horror.
He's a heretic.
There you can see the real religion of the governments today, of politics today, and of the mass of the people.
Today, he's Catholic, but I think he's really insightful.
You have these cornerstones.
We just mentioned it as far as a sacrifice, but you also have another stand in for original sin.
You have new saints.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, he was executed after attempting to assassinate Adolf Hitler.
It seems from his writing, he denied the virgin birth and the resurrection from the dead.
So, according to the standards of the Christian faith, the man was a heretic.
The Lord knows what happened to his soul.
And arguably, also denied inerrancy of Scripture.
Yep.
So, the Christian faith will be held to be essential.
He seemed not to affirm those things.
But he's held up as a saint.
Movies are made about him.
Dietrich Bonhoeff.
What would you do in the face of evil?
What would Dietrich have done?
We hold up these new saints, these new sacrifices.
I'm about to read a quote from John Piper about these new crucifixions.
You have a new original sin, Nazism, racial supremacy.
You have a new devil, Adolf Hitler.
This functions as a religion.
With COVID, there were very many aspects of it too that felt very religious in nature.
A new priest, Dr. Fauci.
A new sacrament.
You had ostensibly Christian ministers saying the COVID shot is kind of like the resurrection, where the aborted fetal cells that have been used in the vaccine lines have been used now in this vaccine that gives life.
And it's kind of like how Jesus died, like this aborted infant died and then gives life in their death.
It was a religion.
The mass was the sacrament.
The vaccines were the sacrament.
There was priests.
There was a church.
There was good works.
You had all of that.
And what we have here is it's a longer standing one than the COVID religion.
But a new religion nonetheless.
Dennis Prager in 2022, he wrote an article.
You can see the headline on the screen here.
If Holocaust deniers don't go to hell, there is no God.
Now, Dennis Prager is an Orthodox Jew.
He's not a Christian.
But he went so far as to say if they don't go to hell, if the people who deny this historic event don't go to hell, I would refuse to believe that God even exists because he wouldn't punish someone so evil as to deny that.
Yeah, it's crazy.
Absolutely insane.
Crazy.
When you think of Actual true statements, it would be if crucifixion deniers or if resurrection deniers don't go to hell, then there is no God.
But here you have the replacement of the life, death, and burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ with the life, death, cremation, right, and ascension of their ashes and smoke of six million Jews.
It is a replacement religion, it is not mere history.
It is religious.
It pains me to quote from this article because I think all of us have been impacted positively, negatively in some ways, but positively in many ways by Dr. John Piper.
He's an older man.
He's in many ways had a faithful ministry.
But this is a 2003 article titled The Passion of Jesus Christ and the Passion of Ostrich.
And some of this I will chalk up to John Piper is a very bleeding heart.
He's a man with a lot of sympathy and a lot of compassion for people in suffering.
He has a pastor's heart in many ways.
But this is an example of how even otherwise orthodox, otherwise solid, otherwise faithful ministers, how even this narrative in what we think to be a true Christian, I think we'll see John Piper in heaven, even in a true Christian.
They can say things that are borderline tantamount to blasphemy.
I'm actually going to start with this quote here.
This is from this short article, The Passion of Jesus Christ and the Passion of Auschwitz.
At one point, he says this.
I'm not going to read the whole article.
He says, The denial that Christ was crucified is like the denial of the Holocaust.
For some, it is simply too horrific to affirm.
For others, it is an elaborate conspiracy to coerce religious sympathy.
But the deniers live in a historical dream world.
Jesus suffered unspeakably and died.
So did Jews.
Literally on the same line, the life, death, resurrection of the Son of God, historic certainty that he lived, died, and rose again.
And we literally have to make a line right below it.
So did Jews.
His words, the denial that Christ was crucified is like the denial of the Holocaust.
What are we doing?
Yeah.
Strange.
This is a more extended quote, but he's going to continue to link this idea of suffering at Calvary.
In the suffering at the extermination camp in Eastern Germany or Poland at Ostwich.
He says here, I'm not thinking of cause or blame.
I'm thinking of hope.
Is there a way that Jewish suffering may find not its cause, but its final meaning in the suffering of Jesus Christ?
Is it possible to think not of Christ's passion leading to Ostwich, but of Ostwich leading to an understanding of Christ's passion?
Right there, he's just kind of making the point that intense human suffering can point us to Christ.
That is a fair point.
We'll totally grant that.
Is the link between Calvary and the camps a link of unfathomable empathy?
Perhaps only Jesus, in the end, can know what happened during the one long night of Jewish suffering.
And perhaps a generation of Jewish people whose grandparents endured their own noxious crucifixion will be able to, as no others, to grasp what happened to the Son of God at Calvary.
And he does say, he says, I leave this as a question.
I do not know.
But again, in his own words, perhaps unlike any other people, these people that suffered through this can empathize with Christ at Calvary.
That is elevating a historical event to the level.
Of religion.
And as long as that religion has a grip on our psyche, has a grip on our movies, I mean, education, Holocaust education, it's mandatory in many, many states.
Morality vs National Identity00:03:06
You have to go to the museums.
I was doing research for an article and coming out of one of the Holocaust museums, the children were encouraged to write on a little card things that they learned and things that they're going to take away.
And I could see on the board there, this was in Chicago, one little girl had written on her note, What have you learned?
What did you take away from this?
I've learned to be kind and welcoming to immigrants.
Now, I'm not going to pick on the little girl here, but don't miss the connection of the ideas.
The Holocaust is what happens when you close your borders.
The Holocaust is what happens when you're critical of groups of people.
The Holocaust is what happens when you say, hey, there's some problems here.
And we're noticing a certain group of people predominantly involved in this.
And if you go down that path, you'll never come back from the spiral of hate that you're in.
And so you must be open, you must be radically welcoming.
You can't have borders, not in your heart, not in your love, not for your country.
You need to welcome everyone and anyone that wants to come here.
Because if you don't, you could be gassing Jews too.
Yep.
And so essentially, it's a false dichotomy, but it's, you know, feels in terms of perception and optics very, very real.
This choice held, you know, as though there are only two options two and only two options.
You can be a moral person or you can want to have a country.
And that's it.
If you want to have a country and the things that are prerequisites to having a country, like a people in place and borders in order to be able to govern and mitigate that.
People being eroded and displaced and deracinated, and all those different things.
If you believe that we should have a country, that we're allowed to have a country and do the things necessary in order to have that country, then you are a sinister person.
Or as an alternative, you can be a very good person.
But being a very good person, a moral person, what that requires as a prerequisite is the complete inclusion of everyone else.
What it requires to be a good person is you can be a good individual.
A moral individual, but you cannot have a people.
So you can have morality as a person, but you cannot have a people.
Or you can have a people, but you cannot have God.
You cannot have morality.
You cannot have heaven.
So I can have a people, but I can't have goodness.
I can't have morality.
I can't have a conscience any longer.
Or I can have a conscience, morality, but in order to do that, in order to attain sainthood, in order to attain to the status of being a good person, I have to tie my hands behind my back.
I have to say that I don't have a home.
I don't have a place.
I don't have a country.
I don't have a people.
And my children don't have a future.
And those are your choices, basically.
You can love your kids and want them to have a country and a hope and a future, or you can be a good person.
Defending Scripture Against Bigotry00:13:50
And I think it's a sham.
I think that it's a false dichotomy.
I don't think that that's the way it shakes out at all.
But.
Although I'll rail against that false dichotomy and that framing, at the same time, for those who will not see it and will never see it any other way, they'll only see those two options, then, you know, for all intents and purposes, as it's perceived by them, then sure, I will be a monster, a monster who ensures a future for my children.
I'll do that every day of the week and twice on Sunday if the only alternative is being a nice person, but my children don't stand a chance.
Yeah, I think that's a great point.
I think it's, and when I think about this, and I think this is kind of the overarching theme of how we're talking about this, it's as much about the history as it is the premises that were built and the lessons that were drawn from the history.
And I think what we're finding is so often Christ's enemies and the church's enemies don't allow you to separate those two things.
In other words, it's to question borders, to question these things is to question the Holocaust and whether the Holocaust happened.
And so, even if you, as we're attempting to do, say, assume the history and assume the prevailing narrative about the Holocaust, we want to attack the premises and the lessons drawn from it.
And our enemies are still going to say, you're questioning the Holocaust because they're so inextricably linked.
And I think the Holocaust Memorial or Holocaust Museum example is a case in point of those things that it's not enough to affirm the Holocaust, it also is that you must affirm the history.
The prevailing narratives that continue on in America's ethos as well.
It's why we defend verbal plenary inspiration.
Every word of the Bible, divinely inspired and divinely preserved.
Because we know if you question even one part of it and we say, well, 99% of it's true, but there's one part here, like, was it really that many?
Did Joshua really cross the Jordan?
If you do that, then how certain can we be of other parts to it?
So we hold the whole narrative and we say from the beginning to the end, every single word inspired by God.
Because All of it fits together.
If you can question part of it, then you can question all of it.
You can question.
And we, as Christians, know that's a great example.
We know how important it is with every fiber of our being to defend, at the cost of our lives, the inerrancy of Scripture.
Because if any of it can be questioned, all of it can be questioned.
And ultimately, we lose the Bible and that being the grounds of our religion, the Christian faith.
And I think that Christians understand that as it pertains to the equivalency within the Christian paradigm.
But also, I think Holocaustianity, they understand this as well.
There are Christians, and then there are Judeo Christians, and Judeo Christianity is an alternate religion.
And so, for the Judeo Christian, it's not the Bible, it's the newspaper clippings and the Nuremberg trials, and that's their plenary inspiration, verbal plenary inspiration.
That's their inerrancy.
And they're going to defend it at all costs because they know if anything, Can be questioned, it can all be questioned.
And if that historical narrative is questioned, then the religious implications that's what they're most concerned about that come out of it that all that begins to crumble.
And so they're defending, and we have to see it this way this isn't just a battle between historians, this is a battle of religions.
There are two predominant religions in the United States.
Yes, there are more Muslims coming in, yes, there are more Hindus and Buddhists coming in.
But by and large, there are two predominant religions that are at war right now for prominence in the United States Christianity and Holocaustianity, Christianity and Judeo Christianity, the Bible and World War II.
That is the battle.
And what we're realizing more and more as every day passes, we're realizing this ideology, this religion, It is idolatry.
It is idolatry.
It is a direct enemy of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
It is.
And it must crumble.
It must crumble.
And when I say that, we're not saying, and therefore we must hold that nothing bad happened under the Third Reich, that no atrocities occurred, that no sin.
No, but what we're saying is we believe something happened.
And again, we're not historians, so we're not going to put exact details and exact numbers and exact timelines on everything.
But we know there's enough proof of at least these elements did happen.
And some of that, there's a reason, right?
It's war, after all.
And then some of that, even though it was war, we would say is still immoral.
And you can hold that position in the history category.
But then over here, as a Christian, with your chief devotion being to the Lord Jesus Christ and to the truth of scripture, say in the religious category, we deny all.
All of it.
Do I deny the Holocaust historically?
All of it, wholesale.
No.
Do I deny Holocaustianity as a religion?
You betcha 100%.
And going back to the point of it's all a package deal, if you don't have the Holocaust, then the narrative well, white people can kind of have their home.
Like, we've got to be honest, that's the impetus of it.
You can't have your home, you can't have your own place, you can't have your own people because Hitler back.
It would lead to this.
We saw what happened to it.
And so it's that package deal because when you lose that part of it, maybe actually white people are allowed to have their own space.
They've gone from 36% of the world to like 12%.
They're a rapidly diminishing global minority.
Well, we've got to keep that up because we know even if 5% of them have their own place with their own laws and strictly enforced borders, we know what would happen there.
We've got to be honest.
There's an antagonism.
European Jews or Europeans and Jews, they don't like each other.
Like this has been 1500 years.
They don't like each other for justified reasons and unjustified reasons.
And this has been weaponized.
Guys, you saw the movies, you saw the memorials, you saw the last names that made the movies.
This has been weaponized against Europeans to say you guys can't advocate for this.
Can I get an early life check on Spielberg?
Let me look here.
Real quick.
I'm just curious.
There's a couple of Levi's that showed up there.
Okay.
All right.
Any other?
This has been great.
You came and you did your homework.
You did.
Well, you did the reading.
You conquered employment.
You'll never be employed again.
No, I would expect nothing less from you, Wesley Todd, but you did the reading.
You brought the quotes.
Everybody, you know, if they're watching, the guys listening on Apple and Spotify, you know, God bless you.
We appreciate you.
Leave a Five star review, or we will find you.
We have a particular set of skills.
We will find you.
Give us that five star review.
We earned it.
But for those who are actually visually watching, you're on X or you're on YouTube, I think I speak for everyone.
We say we love a good quote coming in, making a little sound, popping up on the screen.
And you brought them.
I'm looking at your iPad over there, and it's just so many words.
It's just so many slides, so many things, graphs, and pictures.
It's phenomenal.
So I feel like You brought it today.
I feel like we covered a lot.
Are there any final thoughts on this subject as we kind of land the plane?
I would just say my summary, my takeaway is that I actually think, as a matter of history around the Holocaust, is actually beside the point.
Yes, that's what we are called to do as Christians is actually attack those things, those ideas and lessons that are in direct contradiction to scripture.
And in doing that, yes, you will be called a Holocaust denier.
Yes, you'll be attacked in the same light as someone who actually questions the real history.
But the reality is that.
We shouldn't be forced to defend the bad, the good of history as Christians.
We shouldn't be forced to defend those things.
What we can absolutely do today is attack and defend, well, I would say defend scripture and attack the ideas that people are actively promulgating.
They're using the history to promulgate and to espouse.
And so that's what we're called to do.
So, all that to say for the Christian out there who's like, well, I don't have time to look into the Holocaust.
I don't know if I can come to a complete determination of what did and what didn't happen.
That's my encouragement.
It's actually, hey, great.
Don't worry about it.
You don't need to do that.
Yeah.
Yep.
That's very well said.
I'll leave it with this just as a pastoral warning.
A day is quickly approaching.
If we're not already there, we will be not in decades, but in a matter of months or at most a few years, where in the same way that you cannot be a Bible believing, courageous, faithful Christian in our current climate without being called a bigot.
Homophobic, you know, these kinds of chauvinistic, misogynistic, racist.
I'm just, I'm telling you, this is the way it is.
I don't like it.
I wish it wasn't, but you are kidding yourself.
You are fooling yourself if you think that it's anything other than what I'm about to say.
A day is quickly approaching where you cannot, in the West, be a faithful, Bible scripture loving, courageous Christian without being called anti Semitic.
It's not going to be possible.
It's not going to be possible.
We are quickly approaching a time where.
If you simply believe the New Testament, the New Testament itself is already being labeled as anti Semitic by the ADL, right?
We're already almost there.
And you might console yourself by saying, well, yeah, the ADL, you know, but that's not, you know, that's not, Dennis Prager hasn't said that.
Ben Shapiro hasn't said that.
Well, one, go back and look at some of the receipts that, you know, there's a few statements that already have been made that might surprise you.
But two, Even for some of the individuals that have not gone as far as the ADL yet, my point would be that last word, yet.
A day is quickly approaching, rapidly approaching, where you cannot be a faithful, Bible believing, courageous, outspoken Christian without being labeled an anti Semite.
In the same way that if you're a Bible believing Christian that holds to a traditional view of marriage, you will be labeled a bigot, you will be labeled transphobic, homophobic.
That same principle is going to apply to this issue, this question of are you an anti Semite?
I see that as either already true or soon to be true.
But it is inevitable, and every serious Christian needs to be prepared for that.
And when I say prepared for that, I mean that you need to be able to see that it's coming, know that it's coming.
And be resolved between you and the Lord and your loved ones.
Have that conversation with your spouse, have that conversation with your children, with your local church, with your friends, and say, when that day comes, I'm not going to flinch.
I'm not going to back down.
I know it's not if, it's simply a matter of when.
I will be called on the basis of my faith in Jesus an anti Semite.
And when that happens, I'm still going to preach Jesus.
I won't back down.
That will be a line in the sand, and it is quickly approaching.
And my prayer and hope as a Christian minister is that Christians will pick the right side, that they will side with Christians, that they will side with Christ, that they will side with Scripture, and not with Jews, not with the ADL, not with Israel, not with Judeo Christianity, not with the neocons, not with the Daily Wire, not with this, that, and the other.
But that they would choose the side of Christ.
Because Jesus promised us on that final day that if we were ashamed of him before men, he will be ashamed of us before his Father.
I'm not ashamed of Jesus, no matter what I'm called, no matter what labels are applied to me.
And I pray that by God's grace, you would not be ashamed either.
That's our show for today.
We hope that you've been blessed by it.
We pray that God would strengthen you and give you courage.
To face future attacks against Christians by enemies of God, which come for the record in all shapes, forms, and sizes.
And this is just one, but there are many, and we should be prepared.