Speaker 1: All right, we've got a decent number of people on
I think we're probably good to go ahead and start.
Remember this is recorded to anyone who missed anything can
always re listen and catch up with parts of it.
Everyone else to go with it. I think we can
go ahead and start. So, Hey, my name is Luke.
I'm the president of the Nathaniel Green Society. We, of
course are the North Carolina chapter of the Old Glory Club.
We have this space every week to discuss a variety
of topics and to chat with some very good guest
and tonight we are thankful to have a new guest
with us, but familiar to pretty much anyone who's involved
in these sort of right wing circles, especially on Twitter.
So any of the other officers can introduce themselves and
then we'll let our guests introduce himself and we can
kind of move into the topic.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'll go.
Speaker 1: Hey, guys, I'm Kevin or keV Bought, Secretary of NNGS.
Speaker 2: Good to be chatting with you all tonight.
Speaker 3: I am Appeal to Heaven and I am one of
the five officers at Lodge in the Club for the NNGS.
Speaker 4: Looking forward to it's a nice conversation.
Speaker 1: Good evening everyone.
Speaker 4: My name was pandam the vice president Daniel Green Society.
Speaker 2: I'm behind the society account tonight.
Speaker 4: Thanks for coming, and I'm chief Slack, the X Space enthusiast.
Speaker 1: I think our fifth officer is not with us at
the moment, and so I guess we can move on
to our guest and then we'll let him introduce himself
into topic.
Speaker 2: Hey, this is Peaking Jana's host of the Peaking Yanas Show.
I'm a member, charter member, and an officer in the
Central Committee for the Whole Glory Club, one of the
first ten people in there. And yeah, I guess the
general men invited me on because they wanted to talk
about dispensationalism. And I've done I've done a couple episodes
on it, I've read some books on it, and I
pretty much yeah. Yeah, twenty years ago dismissed it as
just brainwashing junk theology. But you know, it does rear
its ugly ahead, and I guess if it's going to
be something that in influences are you know, the US
foreign policy, it's something you're gonna have to revisit every
once in a while. So yeah, that's where I'm at.
Speaker 1: Well, we appreciate you coming on to talk with us. Yeah,
dispensationialism is one of those things where it doesn't really
make a lot of sense if you weren't raised around it,
you're kind of surprised that anybody really adheres to it.
But you know, it still is alive and well, although
it does seem to be sort of aging out, most
of its you know, hardcore adherents tend to be I
would say, probably in their late fifties, sixties or older now.
But you're right, it has historically impacted America's foreign policy.
It still does to a degree, and it still holds
sway in some of the lingering neo con influencers that
are out there. And and if you're raised Baptist, even
if you weren't taught it explicitly, it's a little bit
still kind of in the air you breathe. Not as
much as it used to be, but it's still somewhat present.
So it's good to revisit it. We appreciate you coming
on to kind of tackle that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no problem. I Yeah, I was raised Catholic, baptized
as a baby, first communion, you know, Catholic schools. I
went to a Jesuit school. This when I got to
high school. When I graduated high school, I pretty much
just stopped going to church. And it wasn't until I
was around twenty eight or twenty nine that I started
attending a Baptist church. And I didn't last very long
in that one. But I went to another church which
was more reform Baptists, like sixteen eighty nine Confession, and
it just never it was never a topic of conversation
until I decided, you know, I was going to I
was going to take seminary classes, and it was brought up,
and it was you know, it was just one of
those things that I went to a Cresterian a PCA
Presterian Church of America a seminary, and it was just
one of those things that was brought up. It's like
a joke, you know. It's like the things that we'd
argue over or were like pedo baptism and you know, eschatology.
So I started studying it and I started reading about it,
and I was like, how can anyone read the Bible
and get this out of this? It just doesn't make
any sense. It's you're you're bringing some thing to the text.
You you've made a conclusion. Now you're bringing it to
the text and you're figuring out you're going cafeteria to
the scripture to figure out how to make it work.
And even so it doesn't work. I mean, I just don't.
I'm sorry. I'm I'm a pattern noticer guy. If that
was true, if there was any truth to it, I
would have noticed the pattern. I would have noticed it explicitly.
And it just doesn't make any sense. I mean, I'm
not saying that there isn't going to be like a
physical rapture one day. You know, you can argue over
when that is. But the whole thing about dispensations and
then the whole thing, you know that especially the thing
about modern day Israel having anything to do with what's
in the sixty six books or seventy two books sorry
of scripture. I don't see it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is very much something you kind of have
to bring with you to the text, and it's and
if you study asmisatialism, and I guess you've read more
of the history of this, but it's always struck me
as something that that's very obviously what happened. You know,
there were some people who had some conclusions, maybe not
entirely sure how they got there, but they really got
in their mind, you know, certain aspects about the Jews
and sort of their role in eschatology in the present day,
and they just decided that was true. And then in
order to make that, you know, that quote unquote fact reality,
they just had to bend to the entire text to
kind of match it.
Speaker 2: Well. Yeah, and even if you want to, if you
don't want to accuse anybody of doing it for certain purposes,
which you know once you study and you know, if
you know, you don't have to read it, but I
mean you can peruse the schofield that was at Scofall
the man in his book. I have the I have
the PDF, and I've just you know, control left the
whole book for for certain things. You realize that it
was it was put out for a reason, and it's
not a I don't think it's a a coincidence that
this this teaching arose at the same time Zionism proto
Zionism was rising in Russia in other places. So yeah,
I mean, it just there's in order for you to
believe it, you would basically have to say that I
don't think that you can believe in dispensationalism and say,
you know, scripture is inerrant, because you're you're either going
to be ripping out, ignoring, ignoring whole you know, whole passages.
You're going to be jettisoning two thousand year old, well
at the time, eighteen hundred and fifty year old teachings.
And you know, I mean, maybe that's what you know
to do. I mean, five hundred years ago they decided
to jettison fifteen hundred years of teaching. So you know,
I mean, maybe maybe that's not it's not so surprising.
Speaker 1: Well, at least in the Reformation you saw continuity. Even
though you did end up seeing a big divide between
the schools, the reformers still claim to have a continuity there.
The environment that dismensationialism arose out of was not really
attempting to do that though, So you know, so dismins
stacialism came a little bit after the Second grade Awakening,
But the second grade Awakening specifically was very much oriented
towards restorationism. I mean, and there was some good that
came out of it, actually, you know, like there were
positive benefits. I think there were a lot of people
who became, you know, genuine believers during that time, but
there was no attempt like before, to show much in
the way of continuity with the past. I think that's
the reason why even though you did see revival, which
I think was genuine in many cases, you also saw
a lot of cults form at the same time. Yeah,
it was sort of a cultural mood where people were
very confused, either didn't know about the pastor didn't care
about it. And it's not surprising that sort of in
the aftermath of that, even though it may not have
arisen exactly at the same time, is when you started
to see the rise of dispensationalism, because you're right, there's
really no record of the belief as far as we know.
I would say before the mid you know, the mid
eighteen hundreds, or say.
Speaker 2: Sure, and I'm just being hyperbolic and you know, taking chabs,
but yeah, I mean, this this comes out of nowhere,
and you know, inevitably you'll have somebody who will pull
up like one like theologian from I don't know, from
maybe fifteen you know, from the early fifteen hundreds forward
or even before then, and you know, all that is
is the exception proving the rule. It's like one guy
had an idea. It's not even close. It echoes something
that Darby and and Schofield were teaching, and you know,
you just have what they have to do is they
have to basically torture somebody's words in order to present it.
And yeah, I mean, it's not like the Reformation. I
understand why the Reformation happened. I don't. You can't explain
why this happened really, and when you, once you start
studying this, you realize that it had to be something,
something nefarious. And I'm not saying that there weren't any
nefarious forces working in the background of the Reformation. Not
there were. We don't need to get into that. That's
another that's another space. But this is something that is
obviously in your face. It's one of those things where
you look at it and you're like, okay, I mean,
this isn't even subtle. Yeah, and then you look at
a certain group who is just not subtle with their
propaganda and you're like, okay, I understand, I understand what happened.
Speaker 1: Well, so I guess to keep the I guess to
sort of provide some background for any who may not
be familiar with it. Would you like to start with
what you consider to be the historic roots to the
You know, obviously it's kind of a new thing that
came somewhey out of nowhere, But you know what, where
do the beginnings of this teaching seem to be? Like
how did it get popularized? Maybe so we can kind
of explain how it became so big in the US
in particular.
Speaker 2: Kind of hard to pin it down, but there it
seems to have come out of revival, out of the
revival movement of the eighteen hundreds. There were some excited
utterances by an Irish girl in I think the eighteen thirties.
I can't remember. I used to I used to all
this stuff by heart. It's been years. I try not
to think about it anymore. That like, that's where the
rapture came from. It was like, oh, I mean it
was literally a girl who was mentally ill and Darby
heard this and ran.
Speaker 4: With it and had a dream.
Speaker 2: Yeah it was something like that, right, It was like, yeah,
it was like a fever dream or something. I mean
she was known to be mentally ill, ye had you know,
she was disturbed and apparently Darby heard of this. I mean,
I don't think he hear at it first hand, but he
heard of this and just decided to run with it.
And then you've come forward, and right around the time
the Protosionist writings are being written, in your eighteen fifties
and eighteen sixties, you start hearing people talking about this.
And it's been a long time since I read that
Schofield book, and it's been a while since I did
an episode on this. But I'm trying to remember when
exactly Scofield presents this. And I know Samuel Untermyer, a
very wealthy benefactor, was the one who was the one
who got it published, and he helped to get it
into all the Moody Bible colleges. And this is right
around I think this happens right around right after the
First World War in the early nineteen twenties. Correct me
if I'm wrong, that's correct.
Speaker 3: He's a He's also an occultist of some sword with
the Golden Dragon order.
Speaker 4: Or something, if you look into that.
Speaker 3: But yeah, it was one of the public or the
helped publish it funded at.
Speaker 2: Least when if you get your study Bible, and you
know this wasn't like my friend Buckcha, who I love,
I've known for years. He was doing a show on
it recently and he said that, oh, this was the
first study Bible, and I was like, actually, the Geneva
Bible had notes. Most people don't know that. The fifteen
I can't remember what year that the Bible came out,
but it was just basically notes on. It wasn't trying
to it was explained, trying to explain like the tougher passages,
things like that. But you know this is those notes.
These notes turn out to be basically teaching you that
the Bible has its own worldview and that God has
given you the Bible and now He's inspired these notes,
which is basically the way it was sold, and that
this is exactly what scripture teaches. And I'm not saying
this hyperbolically. I mean I've met people face to face
who believe this, who believe that the notes of the
Skillfield Bible are somewhat inspired. And I know I have
a hard time believing that this was hidden for eighteen
hundred and fifty years. I mean, I know a lot
of people think the Catholic Church is so evil that
they have every you know, the Library of Alexandria's in
the basement of the Vatican. I don't think they would
have hidden this, hidden this for fifteen hundred years and
then what another three hundred and fifty years of Protestantism
doesn't figure it out, and then all of a sudden,
this just drops out of the sky. I mean, this
is literally like it may as well have been written
on golden tablets.
Speaker 1: Yeah that, I mean that was kind of the attitude
of that sort of mid nineteenth century bibalism anyway, and again,
like the cults that came from that time had the
same attitude. Mean, you mentioned the golden plates, but literally
that's the milieu that Mormonism comes to, you know. I
mean like it's again that mood of wanting to just
make a complete break from the past, and Mormons decided
to take a really complete break from the past and
just do their own thing entirely. But it was that
same attitude. You know. The thing with the Scofield Study
Bible too, was and this is one of the reasons
why it's like, you know, you mentioned the Geneva Bible,
but the Geneva Bible was so impactful in its time,
and it's hard for us to kind of remember this
now because we have so much access to information, and
even our parents said, you know, they didn't have the
Internet so much, but they had at least they had
libraries with a lot of these info in it from
various perspectives. When the Scofield Bible came out, for a
lot of people, that's the only, like, the only theology
they had too, other than the Bible itself, that was
really the only commentary they had. Maybe Matthew's commentary, but
I don't think it was popular then the the way
it is now. And so for a lot of those guys,
I mean, yeah, this is the first time they ever
heard someone, you know, do an in depth explanation of
what the Bible was in our written form, and also
one where they could regularly the interface with it as
they were doing their private reading. And so yeah, for
a lot of people, I mean, even if they didn't
at the time say it was divinely inspired, I mean,
if that's the if that's the one guy who's consistently
teaching you, I mean, you're gonna hold that one man's
opinion too high regard, even if the notes he's saying
don't actually match the text, you know, they could just
be completely unrelated in most cases, but that's what you had,
and so and so they decided to cling to it.
Speaker 3: And you have this also, the skull film Bible off
tune is a if someone just started getting back in
the church or going back to church and they didn't
have a Bible, churches would just hand those out too.
So those are common Bibles that were given to people.
And uh, I mean you mentioned the seminaries. They would
do that stuff as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you mentioned like Matthew Henry's Elementary. When I
was when I was going to Protestant church, I was
a partial to John Gills, which is gigantic. I mean,
you're talking about multiple volumes and basically what you the genius,
the evil genius of the Schofield Bible is is basically
you have a demented systematic theology that you can carry
in your hand. You know, there aren't many people who
are who are able to carry around multiple volumes of
Matthew Henry or John Gill or the many the many
other many other ones that came out of Princeton in
like the nineteen hundreds. But this gives you a systematic
theology and it makes you think it makes especially a
new believer, someone who's naive, someone who doesn't know anything
about church history, who doesn't know that no one was
talking about this, you know, more than one hundred and
fifty two hundred years ago. It makes them feel like
they know something. And also the whole thing about it
pointing towards escatontology has always been something of a of
a problem with me. I'm I'm very much a I
don't know how much so anymore, but very much a preterist.
And you if you want to be a preterist, you
have to go find books like the Perusia. You have
to go you're reading five hundred page books, and you're
finding books that have been out of print for a century.
And the problem, one of the big biggest problems I
have with eschatology is it is very attractive for the
average person because the average person is not very intelligent.
They're not reading thousand they're not reading, you know, five
hundred page books, thousand page books. They're not digging into commentaries,
they're not going to the Bible, to the library at
the local seminary eschatology and believing in eschatology as like
I know the truth of what's going to happen plays
to your ego very easily, and I think that's what
this Gofield Bible was. It was something to play to
the average person's ego where they're reading scripture and then
they're like, I don't understand this, and then they go
down to the notes and it's like, oh, this is
telling me exactly what the scripture means, and that what
what it means, what God meant by inspiring this scripture,
and then you know, but then you look at the
history of you know, a scripture about I don't know,
pick pick one that is you know, yeah, I mean
something that has been for two thousand years debated in
in freaking monasteries, and people are like, oh, I know
actly what this means. It's like, wait a minute, you
know exactly, you know more than Thomas Aquinas. You're going
to You're going to say that Aquinas was wrong about
what he said about this scripture. And it just plays
to people's egos. And I think that's one of the
that's one of the things that it's one of the
reasons why, I mean, you have to study eschatology, but
it's one of the reasons why I hate eschatology is
because they're very unserious people who are not even unserious people,
very uneducated people, people who do not you know, who
can't tell you how they would feel if they didn't
eat breakfast this morning, now believe that they know exactly
what scripture, what scripture means, when this has been debated
for two thousand years.
Speaker 1: Well, another way to kind of approach what you're getting
at is, you know, so I'm gonna, you know, speak
from a Protestant perspective, but you know, one big, you know,
one big you know, biblical Hermoneudic that came out of
the Reformation was that you are it's always better too,
and so the Bible sufficient to interpret itself and the
sense that you know, like you can read the Bible
and the Bible will explain what it means to you
through it's referencing itself. But if you're going to do that,
you have to start with the passages that are really
like easy to understand, and then you work from there
into more complicated passages. If you're someone who gets really
into eschatology, you're starting with probably the like one of
the most complicated subjects in theology. Coming to a form
of certainty on it and then taking your conclusion and
working into the plain meaning of the text. You know. So,
for example, you'll have people who will have really really
strong opinions on like the thousand year Reign, for example,
from the end of Revelation, and they'll start there and
they'll use that interpretation to explain passages that really are
like pretty straightforward, but because they came to a really
firm and usually aer in you know, conclusion on the
thousand year rag, all of a sudden, the whole Bible
gets distorted because you have to take these plane passages
and make them kind of twist to mess in to
what you decided your eschatology was what in reality, you know,
it really should take you years to get there.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, and that's I think that that's one of
the reasons why they had to get it into the
Moody Bible colleges immediately was if we're going to make
this go wide, it has to the person in the
pulpit has to believe it. And you know, like I said,
if the person in the pulpit is standing up there
and you know, it's like I was just thinking about this,
like Matthew Henry, I've used Matthew Henry's Bible commentary extensively
for John Gills. When you read through like Paul's letters,
they're pretty they're pretty solid on what they mean, and
almost to the point of there's there's sort of not
so much with Gilbert, with Henry, a little bit of
an arrogance, like, I mean, come on, come on, guys,
this is easy stuff. But not when they get to eschatology.
When they get to eschatology, you see that shifts away
and you see different arguments for what different passages mean.
And you have to take into consideration that if you're
going to brainwash a whole generation or generations of people
into believing that they know exactly what prophecy means, I mean,
do you understand how dangerous? Does anybody understand how dangerous
that is? I mean, this is why you you can
show so many evangelicles videos of Israeli's raping prisoners and
they either are going to completely ignore it, or if
they do comment on it, they're going to make excuses
for it.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's a multiple generation brainwashing.
Speaker 3: I mean, and it goes from like a pastor to
a layman and then I'm not layman to the family
and then you know, just keeps repeating the cycle over
and over again.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so there's no real humility about it. And you know,
one thing that I know from studying scripture, from studying
systematic theology, going down numerous numerous rabbit holes on soteriological
discussions from the fifteen sixteen hundreds between the Baptists and
the Covenant theologians. I mean, the scripture is not easy.
It's not. It just isn't. There are some things that
were there's some things that you're going to go to
the grave not being able to understand and handling someone
a Bible and saying here, now, you can understand everything
that's in here. I that's not only dangerous, that's basically abuse.
That's spiritual abuse. And I think you have generations of
people that have been spiritually abused.
Speaker 3: And yeah, there's also some other things that start to
factor into the twentieth century that kind of makes it
this like self fulfilling prophecy where you were talking about
early Zionism in uh, well, I guess it comes from
the Russian Pale kind of settlements. You start seeing that
going on in the eighteen eighties, and you start seeing
that during World War one with the Balford Declaration and
all kind of stuff that comes out of it. But
you also have some other writers at the time. I
don't know, are you familiar with Clarence Markin. He's the
guy that does all the charts. He got out a
book called A Dispensational Truth. I actually have it here
on my desk that I'm looking at right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I used to. I used to do the books
for the South Florida Life Waste stores, and I saw
those books when I was when I was doing those,
I don't remember those in the seminary that book in
the seminary library, but I know I've seen that book.
And it's just I'm about talk about a book that
you're like, oh, this is the truth, and then you
give it to somebody and you're like you look at
it and you're like, what the hell what is this?
Speaker 4: It's full of lots of different charts.
Speaker 3: And I was going through some passages the other day,
and I mean, you've got some of these kind of
predictions in there that the time of the Church ends
this year, or the time of the Church ended in
eighteen eighty eight. I think I was what I was reading,
and then you start having this kind of like what
you could sew. I know, they'll say that Covenant theology
is replacement theology, but really what they're doing is it's
subverting the Church and then replacing the Church with the
modern nation state of Israel. And that kind of stuff
ran rampant in smaller little Bible colleges all throughout the
South and probably a little bit of the North, especially
amongst Baptists, throughout the twentieth century.
Speaker 4: And then they would start producing these little pamphlet books
here that aren't more than fifty pages, that are basically
kind of like even a more watered down version of
what Scholfield was writing. And especially you see this ramp
up in the nineteen it's like nineteen fifties, right after
forty eight that all these little books like John r. Ries,
Peter Ruckman, Hayles Anderson, a lot of these guys started
producing and distributing these here to their Sunday school classes.
I'm looking at one right now, and this one was
printed in nineteen fifty and approximately sixty thousand copies in
nineteen fifty fifty one five thousand and fifty two five thousand.
So you think in like a little book like this
right here, that's not more than fifty pages got distributed
to I don't know, roughly they have a need to
eighty thousand people here, and these all were mainly distributed
to Sunday school classes, adults school classes, and who knows
how many people that taught and how many you know
people you know those people taught. So it becomes kind
of this like cascading effect here where you know, you
have schoolfield and he kind of comes up with this
novel idea, or really it's the Plymouth Brethren in the
schoolfield just runs with it, and you end up having
Larkin with his charts, and it starts looking a little
bit I'll just use the word, it starts looking more scholarly,
and a lot of your smaller Baptist colleges and evangelical
kind of schools of thought, they start picking this up
and start running with it, especially after forty eight, so
you have now you're talking about the generation before the boomers,
You got your silent generation. They kind of buy into
it a little bit, and then the Boomer generation they
really really buy into it. And I think largely it's
pretty much destroyed church attendance in America, just like as
a whole.
Speaker 3: I mean, even though you still have you know, the
Boomers clinging on to this kind of ideology. I think,
what's happened and you brought this up, and you know
you're opening here. It's almost like you're living in a
dispensational political worldview now rather than a theological dispensational worldview.
And I would say something like having a heritage American
position would be, you know, if you want to put
it into political terms, would be like a covenant view
of they of what America is not spiritualizing it really,
But that's kind of where we're at right now in
the twenty you know, twenty first century, where you know,
even people that don't even know they're dispensational, they're still
kind of espousing this kind of dispensational worldview that we
see today.
Speaker 2: Well, sure, it's okay.
Speaker 1: Sorry, I was gonna say. I was saying that that
sort of sounded like that was a good transition point
into how exactly that worldview which still exists, but I
think certainly was very strong a few decades ago. You
saw it certainly and full strength around George W.
Speaker 2: Bush.
Speaker 1: But I was wondering if you could give us sort
of a historical breakdown on how this way of seeing
the world sort of entered into our foreign policy, sort
of when that arose, how long you think it persisted,
and whether you think that's kind of still on the
way out or whether you think that still has some
staying power.
Speaker 4: Testing did well.
Speaker 2: Here, I'm sorry I was muted out. Okay, sorry about that. Wow,
don't worry, I'm a professional. The So, what I was
saying was, if you if you look at when the
Bible started hitting when the Scofield Bible started hitting Bible colleges,
which gives it legitimacy. Preachers stand up, It gives it
even more legitimacy. They start preaching it. This must be
the truth. Nineteen forty eight is when you you know,
people are like, okay, the clock begins state you know,
Israel has been refounded, and now everything you know, we're
going to now shoehorn this into this teaching, and you don't.
What's funny is if you really study the fifties and
the sixties, there's so much The fifties is very political time.
The sixties is very revolutionary time. It's once you get
into the seventies you really start seeing people that are like, well,
you know, we're coming up on one generation of Israel,
and someone like I think it was Hal Lindsay who
wrote was it eighty eight reasons or was it reason
eighty eight reasons why the Rapture will happen in nineteen
eighty eight something like that. And of course, I mean
all of these to these predictions never come true. Does
anybody I'm old enough to remember why two K? Just
I'm going to take this off on a side tangent
for a while for a second, just so that I
can talk about the pastors that should have been taken
out and stoned. I was doing books for Life Way
Baptist Life Way Baptist stores in South Florida in nineteen
ninety nine and two thousand, and the amount of preachers
that got rich off of why two K the World
is coming to an end books? They should have been
taken out and stoned. And the fact that they kept
their flocks is I mean to me, is all right,
I'll go back now so that Jesus doesn't come back
in nineteen eighty eight. The rapture doesn't happen in nineteen
eighty eight. Okay, so we got that wrong. They can
always just keep changing everything. Then you get into the
into the late nineteen you get into the nineteen nineties,
and I was working, like I said, I was doing
books for a book chain in South Florida. Does anybody
remember a series of books that came out in the
late nineteen nineties, even if you weren't.
Speaker 4: Alive, you talking about the Left Behind series?
Speaker 2: Yes, I was working doing books in a Christian bookstore
when you couldn't even keep those on the shelf and
people were like lined up for the new releases.
Speaker 3: Have you ever had a conversation with somebody where they
start basically quoting that book for geology?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's pretty unbelievable.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I was having conversations with people in
nineteen ninety nine who were like, why hasn't this been
made into a movie yet? And every once in a
while you'd have somebody slip and go, why hasn't this
been made into a document? I mean a movie yet?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a I remember when the movie, actually the
first movie came out, they had like churches all over
the area had basically watch parties that you could go
to and watch it, and then the pastor would come
and discuss what you had watched and you know, break
it down, and then of course outcomes the Clarence Larkin
charts and lots of they would lots of you know,
I guess you could say like they would have these
like week or two week long Bible studies that they
would you know, go through all the prophecy texts and
try to break that down and say like, oh, and
in your guys's life, so this is what they told
a lot of I guess millennials, you could say, in
your guys's lifetime, Christ is going to rapture you know,
everyone out, because you know, this is the last generation
because in this generation, you know, they would go down
that whole rabbit hole, and you know, you keep telling
it to a generation over and over and over again,
and you keep being wrong about it. Eventually you kind
of have like the legacy media effect that we see
now is that people don't buy it, and you know,
they don't buy the theory. But what you end up
having to have people just straight up leaving the church,
which is even a bigger problem than bad theology in itself.
Speaker 2: Sure, and the whole you know, pre tribulation rapture thing
just ignores two thousand years of history. I mean, when
has God spared us from suffering?
Speaker 4: And there's some dark times, some pretty dark times in history.
Speaker 3: So I mean it's one of those things where you
know it's going wrong.
Speaker 4: It is it is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I mean I'm not the I'm I'm not
like a timeline historian on this. I'm more of a narrative.
You know, I look at the whole narrative. So after nine,
after nine to eleven, you know, you basically people start
having conversations about you know this, you know, who are
these people that we're going to war against? Okay, so
we're going to go to war against Islam? And it
would always be brought up in churches. And this is
one of the one of the main reasons why I
mean I left Protestantism when I did, was because no
one could agree on anything. I mean, I was in
a church to split twice in like six months. And
this is a sixteen eighty nine Reform Baptist church.
Speaker 3: It's still a common Baptist elf Y said, And I'm
I'm a and I'm a Baptist.
Speaker 4: So that's a common Baptist alum. Yeah, that's you know,
they'll they'll split over the copper color.
Speaker 2: And I was going to a Pcay seminary, and you know,
I believed that, you know, at least there was some
kind of order there that there. I don't know, I
didn't put it this way. The the seminary I went
to was attached to a very huge church, and I
didn't see them having splits. They just seemed to be
growing at the time. But the I still was just
watching all this happen, and after nine to eleven, it
just it just made no sense to me because people
started saying, you know, I'm like, I'm going, okay, Well,
I mean I've studied Islam a little bit. There really
didn't seem to be a problem with Islamic terrorism up
until like the late nineteenth century the early twentieth century.
And why did that happen, Well, because a certain group
started moving back. I mean they were still they were there,
they had been there, had been Jews in Palestine the
whole time they've been living there. I mean, I've read
diaries of rabbis from like the seventeen hundreds talking about how,
you know, it was great that they could on the Sabbath,
they could leave their front door open, and everybody was
getting along, but then a certain group with a certain
ideology started moving there, and all of a sudden, violence
started happening. And I'm like, I wonder if that violence
would have happened if those people didn't move there. And
I started asking those questions, and people started going, well,
why are you blaming them? They were just moving the
there was no one there, And I'm like, well, wait
a minute. You just said that there was violence because
the people there were violent. And that's when it's like, well,
this this doesn't any sense. You're instinctively defending one this
one group against the other group. And I can understand
if you don't like either of those groups, or if
you like both of those groups, Well why are you
choosing one group over the other? And why is it
the group that actually moved there that they're the ones
that you're that moved there and push people off the land.
Why are you defending them? Well, they're God's people. And
the way I actually had a pastor tell me this,
I had a Baptist pastor tell me this, The way
we know the Bible is true is because the state
of Israel exists. And that's when I was like, you
know what I'm I'm done.
Speaker 5: Well, Pete, I think that your instincts about some of
the influences in the origins of this movement are correct.
So Darby, who was the precursor to Schofield, was really
working within a It was a reactionary movement because of
some Jews had been admitted into Protestant universities in these
bibl in these Old Testament Biblical studies departments, and this
gave rise to the higher criticism movement, as this really
started within a rabbinical tradition of questioning the veracity of
God's word because for them, the Messiah hadn't come, and
Protestants struggled with the question of Jesus said he was
going to return and he didn't, even though those of
us who come from a more Preadterist or partial Preadterist
background would say, well, eighty seventy was a fulfillment of his.
Speaker 4: Prophecy in Matthew twenty four and a type of coming.
Speaker 5: Anyway, the Protestants because of a and again I'm a
PCA Presbyterian just as background and subscribe to the Westminster Confession.
That being said, Protestants were confused. It didn't have a
singular voice on the answer to these questions, and so
these rabbinical traditions gained purchase in the early and mid
eighteen hundreds and really gave fruit to this higher criticism
movement of well, the word cannot be trusted, and Darby
was really a reaction to that. Uh So, the the
Jewish influence is huge here, and so the the reaction
took form of an answering in in in Jewish terms
rather than in Christian terms. And so, Pete, I think
your your your instincts and study er are are right
as far as the genesis unintended of what's going on here?
Speaker 4: The uh uh.
Speaker 5: So, how do you respond to higher criticism? You you
you go in in and basically create a literalistic hermeneutic
which says, not only is the Word of God true,
but there's you flatten out all poetic references, all prophecy references,
and so on and so forth, and you do so
in kind of a Kindergarten way. Uh. For instance, you know,
you get all the ruminations about six sixty six and
the number of the beast, and yet that's just a
reference to Solomon taking in you know, not holding to
his kingly limitations and taking in six hundred and sixty
six talents of gold. All that becomes is ignored, and
you get this entire literalistic hermeneutic which Schofield and the
Philip partnering and piggybacking on the Plymouth Brethren really runs with.
And then Rory the Riary Study Bible, which came out,
oh gosh, late sixties, early seventies. Charles Rary, who was
a professor at Dallas Seminary, really ran with that. So
the Riary Study Bible was hugely influential. So anyway, I
just wanted to give some of that historic background and
back up what Pete was saying as far as Jewish
influence in the in the origins of this movement.
Speaker 1: Well and on between literal reading and literalistic reading, you know.
So it was the historic tradition really of the Church.
And you know, especially you see it in the Protestant
and Protestantism that you are supposed to read the scripture literally.
You're right to say that what the dispensationalist did was
something different. So when the Reformers, for example, we're saying
you need to read the scripture literally, what they were
saying is you should always read the Bible the way
it's presented, like in the passage you're reading. So for example,
if you're in a section that's poetic, let's say the
Song of Solomon, if you're reading Song of Solomon, you
know it's actually not a literal reading to read that
passage like, you know, literalistically. You actually should read it
poetically because it's literally a book. Whereas the dispensationalist decided
that no matter what the genre of the text was,
it was all going to be interpreted sort of like
you said, in a sort of childishly, you know, flat
way of looking at it, so that it was it.
It was actually ignoring the way the Bible was telling
you to read it, and they just thought they would
read everything just at face value without any honor consideration.
And so I'm glad you brought that up. That's an
important distinction.
Speaker 5: Well, you know, the the questions that were brought about,
you know, you had the commitment, uh you know, Schleiermacher
ended up being kind of the end of this with
the and the quest for the historic Jesus and all
that was this again, this higher criticism movement that said
you couldn't trust your Bible when we know again that
the Bible is the most attested to work of ancient
literature there is. But but there were all these questions
that were brought up that that suddenly seminary students were
thinking they didn't have answers to and this dispensational hermonutic
comes along and says, oh, you don't know, we've not
only not only do we have the answers, you don't
even really need to. It's just this uh, this hermoneutict
that a middle schooler could understand, again going against exactly
what Pete says that you know, the basics of the
Gospel can be understood by a young by a child.
There here there's a redeemer king who loves you and
has shown his love by dying for you. That that
very basic. But the depths of scripture you can never
fully uh, one person could never fully get their arms
completely around and understand the depths of So it was
an attempt, in a again in a simplistic way, to
provide a means to answer these questions. But again I
think in within a the framing, instead of being Christian,
was Jewish. And what I mean by that is is
that it sought to answer the questions that were originally
raised by a group of liberal rabbis.
Speaker 1: And the.
Speaker 5: Vast majority of the church, well, the believing parts of
the church, said well, we don't you know, what's going
on in Germany. We can kind of ignore that right now,
but it really took hold in American seminaries in the
late eighteen hundreds, and so this was just an answer
to that. And so we can have even though it's crazy,
you know, Darby and Schofield and these and Ryri and
Walverard and Zuck and so on and so forth, you
can understand where the where this movement came from, in
the sense of people weren't getting their pastors were no
longer sent of course, you can trust your Bible. Of
course you can trust your Bible. And so you know,
I have I have a a I have I have
some sympathy for the pew sitter who gets who got
you know, sucked into this even with you know, because
Billy Graham. Let's let's let's remember that Billy Graham was
a member of a Dallas church. I'm in Dallas, by
the way, so I know a lot of these uh people,
uh uh somewhat closely. Billy Graham was a dispensationalist, wrote
the book Approaching hoof Beats, which in the late sixties
had a huge influence on Baptist preachers.
Speaker 2: So well, I think, you know, the one thing that
we haven't talked about, which I think is really the
thing that I can't believe people accepted, even people who
nominally understood scripture, was you know, the whole plan B
that Jesus came to the Jews, the Jews rejected him,
and He's like, okay, so I'm going to go to
the you guys are on hold over here, and I'm
going to go to the Gentiles and there's a future thing. Yeah, no, one, no.
And you know, and and I mentioned I've mentioned that
to people who you know, They're like, well, you know,
I grew up in a Scholfield church, but I don't
believe that. And I'm like, it doesn't matter what you
you're the spirit of it.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: It's like people people who Americans, most most Americans have
never read the Constitution, but because they grew up here,
they've it's been put into them. They've they've adopted its values.
It's beliefs by osmosis. You know, the people who have
been here for for people who've been here for generations.
His family has been here for generations, even if they
don't know, it's just it's it's become a part of us.
It's the same thing in churches. You don't have to
believe it if you are, if you're sympathetic to well,
you know, Israel is the modern state of Israel has
something to do with the prophecy of the Bible. And
you can make that claim. But if you say, I
know exactly what it is, because you know, because of
these notes here in this Bible, it told me, well,
you have no legitimacy. And I'm not saying that you
know you can you just because something came eighteen hundred
and fifty years later that it's not true. But you
really have to think that in a time in centuries
when all when there were monasteries, and all monks did
all their job was to do was to study the
Bible and read scripture, they would have saw this. Someone
would have saw this, someone would have came up with this,
something even close to it. But they didn't. And when
you take into consideration political you know, the politics of
the last one hundred and fifty one hundred and seventy
five years. I think it's a lot easier to see
exactly where this came from. It's it's hard to explain
that to somebody who's bought into this unless you can
explain it from a political from a you know, a
geopolitical standpoint, because it's just geopolitics.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So would you say that the political route, you know, so,
like you have this dispensationalism and it's been kind of
brewing in the background, most mostly seen among fundamentalists. That's
actually a conversation worth having, and that's I mean, probably
not tonight, just to stay on track with time and everything,
but you know, the dismensationalism stuck around because the fundamentalists
latched onto the fundamentalists were also at one point basically
the only Christians in America because everyone else, you know,
like all the other liberal denominations were completely falling apart
and losing orthodoxy. That's a different conversation anywhere. So it's
been brewing in the background. Would you say that it's
the sort of tri faith alliance that sort of arises
in neo conservatism that sort of brings well maybe not
even brings that theology, but sort of realizes that that
theology is a useful tool to get you know, an
untapped kind of fundamentalist voter base to agree with them.
And then that's maybe when dismisationalism started to make a
presence in national politics.
Speaker 2: What decade, what decade are you looking at?
Speaker 1: I would start probably with the forties. I would say
that's when Buckley started consolidating his guys.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean you you see the birth of neo
conservatism right around the time of the Doctor's plot in
Soviet Russia. Remember, right after the founding of Israel. The
Soviets were very, very friendly with with Israel. And then
there just seems to be some kind of there's some
kind of split that seems to coincide with what the
Doctor's plot. We don't need to get into that, but
they Jewish doctors, though Jewish doctors were plotting and they
executed them all. And yeah, I mean, well, geopolitics sort
of starts well, and that's and I was saying to
go back, sorry, I can rabbit trail very easily. That's
when you see the birth of the neo conservatives. Is
when Russia is no longer friendly to Israel, then the
neo conservatives come into come into existence, and they're not
friendly to Russia anymore because you know, let's face it,
I mean we I think anyone who knows and anyone
who follows my work knows that what Bolshevism was, and
that up unto a certain point. Basically there was an
over there was an over representation in leadership there, and
then all of a sudden, once the state, once the
State of Israel, you know, Stalin always had this problem
with the Ospburg groups, the Ospburg groups that had someplace
else to go. That's why they executed Germans, That's why
they executed Lithuanians, That's why they executed Poles. Once Israel
was founded, they tried to be friendly with them for
a while and then it was like well and it
wasn't like they kicked Jews out of Russia, but they
definitely had control over their population, much like Putina's control
over his population now. But yeah, it seems like that's
when when you start seeing more of that influence, because
if you look at the fathers of neo conservatism, you
you know, it's kind of hard not to notice a
pattern there. And the even the you know, the Wasps
and the Goham that were that were on their side
were very, very protective, which is why people like you know,
San Francis eventually later on, much later, had to be
kicked out. Or if Murray Rothbart at some point made
some reference that they didn't like, didn't matter that he
was a Jew, they had to they had to denounce him.
So yeah, I mean, I think that the there's a
lot of there's a lot of things that surround the
rising of neo conservatism, but one of one of the
big ones is the Jews losing a lot of the
power that they had in the Soviet Union, and then
from there on you see a real push and then
you see you know, in the sixty seven War, the
United States backs doesn't fight them obviously, you know, gets attacked,
a bunch of Americans get killed. Seventy three War, there's
no real no pushback, no pushback. But you know, when
you really if you want to look at foreign policy,
then you you have to start coming forward to the
eighties and you start seeing that there there's a real
switch to where as it just seems like that first generation.
The closer you get to nineteen eighty eight, the more
the United States government gets people are behind Israel and
you know, then you can look at Reagan's cabinet and see,
you know, who who's making that up. Even if they're
and I'm not saying that they're all they were all Jewish,
but they were definitely all what you would call neo Kanish.
So everybody knows.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, so a question on that. So you so
you see the New York has increasingly coming to power,
you know, through Reagan's administration. Then of course, you know,
Reagan is very popular, and then he achieves a major
foreign policy victory over the Soviet Union. These neo guys
stick around. They're obviously still you know, in full force
when Bush two is there. Now that we're sort of
moving away from neo conservatism, do you foresee this sort
of emphasis in our foreign policy saying the way it is?
Do you think they'll just morph into whatever's coming next?
Do you think there's a substantial Yeah, there's sort of
a substantial decrease in their influence. I'm not sure what
you think the future of this will be, Whether you
think this sort of foreign policy commitment to Israel is
permanent or whether it'll sort of go out with the neocons.
Speaker 2: Heal the immediate impulse is to always believe that whoever's
in power and has the power now always have the power.
But like my buddy luth Emflar, who's in the in
the chat right now we were talking about last night,
is that one of the reasons why you see why
you've seen so many Zionist Jews in the United States
all of a sudden become anti immigration is because the
bigger groups, the more groups you have coming in from
the outside, the more groups you're going to have buying
for influence. And I would say that one of those
groups that I think is even more or is as
power hungry, is as nepotistic, is as inclusive is Indians.
And I don't it's funny that when all of this
was happening during over Christmas, you didn't really see people
a lot of them speaking up against H one B.
But you do see them speaking up against anyone who
any group that may have a poor opinion of them. Well,
why would you speak up against the group that has
a poor opinion of you other than just survival, just
general survival, and that's your history. Everyone's oppressing us. If
you say anything bad about us, that means you just
want to kill us in poke ramas well, because if
you let in groups that are inclusive, they can push
you out of power. And I know that that's impossible
for people who are not intelligent enough to handle the
JQ who run around on social media and just basically
call anybody who disagrees with them a Jew to deal with.
But there is there is a chance that these people
lose their influence and their power. It happened in the
Soviet Union, it can happen anywhere.
Speaker 3: So it isn't that that's declining the support for I
guess you would say the modern nation state of Israel.
I mean, if you look at some Pew research of
you know, young people, and I think it's even young
people that attend church at a regular basis, even if
they go to a dispensational church, they don't buy that
ideology anymore. So, I mean, where do you In one hand,
I was talking to a friend about this here the
other day. In one hand, you had a lot of
subversive behavior going on with undermining Christian values in the country,
which was arguably their biggest defense. Right So now we're
here in you know, twenty twenty five, they don't have
that support anymore because America largely isn't a.
Speaker 4: I'll use the term cultural.
Speaker 3: Christian country anymore because a lot of people have walked
away from the faith because of these issues that we've
discussed about. But now you have where they're kind of
in this like catch twenty two, where they've they've undermined
their biggest support in their biggest base, and now they
don't really have that same power that they used to have.
How do you think they're going to navigate from that
kind of perspective now.
Speaker 2: Well, it seems like they're going to do it by
trying to get laws passed that make it illegal to
even talk about them, and that can only backfire. You know.
One of the things that when you know, one of
the problems that I think that they're starting to realize,
and especially since October seventh, is that you had a
whole bunch of the running places like the Frankfurt School,
writing books like The Authoritarian Personality, coming up with curriculums
that white people are oppressors and colonizers, and well, I
guess the one thing that they forgot to teach them
was that Jews aren't white, so they look upon them
as colonizers and oppressors now and now they're backpedaling. You'll
hear people like Christopher Ruffo who will talk about how
whose whole career is about how terrible the college campuses
are and the woke and all of this stuff, and
he'll praise Jewish academics on college campuses. Where do you
think this came from? I mean, and I find a
hard time to believe. I have a hard time believing
he doesn't know that. I have hard time believing the
James Lindsay said, well, don't know that. So they're just
going to call people, well right or anti semites if
you bring it up, if you point out that, you know, what,
what did? What has Dennis Prager said? He said that
atheist Jews. And I won't just use the one, you know,
like twelve second clip that I use all the time,
but there's another clip of him out there explaining exactly
how this happened. Is that atheist Jews, once they abandoned God,
they you know, they took the whole tikon olam all
on thing where you're, oh, heal the world, and they
did it using secular things. So they came up with
all the isms communism and feminism, and all these things
to heal. Well, the more people who realize that, the
more people are going to start questioning it. Wait a minute,
why do you like this? And you know, as doctor
Matthew Rafael Johnson says, he's like, look, my you know,
my dentist is Jewish. When I talk about this, I'm
not talking about my dentist. I'm talking about the fact
that there are thought leaders out there quote unquote thought
leaders and whole schools that eighty percent to ninety percent
of them are Jewish. And you have to ask yourself, Okay, well,
if eighty to ninety percent of them were Chinese, you
might have to ask a Chinese question, what cause it?
Speaker 4: What is?
Speaker 2: Why are Chinese people over represented in what seemed to
be revolutionary and anti American, anti American civilization, anti Western
civilization teachings that basically destroy you know what what our
ancestors and you know, people who have been here longer
than my answertors have been here. How come they're just
why did these Chinese? What are these China? You know,
why does Biden have four hundred and fifty seven Chinese
people working in the executive in the executive and you're
just not going to be able to get past this.
And you know, just there the whole dispensationalism thing is
is falling apart with boomers dying out. And you know
if basically in I forget what what luth empl are
and I had the numbers we were using yesterday, but
you know, by the time the next election rolls around,
they'll be like ten million boomers will be dead. And
that's like ten million pretty much ten million white people
are gone. It's like, okay, well, what does that do?
It reduces the demographics here. If you don't start changing things,
it's going to it's going to get our demographics in
the other direction. But also those are those boomers are
the ones that are mostly pro Israel and pro Zionism.
So I mean, and I'm just trying to figure out
exactly how to navigate the next how to navigate the
next four eight, twelve years, because you know, people have that,
you know, people are Trump is just this gigantic Zietist.
He's a Lakudnik, and I'm like, Trump's a boomer. He
has Jewish friends, He's been dealing with Jews his whole life.
He's been cheated by Jews and Jews have made him
a lot of money, and jess have gave him given
him money. I don't believe that he thinks that like
Israel is this place that has this this place in eschatology,
and that Jesus is going to come back because this place.
But I think he sees it as as the way
most Boomers see it, Boomer truth, post war consensus. I mean,
he's still panderous to black people that hate him. So
I mean, when it comes down to it, I don't
know how much dispensationalism actually means anymore. And I think
it's I think that it's going away, that its influence
is going away, But the political influence that was allowed
because of dispensationalism, that's not going away, and we're just
going to have to figure out a way to navigate it.
And eventually it's either going to die or die on
its own, which I think that's exactly what's going to
happen if you believe in the eighty year cycles coming
up on eighty years in a couple of in a
few years, or is just going to implode because that's
what it is, what always happens. They always just reach
too far. So yeah, I mean, I don't have all
the answers, but I think I have a you know,
I think that you know, at the Old Glory, we've
tried to figure out a way to navigate what's coming,
and you know, the potential for things to come, and
that's the collective eyes just like they do. And yeah,
I mean that's the way the only way I really
see forward.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's a good perspective there.
Speaker 3: So I mean what you're saying is basically, I mean
we're kind of living in a cultural dispensational kind of
framework time where you know, politics are still looked through
the lens of even if these boomers don't go to church,
or you know, their kids don't go to churchies, values
have been passed down somewhat mimetically to their children, especially
if they're kind of in the DC Beltway, where they're
still going to have kind of this overlay framework that
they're going to still view everything. I think you kind
of see this with guys, you know, on the app.
I don't want to call them neocons. I think that
that words. I mean, they kind of are, but at
the same time they're not. But you kind of have
this like multiple right factions where you've got the Libertarians,
you've got more of your dissident paleo alt right conservatives,
and then you have this kind of like this this
maga right, I guess you want to call it, where
you know, there's still you know, rapture ready, you know,
at any moment. Now, you know, we're basically spared for
the next four years as long as Trump's in office,
and they're just you know, coasting it out right now
through the retirement. But like you said, if ten million
of them, you know, pass away off the scene here
in the next I don't know, eight to ten years,
that's going to really shape the start reshaping the kind
of political landscape. I mean, you got to think the
boomers have also basically controlled politics since they were a
voting age. They've been the largest voting block and I
would say probably still the largest voting block of people
that show up to actually vote at the polls. That's
one thing that they they usually don't miss is to
go out and vote. So I mean that's something that
I can you know, I see that I don't really
know what you want to call the kind of the
maga right kind of people, but I mean there's there's
fracturing camps in there, and sometimes it seems like there's
some kind of conservative effort in the last couple of
weeks where it's like this, you know, undying loyalty to
you know, nineteen forty eight, the nineteen forty eight state,
and it's hard to kind of tell what direction that's
going to shift, if it's going to you know, it's
a fight that we're going to have over the next
for the next four years here with this administration.
Speaker 4: Internally within the right.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, and you have all these factions on the right,
and you know, if you study the Spanish Civil War,
reason why they the Nationalists Franco side, you know, teaming
with the Filongay and teaming with the Carlists were able
to win and be cohesive is because they all basically
knew who the enemy was. They it was clear who
the enemy was. Problem you have what the factions on
the right is at this point, a lot of people
look at the right and see the enemy embedded in
the right. So it's like, how do the factions of
the right come together when people look at the different
factions and they don't trust each other. So either one
of those factions is going to rise up and be
powerful and is going to you know, take over and
be the dominant group, or you're going to have to
have some kind of Balkanization. And Yeah, whether it be
the fact or desire, you're just not going to be
able to work together with people who that you just
feel like you cannot trust. Yep, there aren't going to
be I'm going to say this and it'll kiss people off.
They're not going to be mass deportations back to Africa,
They're not going to the United States. Is not going
to be one oh nine or one ten. I think
I think Maldives just became one ten. It's not going
to be one eleven. They're not even going to get
the illegals that are here now are not going to
be mass deported. It's not going to happen. So you're
going to have to figure out how you're going to survive,
how you and the people who you share your values
with you're going to thrive and survive within this soup
of hell. You have to go make your own heaven
within it, because all of those fantasies you have are
just fantasies. They're the same fantasies libertarians have when they're like,
you know, every country in the world just going to
adopt bitcoin is their reserve currency, or just end the
state bro or just end the federal reserve, or just
end end government schooling. Those are all fantasies. They're the
same fantas those And when you're sitting there going, oh,
we're sending them all back to Liberia. Oh we're deporting
every Central American and South American out of here. Oh
we're deporting all the Indians. Oh we're deporting now. Sorry,
sorry to burst your bubble. It's not gonna happen. You're
gonna have to figure it out on your own. You're
gonna have to figure it out with you. Start with yourself.
You strengthen yourself as much as possible, and then you
look for like minded people and you figure out a
way not only to survive, but to thrive. And until
you do that, all everything that you're everything that you
have in your head about how this country is gonna
go back in time is just a fantasy. It's not
gonna happen.
Speaker 1: Sorry, well, and hopefully the Old Glory Club can feel
part of that niche. You know, you're not gonna get
You're gonna get a hundred million people who join the
Old Glory Club. You know, that's really not scalable, but
it is sort of a stab in accomplishing that, getting
people who are of a like mind, who have similar
goals coming together and trying to build something. And you know,
networking is one of you know, people love to hate
on it because it's kind of a business buzzword, but
networking is the way you start building a bigger project.
On that note, Pete, we thank you for coming and
speaking to us tonight. I know it's it's getting close
to nine thirty, so we you just start winding down
about this time. Do you have any final thoughts before
we do our plugs and head out.
Speaker 2: No, no, thank you for having me. I really appreciate it,
and you know, really think, start thinking realistically, start preparing hope,
start preparing preparing for the worst, but also having a
plan to thrive. There's no reason, you know, when when
you look at when you look at oppressive regimes of
the past, especially the twentieth century, there were people who
were thriving in it. They were thriving in them why
because they figured it out. Figure it out. Stop living
in fantasy land. That's why I'm not. That's why I
had to leave libertarianism, because it's I saw it as
wrongly a more like academic right wing, you know, have
all the answers, be able to just say everybody sucks
and explain why and here's why you're wrong and everything.
None of that matters. What matters is what you can
do for yourself and what you can do for those
that you share values with. Anything else is just it's
just wish. It's you're hoping that somebody gets elected into Washington,
DC and turns this whole thing upside down. I mean,
there's there's a ton of reasons why that's not going
to happen, and we can do another space on that
sometime and I'll go into some not only practical reasons,
but some metaphysical reasons why that won't happen.
Speaker 1: Well, and that would be a good topic for another space.
And it is good, and we thank you for bringing
a little dose of clarity towards the end. Yeah, people
on the online right light to engage in fantasies, but
fantasies are counterproductive, really just an active waste of time,
and so it's good to be a level headed about it.
I get discouraged to be level headed and then you know,
being an adult, make responsible decisions for you and then
those around you to the best you can.
Speaker 2: Well, it's it's not black it's not black pilling. It's
figuring out what the reality of it is and then
just saying, Okay, this is what I need Now, I
know what I need to do. The hardest part is
figuring out knowing what she needs to do. You just
have to figure that out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, black pilling is just about giving up.
That's really all it is. Being realistic is the first
step in just being a grown up really at the
end of the day. And I mean we just you know,
and people on the right, you know, we do need
to ask movement kind of grow up, so to speak.
Like I was saying, hopefully the AGC plays an important
role in that. I'm confident it is. That's why I
joined this Wire Officer joined all our members joined, you know,
hoping to make a meaningful difference in our state and
then in the country as a whole.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think that I think we're down the
right path for that. And yeah, the one thing I
hear is, well, what are you guys doing well if
you're not. If you're not in the club, we're not going.
Speaker 1: To tell you.
Speaker 2: Sorry.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's yeah, that's the whole point, and join us instead.
You'll find out.
Speaker 2: Yeah, thanks, gentlemen, I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, Well, before we go, we do have some plugs.
As is becoming our tradition, we do ask that you
follow this week's guest. We have Pete at at Peter
r Kes that is his ex handle. Also, we had
a guest speak up Ronald Dodson. That's at ron Dodson.
We recommend you followed him as well. Of course we
recommend you follow the nngs that's at O, B, E,
D T st N. Of course you can follow the
officers as well. For membership inquiries, we do ask that
you reach out to us either at the Nathaniel Green
Society at protimail dot com. You can also DM our
account if you would like to, but the email is easier,
or if you are not North Carolina you'd like to
learn more about the Old Glory Club, please go to
the Old Glory Club at gmail dot com. Also, we
would like to plug our OGC affiliate out, which is
the Nicotine. I've had them and they are very good
and everyone I've heard speak of them speaks highly of them,
so please buy out. And finally, we do want to
wish you a good evening. We'll be back at eight
pm next week, same time, and we'll have more good
guests and more good topics, so thank you. And if
for offsers of anything they want to add, go ahead,
but if not, I think we'll go in head out