I mean, he’s right. He isn’t talking about destroying the government or releasing all prisoners. He’s talking about a truly Christian nation (which is not some corporeal plot of land), what Jesus says about the poor and oppressed, and how we as Americans citizens are choosing to serve the devil rather than God. Granted, a Christian nation would have no borders, no government, and no military, but Hart isn’t saying destroy all of that, he’s saying that, if we are a Christian nation, we shouldn’t have it in the first place. Jesus is radical, and I’m really happy Hart brought out just how radical he is. We ought adore only God, and in that commandment we do not find nation, borders, government, or anything of this world.
And let our poor get trampled by depressed wages, less job opportunities, MS-13(not every asylum seeker is peaceful), cultural change to reflect the southern countries, heightened taxes to pay, for helping these people etc etc. This is a question of which poor you’d rather choose and yours is not of your neighbor - who you’ve seem to have forgotten.
@Wolfhammered you're totally missing the point of the Gospels. Surely, you don't know this, but you literally worship some subordinate cosmic power , and not God, in thinking this way. In Christ, there is no "our poor" vs "their poor." There is no "those others," my friend. We are to see Him in "the least of these," and that's the criteria. If you find this problematic, then fine, but you renounce your faith insodoing.
Thank you for this. I appreciated the historical background provided. It was a helpful reminder. It's application for Christian citizens of the US was also interesting and gave me a bit to think about. I understood this to represent a summary view of Dr Hart's thoughts on the matter, but it was a great starting point and both clearly and succinctly stated. I would have to listen to it again to discern whether Dr Hart's comments were addressing policies themselves or the reasons underneath those policies. (I have an 8mth old distracting me atm.) Nevertheless, as a Canadian and speaking practically, I would find it difficult to navigate the best decision for the upcoming election, given the options currently available to US citizens, meaning Trump vs democrat. Either decision strikes me as entailing harm, regarding policies. I do not think the answer can be simple.
He’s got a big blind spot with his “orange man bad” take on the southern boarder. Orange man was using the same system that the Black messiah was using and the same system that the current guy uses, wash, rinse, repeat.
Depends on what you mean by socialism, most of what is called socialism in the United States is called social democracy in the rest of the world. I'm actually a market socialist, we believe instead of the state or the business owner class running industry it should be run democratically by the workers. The catholic church teaches a form of market socialism called distributism. Market socialism worked well in Yugoslavia.
@@christophersnedeker My friend, Catholic social teaching does not advocate for a form of 'market socialism'. I know this because I am a Catholic. By the way it doesn't depend on what I mean by socialism. It's what DBH means by socialism that was the important part here
Yeah, right. Nations should not be allowed to make laws restricting access into their countries, nor to apprehend those who disregard those laws. Ridiculous. The church has for many centuries acknowledged the boundaries and autonomies of various national governments. The various, historic churches have even identified to themselves according to those boundaries... the church of Greece, of Romania, of Russia, etc. When Hart says that "Christians have no earthly nation", and suggests that those who disagree with him regarding border enforcement are somehow "Christian nationalists", and that they make themselves to be children of the devil, he is painting some pretty haphazardly broad strokes. There are processes in place in America for seeking asylum. But the vast majority of people crossing at the southern border are not entering at legal points of entry; instead, they are blatantly disregarding the laws of the land, entering illegally. Where exactly did Christ challenge the secular government on its authority to establish law? As I recall, even as he was being sentenced to death, he pointed out Pilate's power to exact such a sentence had been given him by God. If a civil government may have authority even unto capital punishment, how can it not have power to detain illegal entrants? What's Hart been smoking?
I don't believe Hart suggested governments don't have the right to make laws. As Scripture says, mercy triumphs over judgement. Laws ought to be bound by ethics. If Christ approved of a blank cheque He wouldn't have criticised the institutions of His day.
@@br2485 It's unethical for a government to detain people illegally sneaking into their country? Many of these children are being trafficked by people who are not their parents. It's not merciful to detain them to sort out the mess being created by these criminal adults? Hart repeatedly says these actions can only be supported by children of the devil. Look, it's not a perfect situation. There's room to disagree on politics. But Hart's rhetoric here is really over the top
I wouldn't want to make a blanket statement about governments detaining people. It's certainly very possible for it to be unethical. I assume you've seen the conditions some of these children are in. I don't really see how that can be justified. We can't really doubt the devil would be pleased with the terror the children are experiencing. Where can we see how many of these children are being trafficked as opposed to being with families? Or how many are recently separated from families amongst the confusion of a mass migrant group?
@@br2485 According to the U.S. Federal Customs Border Protection, in the past seven months, 206,927 people were found trying to circumvent America's laws by sneaking in at places other than legal ports of entry. Of these, 41,068 were determined to be people belonging to a family unit (this number includes both parents and children, etc.), whereas 18,796 of these were deemed 'unaccompanied children' as they were either on their own or with adults other than their legal guardians. In 2019, 851,508 people were apprehended in total, with 76,020 of these being 'unaccompanied' children. (Likely, trafficked... shall we go on to rape statistics?) If the conditions are inadequate in these facilities where they are sorting things out while trying to keep pace with the tidal wave, the primary blame lies not with the government, but with those who are contemptuously disregarding the law of the land by not seeking asylum by legal routes, crossing the border illegally. If the Kool-aid you and Hart are selling is Christianity, then count me among the children of the devil who support the wall, creating whatever barriers necessary, physical or otherwise, to push back against this abuse of these tens of thousands of children.
@@Giant_Meteor In 2019 473,682 people coming through the Southwestern border were in a family unit. Assuming the minimum amount of children (if all families were two parents and one child) that's 157,894 accompanied children. A much much greater number than that awful figure of 76,020. You and I obviously wouldn't say the latter figure is acceptable, but we also couldn't say how many specifically are trafficked. At least I didnt see that information in the statistics. Many could be lone teenagers, children with their older siblings, etc. Regardless, one might say it's fairly repugnant to be callous towards people who endure the sorts of hardships that would motivate such desperate migration. It's easy to judge. But as you say, they're breaking the law. I gather that's all that matters. The question of being with Jesus or with the devil, of right and wrong, is dwarfed and subsumed by the supreme, uncompromising authority of law demanding our unquestioning loyalty. It's either that or total anarchy. I can't imagine any middle ground. At least, my lords haven't asked me to support one.
DBH is brilliant in the areas of philosophy and theology. No doubt we as Christians must forgive those who are indebted to us, just as we have been forgiven ourselves. But, just because one is an expert in one or two areas does not make one an expert in all areas. I wonder if DBH has researched the situation at the border as extensively as he has the New Testament. If he's reducing the issue down to: "Orange goblin puts kids in cages! Grrrr!" then it's obvious he hasn't.
@@erichgroat838 ... and he therefore became instrumental for Christ's work ! In fact, the text does not speak of betrayal. If I remember right, it was more like "handed over" or "relayed the information" or some such, and even the text makes it obvious that he went on Christ's orders. So it looks as if Judas merely did as he was told because Jesus wanted to face the Sanhedrin.
@@TheSoteriologist The idea of Judas as instrumental sacrifice, damned to hell for the purpose of serving Christ's worldly mission, is entirely unorthodox and pretty un-Christian really. I'd like to see defense of it... What Christ was up in his day to was, in political terms, totally anathema, understood by no one, and exceedingly impractical if not impossible. He was, politically, an "idiot." Did his casting out of money-dealers from the temple bring an end to the practice? Hardly. Things might even have gotten worse in reaction later; who knows? Jesus had little interest in the "practical" unless it symbolized the "principled."
My second objection, and I really haven't heard a good answer from fellow believers, is I agree Trump is bad. But the system logically only allows two candidates. So it was either vote for Trump, or Clinton. Or a third party, or non vote. And as bad as trump is the human trafficking and fully evil Clinton family was no moral superior choice. If Trump scores 1/10 morally, she voted 0/10. So, unfortunately and terribly, a 1 is still higher than 0
What a sad, dark rabbit hole you have gone down. If you were a US citizen, would you have taken an automatic weapon to Comic Pizza to liberate the children?
They already have a gun to your head. If you don’t want to be complicit, don’t vote. It’s not really an election if you don’t have a choice. This isn’t hard, morally. Anyone who greatly concerns themselves with national election voting doesn’t actually care about any of this suffering or what actions could contribute to changing it.
The obvious answer in the specific context you invoke, which isn't the one to which he is referring (Hart was inveighing against voting for Trump during 2020 presidential election, not the 2017 race btwn him and Clinton, whom he didn't vote for either), is to not vote at all. But that's not the argument he's making here. In this case, he's making a utilitarian argument about trying to bring an end to the imminent reality of caged children at the southern border; the evil things politicians do happen unilaterally, so generally, don't vote either way. But when u have reason to believe you can eliminate its excesses by voting one way or the other in some specific context, you are morally obligated to do so. Trump could not have caged children before having been president. He ran against Clinton in order to become president. Therefore, it's impossible for Hart to be talking about the Clinton vs Trump presidential race, which he's on record saying he didn't vote for either candidate during. If no one has told u this, then you're surrounded by stupid people and need smarter friends. Finally, idk what causes you to imagine that Trump is any less involved in what you're referring to than Hillary. You're injecting a pre existing bias into that judgment.
*One massive straw man argument !* A case where I can agree with every single word he's saying, but not with the idea that our geo-political reality is properly described by and therefore a field of application for what he says, nor would a reasonable help for the poor consist in letting them all in. It's the typical unspeakable do-gooder naivete in such matters.
@TheSoteriologist I think he's making a point that even naive do-goodery is more christlike than you are in making your argument. But Christ was not a compromising political utilitarian. That's not the call to action we are pressed with. In any case, "we can't let everyone in" (presumably criminals) isn't any kind of refutation to "we shouldn't cage children at the border." You are not supposed to be an American. You are supposed to be a Christian. You have chosen the former over the latter.
I mean, he’s right. He isn’t talking about destroying the government or releasing all prisoners. He’s talking about a truly Christian nation (which is not some corporeal plot of land), what Jesus says about the poor and oppressed, and how we as Americans citizens are choosing to serve the devil rather than God. Granted, a Christian nation would have no borders, no government, and no military, but Hart isn’t saying destroy all of that, he’s saying that, if we are a Christian nation, we shouldn’t have it in the first place. Jesus is radical, and I’m really happy Hart brought out just how radical he is.
We ought adore only God, and in that commandment we do not find nation, borders, government, or anything of this world.
And let our poor get trampled by depressed wages, less job opportunities, MS-13(not every asylum seeker is peaceful), cultural change to reflect the southern countries, heightened taxes to pay, for helping these people etc etc. This is a question of which poor you’d rather choose and yours is not of your neighbor - who you’ve seem to have forgotten.
@@Wolfhammered Ah, I see, Wolf. You worship the devil?
@@aleph5411 LOL so anyone who considers how 'no borders' would severely impact the poor and forgotten in this country = devil worshipper?🙄🤡🤡🤡🤦♂️
@Wolfhammered you're totally missing the point of the Gospels. Surely, you don't know this, but you literally worship some subordinate cosmic power , and not God, in thinking this way. In Christ, there is no "our poor" vs "their poor." There is no "those others," my friend. We are to see Him in "the least of these," and that's the criteria. If you find this problematic, then fine, but you renounce your faith insodoing.
Finally more Hart videos!
Thanks a lot Bob.
Greatly appreciate it
Holy Smoke! He's good!
We are called to forgive our debtors
💵
Nice to see you posting videos again
A lot to consider
As an Orthodox Christian and Georgist Libertarian, I approve. 👍
Thank you Bob😁
Nice.
Thank you for this. I appreciated the historical background provided. It was a helpful reminder.
It's application for Christian citizens of the US was also interesting and gave me a bit to think about. I understood this to represent a summary view of Dr Hart's thoughts on the matter, but it was a great starting point and both clearly and succinctly stated.
I would have to listen to it again to discern whether Dr Hart's comments were addressing policies themselves or the reasons underneath those policies. (I have an 8mth old distracting me atm.) Nevertheless, as a Canadian and speaking practically, I would find it difficult to navigate the best decision for the upcoming election, given the options currently available to US citizens, meaning Trump vs democrat. Either decision strikes me as entailing harm, regarding policies. I do not think the answer can be simple.
16:00 “I don’t think [overturning Roe v Wade] will ever happen. I think it’s a pipe dream.”
He’s got a big blind spot with his “orange man bad” take on the southern boarder. Orange man was using the same system that the Black messiah was using and the same system that the current guy uses, wash, rinse, repeat.
I enjoy DBH's theological writings, but his insistence on democratic socialism is the one big blemish on his record...
Depends on what you mean by socialism, most of what is called socialism in the United States is called social democracy in the rest of the world. I'm actually a market socialist, we believe instead of the state or the business owner class running industry it should be run democratically by the workers. The catholic church teaches a form of market socialism called distributism. Market socialism worked well in Yugoslavia.
@@christophersnedeker My friend, Catholic social teaching does not advocate for a form of 'market socialism'. I know this because I am a Catholic. By the way it doesn't depend on what I mean by socialism. It's what DBH means by socialism that was the important part here
Yeah, right. Nations should not be allowed to make laws restricting access into their countries, nor to apprehend those who disregard those laws. Ridiculous.
The church has for many centuries acknowledged the boundaries and autonomies of various national governments. The various, historic churches have even identified to themselves according to those boundaries... the church of Greece, of Romania, of Russia, etc. When Hart says that "Christians have no earthly nation", and suggests that those who disagree with him regarding border enforcement are somehow "Christian nationalists", and that they make themselves to be children of the devil, he is painting some pretty haphazardly broad strokes.
There are processes in place in America for seeking asylum. But the vast majority of people crossing at the southern border are not entering at legal points of entry; instead, they are blatantly disregarding the laws of the land, entering illegally.
Where exactly did Christ challenge the secular government on its authority to establish law? As I recall, even as he was being sentenced to death, he pointed out Pilate's power to exact such a sentence had been given him by God. If a civil government may have authority even unto capital punishment, how can it not have power to detain illegal entrants?
What's Hart been smoking?
I don't believe Hart suggested governments don't have the right to make laws.
As Scripture says, mercy triumphs over judgement. Laws ought to be bound by ethics. If Christ approved of a blank cheque He wouldn't have criticised the institutions of His day.
@@br2485 It's unethical for a government to detain people illegally sneaking into their country?
Many of these children are being trafficked by people who are not their parents. It's not merciful to detain them to sort out the mess being created by these criminal adults?
Hart repeatedly says these actions can only be supported by children of the devil. Look, it's not a perfect situation. There's room to disagree on politics. But Hart's rhetoric here is really over the top
I wouldn't want to make a blanket statement about governments detaining people. It's certainly very possible for it to be unethical.
I assume you've seen the conditions some of these children are in. I don't really see how that can be justified. We can't really doubt the devil would be pleased with the terror the children are experiencing.
Where can we see how many of these children are being trafficked as opposed to being with families? Or how many are recently separated from families amongst the confusion of a mass migrant group?
@@br2485 According to the U.S. Federal Customs Border Protection, in the past seven months, 206,927 people were found trying to circumvent America's laws by sneaking in at places other than legal ports of entry. Of these, 41,068 were determined to be people belonging to a family unit (this number includes both parents and children, etc.), whereas 18,796 of these were deemed 'unaccompanied children' as they were either on their own or with adults other than their legal guardians.
In 2019, 851,508 people were apprehended in total, with 76,020 of these being 'unaccompanied' children. (Likely, trafficked... shall we go on to rape statistics?)
If the conditions are inadequate in these facilities where they are sorting things out while trying to keep pace with the tidal wave, the primary blame lies not with the government, but with those who are contemptuously disregarding the law of the land by not seeking asylum by legal routes, crossing the border illegally.
If the Kool-aid you and Hart are selling is Christianity, then count me among the children of the devil who support the wall, creating whatever barriers necessary, physical or otherwise, to push back against this abuse of these tens of thousands of children.
@@Giant_Meteor In 2019 473,682 people coming through the Southwestern border were in a family unit. Assuming the minimum amount of children (if all families were two parents and one child) that's 157,894 accompanied children. A much much greater number than that awful figure of 76,020. You and I obviously wouldn't say the latter figure is acceptable, but we also couldn't say how many specifically are trafficked. At least I didnt see that information in the statistics. Many could be lone teenagers, children with their older siblings, etc.
Regardless, one might say it's fairly repugnant to be callous towards people who endure the sorts of hardships that would motivate such desperate migration. It's easy to judge. But as you say, they're breaking the law. I gather that's all that matters. The question of being with Jesus or with the devil, of right and wrong, is dwarfed and subsumed by the supreme, uncompromising authority of law demanding our unquestioning loyalty. It's either that or total anarchy. I can't imagine any middle ground. At least, my lords haven't asked me to support one.
you voted for Joe David?
WHAMMO!!!
When you love DBH but you vote Trump.
DBH is brilliant in the areas of philosophy and theology. No doubt we as Christians must forgive those who are indebted to us, just as we have been forgiven ourselves. But, just because one is an expert in one or two areas does not make one an expert in all areas. I wonder if DBH has researched the situation at the border as extensively as he has the New Testament. If he's reducing the issue down to: "Orange goblin puts kids in cages! Grrrr!" then it's obvious he hasn't.
His theological brilliance is only rivaled by his political stupidity.
@@noahboughdy2648 That's pretty much what Judas said about Christ.
@@noahboughdy2648 Haha, exactly.
@@erichgroat838 ... and he therefore became instrumental for Christ's work ! In fact, the text does not speak of betrayal. If I remember right, it was more like "handed over" or "relayed the information" or some such, and even the text makes it obvious that he went on Christ's orders. So it looks as if Judas merely did as he was told because Jesus wanted to face the Sanhedrin.
@@TheSoteriologist The idea of Judas as instrumental sacrifice, damned to hell for the purpose of serving Christ's worldly mission, is entirely unorthodox and pretty un-Christian really. I'd like to see defense of it...
What Christ was up in his day to was, in political terms, totally anathema, understood by no one, and exceedingly impractical if not impossible. He was, politically, an "idiot." Did his casting out of money-dealers from the temple bring an end to the practice? Hardly. Things might even have gotten worse in reaction later; who knows?
Jesus had little interest in the "practical" unless it symbolized the "principled."
nothing new under the sun......
My second objection, and I really haven't heard a good answer from fellow believers, is I agree Trump is bad. But the system logically only allows two candidates. So it was either vote for Trump, or Clinton. Or a third party, or non vote. And as bad as trump is the human trafficking and fully evil Clinton family was no moral superior choice. If Trump scores 1/10 morally, she voted 0/10. So, unfortunately and terribly, a 1 is still higher than 0
What a sad, dark rabbit hole you have gone down. If you were a US citizen, would you have taken an automatic weapon to Comic Pizza to liberate the children?
@@annefurman33 Excellent point and question.
They already have a gun to your head. If you don’t want to be complicit, don’t vote. It’s not really an election if you don’t have a choice. This isn’t hard, morally. Anyone who greatly concerns themselves with national election voting doesn’t actually care about any of this suffering or what actions could contribute to changing it.
The obvious answer in the specific context you invoke, which isn't the one to which he is referring (Hart was inveighing against voting for Trump during 2020 presidential election, not the 2017 race btwn him and Clinton, whom he didn't vote for either), is to not vote at all.
But that's not the argument he's making here. In this case, he's making a utilitarian argument about trying to bring an end to the imminent reality of caged children at the southern border; the evil things politicians do happen unilaterally, so generally, don't vote either way. But when u have reason to believe you can eliminate its excesses by voting one way or the other in some specific context, you are morally obligated to do so.
Trump could not have caged children before having been president. He ran against Clinton in order to become president. Therefore, it's impossible for Hart to be talking about the Clinton vs Trump presidential race, which he's on record saying he didn't vote for either candidate during.
If no one has told u this, then you're surrounded by stupid people and need smarter friends.
Finally, idk what causes you to imagine that Trump is any less involved in what you're referring to than Hillary. You're injecting a pre existing bias into that judgment.
*One massive straw man argument !* A case where I can agree with every single word he's saying, but not with the idea that our geo-political reality is properly described by and therefore a field of application for what he says, nor would a reasonable help for the poor consist in letting them all in. It's the typical unspeakable do-gooder naivete in such matters.
Pigheaded pride Vs naive do-goodery, I wonder which is closer to what Jesus taught
@@SC-zk6qb Exactly, I don't get why you chose pigheaded pride. I guess Dunning-Kruger is a possible explanation.
@TheSoteriologist I think he's making a point that even naive do-goodery is more christlike than you are in making your argument.
But Christ was not a compromising political utilitarian. That's not the call to action we are pressed with.
In any case, "we can't let everyone in" (presumably criminals) isn't any kind of refutation to "we shouldn't cage children at the border."
You are not supposed to be an American. You are supposed to be a Christian. You have chosen the former over the latter.