In this sobering episode of A Reasonable Response, Robert Bosley confronts a dangerous distortion of Jesus emerging from progressive theology—a version of Christ with no lordship, no law, and no demand for repentance.
Bosley contrasts this false gospel with the true message of Scripture: that while our sins are great, Christ is greater, and only in Him is there forgiveness and eternal hope. He warns that redefining Jesus to fit cultural comfort zones may sound like love, but in reality, it's a message that leads souls away from salvation.
This is not just a critique of theological liberalism—it’s a passionate call to return to the revealed Christ, the only One who saves.
God is not a Presbyterian. God is not a Christian. God is not a noun at all. God is a verb. God is not a being.
God is being itself. God is not a being, he says. Well, Scripture says otherwise. I don't know if he's just being poetic or what, but whatever he means, it's nonsense. Welcome to A Reasonable Response.
My name is Robert Bosley, and the purpose of this podcast is to give a reasoned response to issues related to the Christian faith from a Reformed Baptist perspective. Each episode contains what we call the breakdown, where I interact with a video related to the topic at hand. And today, that topic is progressive Christianity or, as we call it, the He Gets Us Jesus. But before we get to that, we're going to take a little bit of time and look at some comments that have been left on previous videos. So we're going to respond to some of you responding to me.
At Heisenberg 3082 asks, how do you know your interpretation of scripture is correct and not the Catholic one? Both you and they can quote the Bible to support their respective positions. It's a great question really is I Would answer succinctly that we can believe the Protestant position is true according to scripture because scripture is clear and scripture is sufficient The Roman Catholic position requires that Scripture be unintelligible, at least largely, and that you would have to have the magisterium of the Church to uphold and prop up all these additional doctrines that you're required to believe in order to be a faithful Roman Catholic. Whereas the Protestant perspective says that no scripture alone is our final authority, we go to that scripture, not everything's equally clear, and I'm not claiming infallibility for myself, but it is clear enough that the things that are most necessary for our salvation, namely justification by faith, is clear enough that by scripture alone, we can see that truth in scripture and know what we must do and believe to be saved. And that's repent and believe the gospel.
At Delicious Crepes says, I refuse to acknowledge any denominations. I know that I'm welcome in every church. I know that we're all children of Christ. No word is stronger than Christian. When some devil tries to say only Catholics are saved or only Protestants are saved, I spit on him.
That seems a little bit much. But if you actually watch the video, I didn't say Only Protestants are saved. I actually specifically said, because justification by faith is true, there are Catholics who will be saved because they are trusting in the gospel in spite of what they're being taught. At Psalm 50 is actually Psalm 51, says, the audacity for a prot to stand in judgment of who or isn't a Christian, lol. Protestants don't have a church or apostolic secession.
Worse yet, their communion is merely symbolic and not the real body and blood of our Lord. Protestants are an historian heretics. First off, I doubt he actually understands what an historianism means if he thinks Protestants are historians. Also, we have apostolic succession, but it's an apostolic succession of doctrine. Acts 2 says that the new converts devoted themselves to the Apostles' doctrine.
That's the apostolic succession that the Bible teaches, not a series of bishops. As for communion being merely symbolic, Reformed Baptists don't actually believe that. We believe it's a means of grace. Christ is really present in the supper, spiritually, not physically. And Ike the Mage said, Priscilla would like to enter the debate.
Well, Ike apparently didn't watch the episode. We talked about Priscilla, and Priscilla is more than welcome to enter the debate, and she's welcome to leave it with her husband as well. Joseph Michael 6514 says, the kingdom is within all mankind. Is that you, James? And don't worry, that'll make more sense by the end of this video.
The Eight Road Wanderer says, it's all made up, sir. Well, I'm convinced. I'm done. Today, for the breakdown, we're looking at a video from the YouTube page of James Talerico titled, James Talerico Delivers Sermon against Christian nationalism. Now, we're not actually dealing with the issue of Christian nationalism per se.
Really, what we're going to look at is his conception of the Christian faith as a liberal and the liberal progressive view of Jesus. Now, a little bit about Mr. Talarico. He is currently a Texas representative running for U.S. Senate, and he's making some waves online.
He's been on Joe Rogan and other podcasts, pushing his liberal views as a progressive so-called Christian. And so with that in mind, let's look at clip one. First followers of Jesus didn't call themselves Christians. They called themselves the Way. Their crucified teacher taught them a different way of being human and they intended to follow it.
No, they were called the followers of the way. And by the end of the New Testament, we see that they did actually fully adopt the title Christians. It was a title imposed on them by outsiders in Antioch. And as far as we can tell, the name Christian means a member of the party of Christ. The idea that means little Christ doesn't seem actually quite right.
It's Similar to the people who were followers of Herod were the Herodians. The Christians followed Christ. They were his disciples. It really has an inherently political meaning, actually. They're members of a party that follows another king.
It's not just about a way of life, though that obviously is part of it, but it's people who have come to know and worship the true king of the universe, the one who came and bled and died for their sins. It's more than just being nice to your neighbor. But 300 years after Jesus was executed by the Roman Empire, Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official state religion of that very same empire. Constantine was the first Christian nationalist. And ever since, the powers that be have been taming Christianity, domesticating it, diluting it into something more palatable.
So again, just like in the previous episode dealing with patriarchy, the basic factual historical errors. No, Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. I know it's popular to say, but it's just not true. He made Christianity legal, and with the Peace of the Church and the Edict of Milan in 313, he made it a legal religion and ended state persecution of the Christians. But it wasn't until Emperor Theodosius that Christianity became the official religion of the empire.
Again, something this basic, you should not get it wrong. And if you do get it wrong, I can't believe or trust anything you have to say. The Bible doesn't mention abortion or gay marriage, but it goes on and on about forgiving debt, liberating the poor, and healing the sick. Okay, so while technically in the most strictest literal sense of the words, yes, the Bible doesn't say anything about abortion or gay marriage in and of themselves. However, the Bible does have much to say, positively, about the value of human life, the goodness and blessing of children, as well as proper human sexuality.
When we consider the idea of abortion, the Bible explicitly says that God forms the child in the womb. And even in the law in Exodus 21, we have a case law where if two men are fighting and a pregnant woman is harmed and her child is born early, if the child is unharmed, the man who is at fault is still fined by whatever the husband decides is proper. But if the child is hurt, then that person who is at fault then pays life for life or hurt for hurt. In other words, if a child dies in the womb because of someone's attack, then that is considered murder under God's law. And for gay marriage, it's really just laughable.
If you look at Leviticus 18, look at Romans chapter 1, look at 1 Corinthians 6, The Bible doesn't forbid gay marriage because no one at the time when Scripture was being written could have even conceived of the idea. They knew of homosexual activity, of course, and that is what Scripture explicitly and repeatedly prohibits. Homosexual activity is completely forbidden among God's people. And if that is forbidden, how could you possibly have anything approaching gay marriage? And for these three other items, forgiving debt, liberating the poor, and healing the sick, yes, we are called to do these things.
We're to care for the sick and heal them. We're to care for the poor. We are to be gracious and forgiving. But the problem here is, his perspective is that these are actually the tasks of the state, that this is a power that the government can assume to itself, that through its taxation, it can now forgive debts, when biblically what we see is that's not the case. It's personal debts that are forgiven.
People go and care for their neighbors who are sick or in poverty. It's not the state's job to take money from those who are successful and give it to other people. We need to look at what God's word has actually positively said and on who he lays the responsibility for carrying out his commands and his ordinances. If this was truly a Christian nation, we would never make it a Christian nation because we know the table of fellowship is open to everybody, including our Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and atheist neighbors. Jesus could have started a Christian theocracy, but love would never do that.
The closest thing we have to the kingdom of heaven is a multiracial, multicultural democracy where power is truly shared. You notice he never uses scripture for any of this. And what exactly does he mean by table fellowship with atheists, Muslims, Jews, so on and so forth? I don't fully understand, but if he's trying to say that as Christians in the church having fellowship, obviously there's no defense of this. Biblically, Christians are to have no fellowship with darkness, and it's only Christians who are in the light.
This is a basic principle throughout the New Testament scriptures Just as a sample verse among the many that could be quoted 2nd Corinthians 6 14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers for what? Fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness And what communion has light with darkness? Obviously, it's rhetorical question. What fellowship do they have? None.
And he says that love would never create a Christian theocracy, that the closest thing to the Kingdom of Heaven is this democracy. Now, yes, the Kingdom of Heaven will be multiracial. All the nations are going to be reached with the gospel and praise God for that. But I think he forgets that the Kingdom of heaven has a king and it is God and this isn't the Muslim God or the Buddhist king or any other idea of king or God the true God of scripture is the king of the universe The kingdom of heaven is ruled by the true God. There is a theocracy that will endure forever.
And the Bible says it's a kingdom of love. When someone asked Jesus to name his most important commandment, he cheats and gives two. Two that he says are related. The first is to love God. The second, he said, is like it.
Love thy neighbor as thyself. It's like it because when I recognize the divine image in myself, I can't help but recognize it in my neighbor, whether they're Christian or not, whether they're religious or not. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus specifically defines neighbor as someone different from us, racially, economically, politically, religiously. God loves diversity. God loves variety.
Just look around this big beautiful planet of ours. Do we really think God would make all these beautiful people with all their beautiful traditions for no reason at all? There are so many pathways to the sacred. He says there's so many pathways to the sacred, but Jesus said the opposite, that He is the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him. And He didn't mean that somebody can come to the Father through Him in some mystical way, completely disconnected from his teachings, his gospel, and his word.
Now it is true that in a sense, God does love diversity. God has made a world full of many amazing, wonderful things, thousands of different kinds of animals and plants and trees and all these wonderful things. And yes, the kingdom of heaven will be filled with people from every tribe, tongue, and nation. But these people will come in not because their own traditions and religious views are all equally valid. They will come in because they have heard the gospel and they have repented of their sins and turned away from their man-made foolish beliefs to worship the true and living God instead.
And this is why his misunderstanding of the two great commandments according to Jesus is such a problem. You hear this often, especially from so-called progressive Christians, that Christianity boils down to two commandments, love God and love your neighbor. Well, unfortunately, that is what Jesus says is the summary of the law, not the gospel. The law of God says that you should love God and love your neighbor. The problem is none of us have ever done that perfectly, and so by James's own standard, he condemns himself.
He has never loved God perfectly. He has never loved any of his neighbors perfectly. And because he has never done these things, and I've never done these things, and none of us ever have done these things, That is why we need the gospel because all mankind by the standard of the two greatest commandments we are condemned and we need a savior and our own thinking about who God is or our own traditions cannot save us, only Christ and his cross and his empty tomb. God is not a Presbyterian. God is not a Christian.
God is not a noun at all. God is a verb. God is not a being. God is being itself. God is love.
And that's why Jesus is against anything that gets in the way of that love between neighbors, including religion. That's why he's always breaking religious rules. That's why he's always getting in trouble with the religious authorities. That's why he says sinners will see the kingdom of heaven before religious people do. God is not a being, he says.
Well, scripture says otherwise. I don't know if he's just being poetic or what, but whatever he means, it's nonsense. God is a personal Being, a being that exists in three persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He exists. He has being.
To say otherwise is absolute blasphemy. He of course quotes God as love, which is a precious truth from Scripture. But when he reads that and when he hears that, he then takes it and misinterprets it as God therefore affirms whatever warm and fuzzy feeling I have. That's not what it means that God is love. God is the source of real love.
He is the one who defines what love is. And how do we know what God's definition of love is? Well fundamentally it's His law. All his laws are laws of love. And it's through his law that we see what it really means to love him and love our neighbors.
And that real love from God and defined by God means that sometimes you have to say difficult things to your neighbors like, no, your God is not real. No, you ought not to do these things that God says you ought not to do. When he talks about Jesus breaking all the religious rules and getting in trouble with the religious authorities, he doesn't understand why Jesus was breaking those rules. Jesus wasn't opposed to rules or religious laws. The New Testament tells us that Jesus is the one who gave the law to Moses.
Jesus was breaking the man-made traditions, the man-made rules that had developed, that had encrusted over the law of God. His problem wasn't with law keeping, his problem was when people elevated the laws and rules of men above the laws of God. And so when Jesus said that sinners will see the kingdom of heaven before you, talking to the Pharisees. It wasn't because the sinners were somehow better than the so-called religious. It was because the religious authorities, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and the scribes were fundamentally apostates who had rejected God and substituted their own law in its place, just as James is doing.
Religious supremacy is antithetical to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Religious supremacy is inherent to the gospel of Jesus Christ because it's only the gospel of Christ that can save anyone's soul. It is the true religious message. Every other way is a false way and therefore an inferior way. The gospel, because Christ is supreme, is the supreme religious message.
Jesus knew we would put our trust in something other than God, something other than love. As a Jewish rabbi, he called those things idols. Money, status, and the most dangerous idol of all, power. When Jesus was tempted by the devil in the wilderness, One of the things the devil offered was power, all the kingdoms of the world, and Jesus rejected it. When his disciples asked, who will be the most powerful in the kingdom of God?
Jesus said, you know the lords of the earth push their people around, but among you it'll be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be a servant. And when they still didn't get it and they asked who will be the greatest in the kingdom of God, Jesus said, little children. So James, if you're elected to US Senate, are you going to give up that money status and power that you would have as a senator. And this is where we see just the absolute hypocrisy of this whole position.
Money, status, power can be idols, but The Bible doesn't say they inherently are. It's not money that is an idol, it's greed that is idolatry. Money itself is not the root of all evil, it's the love of money, and so on and so forth. We see the same thing throughout. God gave much money, status, and power to many good and godly saints throughout history.
They're not in themselves problems. It's what you do with them, whether or not they become idols. He talks about Jesus's temptation by the devil in the wilderness. He was brought up to a high mountain and showed all the kingdoms of the world. Why did Jesus refuse the devil's offer?
Well, not because Jesus has a problem with wielding power, but because the devil ultimately couldn't offer him those things in reality. Jesus knew that the way for him to have all authority in heaven and earth was not through the devil but through obedience to his father. And that's why we have at the end of the gospel, Jesus telling his disciples, I do have all authority in heaven and on earth and because of that go out and make disciples of all the nations. And Jesus is not opposed to power. Jesus is the ruler of heaven and earth.
And when the disciples asked who is the greatest, yes there should be humility among the members of the kingdom of heaven because we're all redeemed creatures. God is supreme and God has ordered the world under him in such a way that certain people do have power, Certain people do have status and money, and those are not inherently bad things. Those who have them ought to use them for the glory of God. There are a thousand ways to kneel and kiss the ground. We can cure the disease of Christian nationalism.
We can protect against the virus of religious extremism with healthy religion. The great faith traditions of the world have so much to offer us in this time of global crisis. Hinduism's Ahimsa provides an alternative to the logic of violence. Buddhist meditation provides an alternative to the abuse of our attention. Judaism's Sabbath provides an alternative to the demands of capitalism.
And in a world where everything can be bought and sold, including the earth itself, Native American traditions provide an alternative to ecological extraction. It's hard. It is so hard to protect your spirit in a world trying to kill it. He's so concerned about what he defines as Christian nationalism and religious extremism without seeming to realize that he is the one tying church and state together far more than any of the rest of us would. He wants his liberal progressive view of Jesus and what he defines it as to completely run and orchestrate all of society and the state.
I actually agree we ought to combat religious extremism with healthy religion. But what does the scripture say is healthy religion or sound doctrine? Well, it's the gospel of Jesus Christ, not these empty platitudes and liberal progressive state control. That's not what will fix the world. What will fix the world is Christ and His gospel and the forgiveness of sins in Him alone.
He appeals to the so-called great faith traditions of the world, but anything that's good in them is better in Christ. Instead of turning to these other religions, we ought to turn to the revealed religion, the truth of Christ, on how we ought to live as Christians, how we ought to live as members of a country, and how we ought to consider those who are outside. We ought to love them as human beings made in the image of God, but that doesn't then mean that we have that table fellowship he talked about earlier. We appeal to them to repent of their sins and trust in Christ, leaving their false gods behind. So in summary, what do we have here?
Again, not dealing with the issue of Christian nationalism per se, but the liberal progressive view of Jesus. We have a picture of Christ as one who has no claims on your life, no law to obey. He accepts everything and anyone just as it is. In other words, it's a Jesus made in his own image. Instead of a gospel that says your sins are not so great, they can be forgiven by a Savior who is far greater than all your sins, this is a false gospel that is really a message of hatred masquerading as a message of love.
It's a message of hatred because ultimately this message damns the souls of those who believe it because it cuts you off from any hope of repentance and forgiveness because it cuts you off from the real message of Christ. Well, that's all the time we have for today. If you'd like to connect with me personally, I'm on X at R. Bosley, 1689. And if you'd like to learn more about church and family life, you can do so at churchandfamilylife.com.
And speaking of church and family life, we'd love to have you join us at our national conference next May in Ridgecrest, North Carolina on the topic of manhood and womanhood, the glory of God in the creation order. Thanks. See you next time.