A short review of a tortured debate between two MAGA pastors abusing the bible to defend voting for Trump...

::::::::

Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. - Exodus 18:21 (ESV)

Click Here

I recently came across another bat-poop crazy MAGA pastor. Joel Webbon, who of course is from Texas, is such a pastor, on steroids apparently. He has recently taught that women who bring unproven claims of sexual assault against men, should be publicly executed to serve as an example. He bases this stupidity on Deuteronomy 19 and the famous "eye for an eye" scriptures. He calls this a "timeless principle" besides the fact that Jesus Himself did away with this standard by teaching that an eye for an eye has been replaced with turning the other cheek. In doing some basic research about Webbon, he also brags that his wife is not allowed to read anything unless he approves it first and that they both agree that women should not have the right to vote. What a guy. The above link however is to a conversation he had with a preacher from Arizona named David Reece. This segment is hilariously called applying theology. The presented topic is how to disagree reasonably about voting for Donald Trump. The reason why it is unreasonable however is that while Webbon gloats about voting for Trump, the opposite opinion in this debate is held by a man who sounds like he wants to vote for Trump so badly. The portion I will be discussing starts around the 13-minute mark and ends around 22 minutes later when they start debating whether Donald Trump fits the six criteria that Reece has concocted by wrongly applying Old Testament verses to America today. So let us reason once more together beloved.

So, the first criteria that Reece offers up is benign. The candidate must be "from among you" or a citizen of your nation. This is supported by our Constitution, so there are no issues here. We go off the rails with the second criteria as Reece says that it must be an adult male. This is of course to dismiss Kamala Harris out of hand by using the patriarchal system of ancient times. This reveals how corrupted his entire teaching is here as God did not provide us with the blueprint for the theocracy of Israel so that we might implement it within the constitutional republic of America. The third qualification Reece states is "competence." The fourth is that he must "fear God" or has made a credible profession of faith. Fifth, he must love truth and sixth, hate covetousness. He bases this upon the key verse for today, from Exodus. This is when Jethro counseled Moses to select people to help him with the administration of Israel. These were the qualifications Moses was advised to look for in selecting these folks. The notion that God provided this verse, from a historical narrative, so that we could apply them to carnal elections in a pagan nation, 3500 years later is biblically asinine. It is what happens when we try to leverage the bible instead of reading it. This is what happens when we use the bible to prop up our carnal desires instead of seeking what God is actually saying. The notion that because during a time when women had no role in anything other than childbearing, within a theocracy, must mean God has ordained throughout all time that women should never have any other roles is scripturally stupid. Reece actually says that he does not see these verses, which he admits are part of the civil law, as germane to Israel. What nonsense. The civil law by the way, was nailed to the cross anyway! Nonetheless, let's charge on here.

"It is obvious from scripture that being ruled by women is a curse while being ruled by men is the fitting thing." - David Reece

Is this obvious from scripture? When Deborah ruled as Judge, was Israel cursed? Also, of the 39 rulers of Judah, only eight were not wicked. All 19 kings of Israel were in fact wicked. So, explain to me again how men ruling guarantees that things are "fitting." What Reece's misogyny misses is that there is a vast difference between the theocracy of Israel and the rulers of men today in pagan nations, including ours. I might add that Israel itself has had female Prime Ministers throughout the years, such as Golda Meir, so they obviously did not get the memo from God. Reece begins applying this to our current upcoming election by actually declaring that Trump is the lawfully elected president from 2020, to which Webbon agrees. So, we have two delusional idiots who think the man who received seven million less votes and lost over 60 court cases trying to prove otherwise, actually won the election. This just perpetuates the "Christians are the stupid ones" narrative that turns off so many from churchianity. It is at the heart of why 40 million people have left the church in the past 25 years. I might add here that what Reece, Webbon and the NAR truly perpetuate is a staggering arrogance when it comes to the God they claim to serve. As if God is not capable of handling a Joe Biden presidency or a Kamala Harris regime. Moving past the "he's a man" criterion, Reece starts to unpack his ridiculousness:

"He is competent (Trump). He is obviously a guy who can be decisive, make decisions and make stuff happen." - David Reece

Webbon actually states that maybe Trump is playing four-dimensional chess. Yes, that must be what is happening when he tells us stories about sharks being electrocuted, how great Hannibal Lecter is or chooses to have speakers at his shows who call Puerto Rico a "floating garbage dump." Webbon then goes on to claim that one of the best things about Trump is that he brings in people for the areas he is not competent in that are great, but unfortunately not loyal. Huh? Who cares if someone is loyal? Doesn't the truth count? When a Four-Star Marine General says that he is a fascist maybe we should listen? Also, how in the world did the definition of competent become the ability to make decisions? A chimp can make decisions. What are those decisions is the question. We have a man who has declared bankruptcy six times. That is six different times he has screwed his own creditors and ran a business into the ground. He created a fake school to bilk people of their life savings and had to settle a lawsuit regarding this to the tune of 25 million dollars. Even as president, he botched the COVID response, said it would miraculously go away, and even hinted at injecting bleach to treat it. Competent? Not by his record.

"I'm going to say that I don't believe that Donald Trump has a credible profession of faith. I don't believe Donald Trump gives a credible display of the fear of God." - David Reece

Webbon and Reece engage in a colloquy on Cornelius and how he may or may not have already been saved but that is a conversation for a different devotional. The issue here is that they never really discuss this at all. Reece is correct in saying that Trump does not have any fear of God. That is painfully evident by his words and actions. He is on record as saying that he does not think he needs to even ask God for forgiveness. His "spiritual advisor" was the noted huckster Paula White. He wanted to shoot protestors in the legs so he could do a photo op in front of a church where he held the bible upside down. He is currently scamming people for $60 bibles, produced in China, for what we can only assume is slave labor wages. Good for Reece to correctly glean that he has no profession of faith. It is a shame that Webbon probably disagrees. We move on to number five.

"Then we go to, well is he a truth teller. Now, he does tell some hard truths but it comes down to ok, how much lying do you see. So, if a guy is consistently willing to say hard truths but is also lies a lot, I would say he is not a man of truth." - David Reece

The point about telling hard truths is subjective and irrelevant. A liar is a liar is a liar. Because Reece is trying desperately to sound reasonable while essentially siding with Trump, he goes into this tortured argument about how during the Hezekiah reforms, God allowed the Levites in general to conduct the sacrifices because they were short on priests and how this means that it is ok to lower our biblical standards for truth telling. I am sure that God provided the narrative of Hezekiah's reign so that we could lower our standards for excusing Donald Trump. How preposterous. In other words, Reece offers the notion that if you can't find a truth teller to vote for, you at least try to find someone who hates covetousness.

"So, that is what I say. What is the retreat line if we cannot find a God-fearer and if we can't find a man of truth, then we go hate covetousness. So, what is hate covetousness? Maybe some people will say that Donald trump likes to make money - well making money is not a problem. Covetousness is when you take other people's money. Maybe the fact that he wants to cut taxes shows that he is a man who hates covetousness and maybe that he wants to undermine socialism to some extent. So, I would say he is not free market enough, but I am even willing to go, let's grant that the guy hates covetousness. So, that one I am not even willing to debate on. I am willing to say fine, he hates covetousness enough for me to say I can vote for him. I land in this area of the fear of God and this telling truth thing." - David Reece.

There is so much wrong here. So, let me see if I have this right. Covetousness is only when you take other people's money? So, what about when you screw people out of money that is theirs by filing bankruptcy six times? What about when you try to milk them of all their money through a bogus university? What about when your fake charity is so bad, you have to pay two million dollars in fines and disband because you essentially stole from other charities, including one for kids with cancer. So, the issue is not making money, it is stealing it from other people. Doesn't the fact that he was unfaithful with three different wives, one time with a porn star count for covetousness? By the way, the exact portion from the key verse dealing with this is if Donald Trump hates a bribe. Are you kidding me? Everything the man does is transactional. He cut deals with the Saudis so his son in law could get two billion dollars. He overcharged world leaders to stay at his hotels and defrauded the American people by overcharging the Secret Service for the same. Cutting taxes for billionaires is somehow not being covetous? Or when he demanded oil executives give him a billion dollars for all of the deregulation he was promising. How in the world can any sane thinking individual land on Donald Trump not being covetous? He is the walking definition of such. The only reason why Reece landed here was because this was never supposed to be a fair debate about voting for Trump. This was a political advertisement for church folk about how you can excuse yourself for voting for him.

Then we really go into the crazy zone as Webbon actually asks Reece what are the big lies that he refers to when saying Trump is dishonest and Reece feigns ignorance! He pretends like he just cannot come up with any off the top of his head. Are you serious? Conservative estimates place the totals lies during his presidency at over 30,000! You cannot think of one lie? How about recently when he said that Haitian immigrants, who are Christian I might add, were eating cats and dogs in Ohio? How about that little nugget that has made their lives a living hell all over again! How about lying that Kamala Harris is not really black. Or didn't really work in McDonalds. How about the whopper he keeps telling about how other countries are emptying their insane asylums and sending their prisoners here. Any of these ringing a bell, you sycophants? Believe me when I say that I am not even being creative. This is just off the top of my head. Is there anything he says that is not a lie?

Webbon then tries to downplay it by calling it "exaggerations" and that he "feels for the guy" because there have been so many lies told about him. His offered proof of this is the "Russia collusion" or the "very fine people hoax," which he claims was debunked by Snopes. Let's deal with this nonsense. The notion that the Russia collusion investigation was a hoax is pure buffoonery designed to create a false narrative. The investigation proved there absolutely was collusion and that Vladimir Putin and his proxies sought influence with Trump's campaign and tried to help him win. The investigation proved how his campaign willingly engaged with Russian operatives in these efforts. Even Republican Robert Mueller secured 34 felony convictions or plea deals including three companies and top advisors to President Trump. Mueller himself concluded that he would not prosecute Trump solely based on department preference regarding sitting presidents, not based on evidence. I do not expect two people who think the 2020 election was stolen to think that 2016 election had Russian collusion but still - the truth is what the truth is. As for the "very fine people" issue, this was not a hoax. Trump actually said this regarding the protestors and counter protestors at the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville Virginia. What Snopes debunked, is the notion that Trump specifically said that neo-Nazis were very fine people. He of course would never overtly say that, but the implication was clear. On one side were people supporting the Nazi position and on the other side were people protesting it. So, to say there were very fine people on both sides was in fact to say that some on the neo-Nazi side were very fine people. Even Snopes clarified that their fact check was about what Trump said, not whether what he said was true or not. There is a certain level of inherent dishonesty at play here between Reece and Webbon as they try to land this advertisement for Donald Trump.

I could go on, but I wanted to get my life back and once Webbon started launching into how his Stepford wife agreed with him that she should have her right to vote stripped away, I thought it was time to wrap. It was an interesting glimpse into the depraved and deceived NAR mind that these two "pastors" share. Reece was able to navigate pretending to not wanting to vote for Donald Trump while excusing away why everyone should. His premise was based upon a story from 3500 years ago about how Moses chose people to help him with managing the theocracy. To apply that forward through the millennia to justify voting for Donald Trump is scriptural assault. The scriptures should seek a restraining order for what Reece was trying to do and he was the more reasonable one of the two! Webbon's position was to sound genial while supporting absurdities. Their positions were entirely carnal in nature and predicated on election lies further compounded by NAR GOP talking points that are also lies. All in the name of Jesus, Hallelujah. Just another example of political hirelings cosplaying as pastors, trying to co-opt your vote. Do not fall for the scam beloved. God did not tell us about Jethro from thousands of years ago, so you could feel better about voting for Donald Trump. We should always be concerned when listening to two men degrade their own wives who support publicly executing women who have the temerity to accuse men of assault, like their idol Mt. Trump, and have no morals whatsoever regarding the truth.

Amen.

Reverend Anthony Wade - October 30, 2024

Authors Bio:
Credentialed Minister of the Gospel for the Assemblies of God. Owner and founder of 828 ministries. Vice President for Goodwill Industries. Always remember that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose.