This piece is adapted from the latest episode of Matt Fradd All Access. You can watch the full episode <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/matt-fradd-monologue-joseph-smith?elementPosition=3&amp;row=5&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">here</a>.
***
This is a controversial topic, so let’s dive right in: Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, was a false prophet.
A couple of disclaimers, right off the bat: entire books have been written on this subject, so we’re only going to scratch the surface. And to my Mormon friends, I understand that some of this may be difficult to hear. And I just want you to know that this isn’t meant to be some kind of attack. I love you guys, but we have to get to the truth. I encourage you to hear what I have to say, look into it for yourself, and let me know what you think.
Here we go.
<h3>Reason #1: False Prophecies That Didn’t Come True </h3>
Let’s start with one of the easiest ways to test a prophet: are their prophecies actually true? Deuteronomy 18:20-22 lays it out clearly: if what a prophet says doesn’t come true, then they’re not speaking for God.
Joseph Smith gave numerous revelations that are flat-out false.
For example, in 1842 Joseph Smith published a supposedly prophetic translation of real Egyptian documents he owned, which he called The Book of Abraham. He claimed, as a prophet, to translate specific Egyptian writings and drawings, and to know their meaning. Important to note, at the time, scholars couldn’t translate Egyptian. But now they can, and we know that his translations are simply wrong. In one drawing, Smith claimed one figure was “King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head,” but it turns out this figure is the goddess Isis, and the characters above the head read, “Isis the great, the god’s mother.” He falsely claims the god Osiris is Abraham, and that the god Anubis is a slave. A prophet’s words have to match reality, and in Smith’s case, they just don’t.
<h3>Reason #2: Contradicting Revelations</h3>
Another red flag with Joseph Smith is his contradicting revelations. For example, the Book of Mormon says, “Is there more than one God? And he answered, No.” But in a later revelation, he says that “the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the earth,” and that righteous Mormons “shall be gods,” “from everlasting to everlasting,” with “all power.” Smith even claimed that God was once a man who became divine.
This is a huge change in foundational beliefs! If someone is truly a prophet of God, their message should be consistent, especially when it comes to who God is. Yet with Smith, we see clear contradictions that raise serious doubts about his claims to divine revelation.
<h3>Reason #3: The Book of Mormon’s Historical Problems </h3>
Next, let’s talk about the Book of Mormon itself. Joseph Smith claimed it tells the history of ancient American civilizations, including the Nephites and Lamanites, who came from Jerusalem. But here’s the problem: there’s zero archaeological evidence for these civilizations. No cities, no artifacts, nothing.
Now, some might argue, “There’s little archaeological evidence for the Exodus, and Christians believe that.” But while evidence for the Exodus may be debated, there is some support — such as Egyptian records mentioning Semitic peoples and archaeological findings in the Sinai suggesting nomadic groups. Scholars continue to explore these possibilities.
With the Book of Mormon, however, we’re talking about entire civilizations that supposedly existed for thousands of years but did not leave behind a single trace. If these civilizations were real, we’d expect something — but we find nothing. That’s a major problem.
<h3>Reason #4: Fabrication &amp; Plagiarism </h3>
There’s also strong evidence that the Book of Mormon simply mirrors Joseph Smith’s time and place. Many books at this time, and in Smith’s area, theorized that the American Indians had come from Israel. And Smith lifted entire sections from the King James Bible, even copying translation errors from the King James Version into his “ancient” text. This isn’t the behavior of a divinely inspired prophet; it’s the behavior of someone fabricating a religious document.
<h3>Reason #5: Joseph Smith’s Dubious Character </h3>
We can’t ignore the moral inconsistencies in Joseph Smith’s life. He secretly practiced polygamy and even married — and slept with — teenage girls, claiming he was divinely commanded to do so.
This is someone who violated the Christian principles of marriage and morality. A true prophet should be held to a high standard of holiness and integrity, but Smith’s life was filled with moral failures. It’s hard to reconcile that with someone who claims to be God’s chosen messenger.
But isn’t there polygamy in the Bible? Yes. But it’s important to note that polygamy in the Old Testament is descriptive, not prescriptive. And the New Testament makes it very clear that monogamy is the only expected and permitted form of marriage.
<h3>Reason #6: Contradictions in the First Vision Accounts </h3>
Smith’s famous &#8220;First Vision,&#8221; where he claims to have seen God the Father and Jesus Christ, is foundational to Mormonism. But did you know there are multiple versions of this event that contradict each other?
In the earliest version, Smith says he saw only one figure, “the Lord,” but later versions claim he saw God the Father and Jesus as separate beings. If this vision were a true, divine encounter, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be conflicting stories about such a pivotal moment. The discrepancies suggest that Smith may have fabricated or embellished his experience over time.
<h3>Reason #7: The Problem of Polytheism </h3>
Finally, Joseph Smith taught that God was once a man who became God, that humans can become gods in the same way, and that there are many gods in existence. That’s not just a different emphasis. It’s a different view of God altogether.
In the King Follett Discourse, Smith said that God “was once as we are now” and that we must learn how to become gods ourselves. In other words, God is not the eternal, uncreated Creator, but a being who progressed to divinity.
This is directly opposed to biblical monotheism. Isaiah 44:6 says, &#8220;I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.&#8221;
The Bible is clear: there is one God. Smith’s teaching of an eternal progression to godhood is not just unbiblical, it’s a complete departure from the Christian understanding of God’s nature. Any prophet who teaches something so fundamentally opposed to Scripture can’t be a true prophet of God.
Whether it’s his failed prophecies, shifting doctrines, or contradictions in his story, the evidence is compelling: Joseph Smith was a false prophet.
***
If you’d like to learn more, see my interview with Joe Heschmeyer, <a href="https://youtu.be/5cvXRlMHMzI?si=U5IBDJNO8Q2qwFSb" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Incoherence of Mormonism</a>.

The church of Jesus Christ of latter-day saints sign, Thetford, Norfolk, England, UK

7 Reasons Joseph Smith Was A False Prophet 

Bible

Christianity

Matt Fradd

Mormonism

secret lives of mormon wives

A federal appeals court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a law requiring public schools to display posters of the Ten Commandments in classrooms. 
In a 9–8 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that S.B. 10 does not violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, marking a significant victory for conservatives who support a greater role for religion in public schools.
“S.B. 10 looks nothing like a historical religious establishment,” <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.226084/gov.uscourts.ca5.226084.507945887.1.pdf">the 5th Circuit’s opinion said.</a> “It does not tell churches or synagogues or mosques what to believe or how to worship or whom to employ as priests, rabbis, or imams. It punishes no one who rejects the Ten Commandments, no matter the reason. It levies no taxes to support any clergy. It does not co-opt churches to perform civic functions. These are the kinds of things “establishments of religion” did at the founding. S.B. 10 does none of them.” 
In June 2025, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) signed <a href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/89R/billtext/pdf/SB00010I.pdf">Senate Bill 10</a>, which requires public elementary and secondary schools to display in each classroom a &#8220;durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments.&#8221; In December 2025, a coalition of parents filed suit and obtained preliminary injunctions blocking the law in certain parts of the state. 
Challengers of the law argued that they didn’t want their children to “be forced to observe and venerate a state-mandated version of the Ten Commandments” every day at school, <a href="https://www.aclutx.org/press-releases/judge-orders-texas-school-districts-remove-ten-commandments-displays-response-second/">according to the ACLU.  </a>
Judges on the conservative-leaning Fifth Circuit disagreed, arguing the law does not mandate any religious exercise. 
&#8220;Students are neither catechized on the Commandments nor taught to adopt them. Nor are teachers commanded to proselytize students who ask about the displays or contradict students who disagree with them,” <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.226084/gov.uscourts.ca5.226084.507945887.1.pdf">the opinion said.</a> “It puts a poster on a classroom wall. Yes, Plaintiffs have sincere religious disagreements with its content. But that does not transform the poster into a summons to prayer.&#8221;
Republican Gov. Gregg Abbott hailed the ruling as a “HUGE WIN.” 
“The foundation of Western law &amp; morality belongs in our classrooms. Texas stands for faith, freedom, and the values that founded our great state,” he said on social media. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
HUGE WIN
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Ten Commandments can remain in Texas public school classrooms.
The foundation of Western law &amp; morality belongs in our classrooms. Texas stands for faith, freedom, and the values that founded our great state.…
— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) <a href="https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/2046758634986590304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 22, 2026</a></blockquote>
Attorney General Ken Paxton (R-TX), who faces a contentious May 26 runoff with Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), also took a victory lap. 
“This is a major victory for Texas and our moral values,” Paxton said. “My office was proud to defend SB 10 and successfully ensure that the Ten Commandments will be displayed in classrooms across Texas. The Ten Commandments have had a profound impact on our nation, and it’s important that students learn from them every single day.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨WIN: This is a major victory for Texas and our moral values. My office was proud to defend SB 10 and successfully ensure that the Ten Commandments will be displayed in classrooms across Texas.
The Ten Commandments have had a profound impact on our nation, and it’s important… <a href="https://t.co/6sh3uLnFpI">https://t.co/6sh3uLnFpI</a>
— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) <a href="https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/2046718781964378358?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2026</a></blockquote>
The ACLU expressed &#8220;disappointment&#8221; with the court’s ruling and vowed to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. 
“The Court’s ruling goes against fundamental First Amendment principles and binding U.S. Supreme Court authority,” <a href="https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/fifth-circuit-upholds-law-requiring-display-of-ten-commandments-in-public-school-classrooms">the ACLU said.</a> “This decision tramples those rights. We anticipate asking the Supreme Court to reverse this decision and uphold the religious-freedom rights of children and parents.”
Louisiana, Arkansas, and Alabama have passed laws requiring Ten Commandments posters in public schools, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/19/us/ten-commandments-schools-states.html">according to the New York Times</a>, with several other conservative-led states debating similar legislation.

Ten Commandments Display in Texas

Court Hands Massive Win For Judeo-Christian Values in Public Schools

ACLU

Free Speech

Politics

Texas

Step aside, Thomas Aquinas. Make room, St. Augustine. There is a new Bible scholar in town, and she didn’t find her calling in a cathedral — she found it in a Reno lounge act and a Disney-funded wardrobe department.
Whoopi Goldberg, a woman whose theological training apparently consists of wearing a polyester habit in two &#8220;Sister Act&#8221; films, has decided that she is the preeminent authority on the &#8220;Bible-Bible.&#8221; Speaking on &#8220;The View&#8221; on Thursday, Goldberg donned her invisible miter to lecture the masses on why the U.S. shouldn&#8217;t deal with Iran, wielding Scripture with the surgical precision of a blindfolded butcher.
Citing the Beatitudes and the command to &#8220;turn the other cheek,&#8221; Goldberg lamented that her own cheeks are &#8220;getting tired&#8221; from all the slapping.
It’s a touching sentiment, truly. One can almost hear the angels weeping — or perhaps that’s just the sound of anyone who has actually read Romans 13 hitting the floor in a dead faint.
Whoopi, ever the humble scholar, warned her audience that they only have a &#8220;half a quote&#8221; and need to &#8220;get into the Bible-Bible&#8221; to truly understand that being a &#8220;peacemaker&#8221; apparently means letting a theocratic regime develop ICBMs.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Despite Joy Behar&#39;s refusal to apologize for calling Jesus a &quot;narcissist&quot; for saying he was the Messiah, earlier in the week, Whoopi wants to lecture the faithful on the right about the Bible and war. She says you need to learn about &quot;The Bible-Bible&quot;:
GOLDBERG: But Jesus said,… <a href="https://t.co/YmrDUIsqm4">pic.twitter.com/YmrDUIsqm4</a>
&mdash; Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) <a href="https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/2044803372809675171?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 16, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
It’s a bold move for a woman who <a href="https://church4everychild.org/2015/10/20/if-we-value-life-we-dont-get-to-choose-which-lives-we-value/#:~:text=During%20one%20such%20discussion%20on,be%20reading%20the%20same%20Bible.">previously informed</a> the world that &#8220;there’s nothing in the Book that says anything about abortion.&#8221; Apparently, in Whoopi’s version of the &#8220;Bible-Bible,&#8221; God’s intricate knitting together of an unborn child in the womb mentioned in Psalm 139 was just a suggestion, and the &#8220;sword&#8221; the state bears in Romans 13 is actually a pool noodle used for rhythmic gymnastics.
But Goldberg’s expertise doesn’t stop at foreign policy. She’s also been there to fix the Catholic Church’s administrative issues. When Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone dared to enforce Canon 915 by denying Communion to Nancy Pelosi, Whoopi was there to <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/the-view-whoopi-goldberg-nancy-pelosi-communion-video/">set him straight</a>: &#8220;This is not your job, dude!&#8221;
According to the Gospel of Goldberg, the Eucharist isn’t a sacrament requiring a state of grace; it’s a participation trophy for anyone with a &#8220;View&#8221; microphone.
She’s &#8220;schooling&#8221; us, folks. We just don&#8217;t understand the &#8220;Bible-Bible&#8221; like she does. After all, she played a nun twice.
That’s basically two-thirds of a Trinity.

Whoopi Goldberg

Our Lady Of The Perpetual Habit: Whoopi Goldberg ‘Schools’ Us On The ‘Bible-Bible’ And War

Catholic Church

Iran war

As the world marks Holocaust Remembrance Day, the Jewish community stands at a poignant crossroads of memory and resilience.
<a href="https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-892865">New data</a> from Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics reveals a staggering truth: eight decades after the Nazi regime attempted to extinguish the Jewish flame, the global Jewish population has climbed to 15.8 million. While this remains just shy of the 16.6 million recorded in 1939, the trajectory represents a defiant rebound from the 11.5 million left in the wake of the Shoah.
This recovery is nothing short of miraculous when viewed through the lens of a history defined by systematic attempts at annihilation. The Jewish story did not begin with the gas chambers; it has been a millennia-long gauntlet of survival. From the dawn of history, the Jewish people faced the Egyptian Oppression and the military campaigns of Merneptah, who boasted of laying Israel to waste. The iron fist of Mesopotamia followed, with the Assyrian Conquest of 722 BCE and the Babylonian Siege of 586 BCE, which saw the First Temple reduced to ash.
Even when the Jews fought back, as they did against the Hellenizing forces of Antiochus IV during the Maccabean Revolt, the reprieve was often brief. The Roman era brought a new level of carnage: the First Jewish-Roman War and the Kitos War left hundreds of thousands dead, culminating in the Bar Kokhba Revolt, where half a million Jews perished under Hadrian’s legions.
The Middle Ages and the Early Modern period offered no sanctuary. The Rhineland Massacres of the First Crusade, the horrific Strasbourg Massacre during the Black Death, the state-sanctioned fires of the Spanish Inquisition, and the blood-soaked Khmelnytsky Uprising all served to suppress Jewish numbers through sheer brutality. By the 19th and early 20th centuries, the &#8220;pogrom&#8221; became a staple of Eastern European life, from the 1881–1884 riots to the Kishinev Pogrom to the post-WWI slaughter in Ukraine.
Then came the Holocaust—an industrialized nightmare where Babi Yar, Operation Reinhard, and Auschwitz-Birkenau became synonyms for the abyss. Yet, as we look at the 111,000 survivors still living in Israel today, we see the living embodiment of &#8220;Never Again.&#8221;
Despite the constant threat from the Arab world, which has been at war with the Jewish state since its inception, today, 45% of the world&#8217;s Jews—7.2 million—call Israel home, a radical shift from the 3% who lived there in 1939. While threats persist, evidenced by the horrific October 7 massacre, the data tell a story of an indestructible people. Despite a history of massacres designed to erase them, the Jewish community has clawed its way back from the brink, nearing a return to its pre-war strength and a vibrant, growing, and eternal presence.

Someone lighting the last candle of a Menorah

The Indestructible Flame: On Holocaust Remembrance Day, Jews Have Returned To Pre-Holocaust Numbers

General

Holocaust

Jews

World

The Supreme Court of Finland held that Päivi Räsänen, a longtime member of the Finnish Parliament, was guilty of the “hate crime” of “insulting” a group based on sexual orientation for publishing a church pamphlet over twenty years ago. A Lutheran bishop, Juhana Pohjola, was similarly convicted for publishing the pamphlet for the church.
Chillingly, Räsänen and Pohjola are now criminals for peacefully expressing their views in the public square.
The details that led up to this outrageous conviction are truly Orwellian.
Räsänen published her pamphlet, “Male and Female He Created Them,” in 2004, when Finland, like much of the world, was debating same-sex marriage. The pamphlet was meant to help others navigate those debates.
Years later, Finland amended its “War Crimes” statute, expanding the scope of criminal “hate speech” laws to include many new protected categories, resulting in this verdict where the court ruled it is illegal to publish “insulting” content.
Räsänen is a member of the Finnish Lutheran Church. In 2019, her church announced it would join the Helsinki Pride Parade. Räsänen gained international attention with a now-famous X post in which she criticized her church’s involvement in the pride parade and shared an image of a Bible verse.
<div id="attachment_652929" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-652929" class="size-large wp-image-652929" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1024x573.png" alt="Päivi Räsänen" width="1024" height="573" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1024x573.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-300x168.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-768x430.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM-1536x859.png 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/11/Screen-Shot-2023-11-14-at-7.01.23-AM.png 1573w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Credit: Alliance Defending Freedom International</div>
A progressive prosecutor in Helsinki could not stand such an “affront” and commenced what would become an almost seven-year legal battle. She immediately launched and announced an investigation into Räsänen for criminal “hate speech.” During that investigation, she seemingly reviewed every statement that Räsänen had made on the subject of sexuality and dredged up the 15-year-old 20-page pamphlet, along with a single radio interview. She later charged Räsänen and Bishop Pohjola with hate crimes based on the Bible tweet, the pamphlet, and the interview.
Räsänen defended herself publicly by sharing links to the allegedly “offensive” material so people could see for themselves what, exactly, she was on trial for.
A Finnish lower court unanimously acquitted Räsänen and Pohjola on all counts, finding that posting Bible verses was not a crime. The case should have ended there. In the United States, if the prosecution loses, the case is closed. But in Finland, the prosecutors can keep appealing even a clear loss, which they did. The Court of Appeals again fully and unanimously acquitted Räsänen and Pohjola.
The prosecutors took one more shot, appealing to the Supreme Court. And now, in a split 3-2 decision, the Supreme Court has found Räsänen and Pohjola guilty of “insult” under the “War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity” section of Finland’s criminal code.
The logic of the decision is mind-bending. The Court, thankfully, upheld the acquittal for the Bible tweet, finding it did not meet the threshold for incitement. That’s good. But how the Court found Räsänen guilty for publishing the pamphlet is straight out of George Orwell&#8217;s 1984.
The Court argued that simply because the prosecution started an investigation in 2019 — about a tweet that the Court itself says is allowed — Räsänen should have known that her early-2000s pamphlet might now be seen as “insulting&#8221; under a law enacted years later. The Court concluded that Räsänen should have removed the allegedly insulting statements before reposting a link to them — even before any charges were filed.
So it was the very fact that she was being publicly investigated and sought to defend herself that made her a criminal and her statements ipso facto illegal.
This is not justice. This is Year Zero thinking, where an official accusation can turn someone into a thought-criminal, and any defense is used against them. It is the upside-down world.
The Court, doubling down on Orwellian reasoning, has demanded that Räsänen and Pohjola remove and “destroy” the “offending” statements from the pamphlet. This is simply the mandatory erasure of history and thought.
How many books, articles, and posts available online “might be” considered “insulting” to a group? Must publishers and authors scour their online libraries and remove anything others might find offensive? Does a mere accusation of offense now mandate people pull their beliefs and statements offline? The Court’s twisted logic points toward all these dystopian outcomes.
Päivi Räsänen has shown immense Christlike grace throughout this whole ordeal, and I pray that she receives justice soon, through an appeal or otherwise.
But the decision in her case goes far beyond just one individual. How many people will refuse to speak up if there is even the hint of controversy in their views, religious or otherwise, especially if the powers-that-be clearly disfavor those views?
Is this how Europe will use mechanisms like the Digital Services Act to silence alleged “hate speech” and export censorship online and globally?
The Finnish Supreme Court’s decision against Räsänen is an outrage against her and against the most fundamental principles of free speech. It is more obvious than ever that &#8220;hate speech&#8221; laws are inherently abusive and must be repealed. This decision should be widely condemned by people worldwide who value freedom.
***
Sean Nelson is an international human rights lawyer serving as Senior Counsel for Global Religious Freedom with ADF International.

Germany: nationwide demonstrations against NSA spying and in solidarity with Edward Snowden

The Finnish Supreme Court’s ‘1984’ Playbook

The Finnish Supreme Court's '1984' Playbook

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Finland

Religious Freedom

Social Media Censorship

Western Civilization

The good news: Bible reading is up across every demographic in America in 2025. The bad news: certain politicians and activists are using those hallowed words as partisan narrative building to launder radical ideology into the language of faith.
They aren’t coming to the Word. They’re mining it.
James Talarico is the most prominent current offender. The Democrat nominee for Texas Senate — think “pick me” Pastor Pete — has made a habit of weaponizing the Lord&#8217;s Divine Writ to sanctify progressive politics. On Joe Rogan’s podcast, he even used the Annunciation to justify abortion.
“I say all of this in the context of abortion. Before God comes over Mary and we have the incarnation, God asks for Mary’s consent … Go back and read this in Luke.”
Okay — I did.
In Luke 1, the angel Gabriel appears to Mary and announces: &#8220;You will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus &#8230; The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.&#8221; Mary responds: &#8220;Here I am, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word.&#8221;
Mary’s humble, faithful acceptance of a unique divine calling — the Incarnation of God Himself — is not a theological permission slip for abortion on demand. The exegetical gymnastics required to arrive at this conclusion are impressive, to say the least. But Talarico isn’t doing theology. He’s doing politics.
And Talarico is not unique in his weaponization of scripture. Progressives have swarmed any comment section touching immigration, social policy, or religious liberty, and you’ll find the same three or four Bible verses deployed like rhetorical grenades (they think they’re so creative). &#8220;What happened to love thy neighbor?&#8221; &#8220;Jesus was an immigrant.&#8221; &#8220;There isn&#8217;t a single Christian who&#8217;s actually read the whole Bible.&#8221;
The angry agnostics thought they had us there! Their words are meant to sting. They’re also increasingly incorrect.
I am on day 198 of the Bible in a Year with Father Mike Schmitz. Every morning, I sit with passages and prophets most material heretics never touch — astonished at the sheer magnitude of wisdom and meaning within those pages. And I can tell you: what’s being weaponized in op-eds and cable hits is a fraction of a fraction of what’s actually there.
Today, it was Isaiah that stopped me cold. Isaiah’s taunt against the king of kings of Babylon — and by extension Lucifer himself — reads:
“How the oppressor has ceased! How his insolence has ceased! The Lord has broken the staff of the wicked, the scepter of rulers, that struck down the peoples in wrath with unceasing blows, that ruled the nations in anger with unrelenting persecution … Sheol beneath is stirred up to meet you when you come … &#8216;You too have become as weak as we! You have become like us!&#8217; Your pomp is brought down to Sheol, and the sound of your harps; maggots are the bed beneath you, and worms are your covering. How you have fallen from heaven!”
It is visceral, sweeping, and devastating. It is the story of what happens when a being given every gift and capability turns those gifts towards pride and domination; when free will is used for evil.
There is a reason we don’t hear that passage quoted by the activists cherry-picking Scripture for social media. It doesn’t fit the narrative. It never does.
What I’ve found, page by page, is that the Bible is far stranger, far harder, and far more demanding than the domesticated version, either Nationalist or Progressive, being peddled by its political appropriators. It doesn’t bend easily to any agenda — it’s harsh. It can also drastically improve your life if you let it. But it resists those who approach it not as the living Word of God, but as a rhetorical arsenal.
Reading it completely — and understanding it — is its own form of resistance. It’s how you know when you’re being lied to. It’s how you develop the intellectual grounding to defend the faith, not just feel it. And in an era when leaders and loudmouths are increasingly mocking Christianity, that groundedness isn’t optional; to me, it’s essential.
For myself, reading the Bible has been transformative. Father Mike doesn’t just read the text &#8211; he explains the scripture, makes it digestible, and allows me to apply these teachings to my life in a way that has made each day lighter.
It’s changed how I think, how I argue, how I deal with shortcomings, and frankly, how I respond when someone online tells me I’ve never opened a Bible.
I have. I’d recommend you do the same.

Senate Candidate James Talarico Holds Primary Night Event

No, The Bible Still Doesn’t Advocate For Abortion

Abortion

James Talarico

Twenty-five centuries ago, Thucydides wrote of heroic men that their story, after death, “abides everywhere without visible symbol, woven into the stuff of other men’s lives.” We know them when they are gone by their enduring effect upon us, and upon those who knew them — and upon those whom they never knew, but who live and flourish in the shade of their works. The hero lives beyond his own.
That was the late great Coach Lou Holtz in full. After 89 years on the field, he has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/beloved-notre-dame-football-coach-lou-holtz-dies-at-89">gone on</a> to his reward — and he also lives on, among us, in the lives he transformed, and in the country he served.
He was the greatest of men — a college football hall of famer, a devoted father, and a faithful Christian.
He was also one of my best friends. I had the opportunity to reflect upon his friendship, and his example, at his visitation and memorial in South Bend, Indiana this week. Seeing the men and women gathered there — the friends and family, and just as importantly the Americans who he never knew but knew him — it was impossible to miss the simple truth. Lou Holtz was a heroic man. It was a quiet heroism, a modest heroism, and a heroism he would have denied with all sincerity. But his life was one of heroism all the same.
Selfless service and a solid personal example, you see, can be heroic in their way. He possessed both in full.
<div id="attachment_1060871" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1060871" class="size-large wp-image-1060871" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-108124301-864x576.jpg" alt="GLENDALE, AZ - JANUARY 10: ESPN reporter Lou Holtz looks on during the Tostitos BCS National Championship Game between the Oregon Ducks and the Auburn Tigers at University of Phoenix Stadium on January 10, 2011 in Glendale, Arizona. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-108124301-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-108124301-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-108124301-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-108124301.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images</div>
Coach Holtz was a source of inspiration to me ever since we first met 33 years ago at the 1993 Cotton Bowl game, where Texas A&amp;M played Notre Dame, and I was the Cotton Bowl Queen. It was a cold, cold day out, but it turned out to be the beginning of a warm, lifelong friendship.
Coach Holtz famously said, “God did not put us on this earth to be ordinary.” And his extraordinary life proves that he lived up to those words better than most.
We could point to his many victories on the field, as the only college football coach in history to lead six different programs to bowl games and four different programs to final top 15 rankings.
But those victories are just part of the story — the fruits of a lifelong commitment to servant leadership.
In addition to serving as an officer in the United States Army Reserve, Coach Holtz was active in national politics for many years. Decades after we first met, we reunited when I was at the helm of the Texas Public Policy Foundation. As the years went on, we developed a bond over a shared vision for America that solidified under President Trump. Coach Holtz was an early supporter of the president, who awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2020 — an honor that was well deserved.
Coach Holtz was a great American, a great coach, a great man. But most important in the eyes of God: he was a good man. He was never content with merely speaking about the Gospel — he was intent on putting it into practice. His decades of charitable work, most recently through the Holtz’s Heroes Foundation, served communities in need and provided scholarships to former student-athletes facing financial, physical, or mental hardships.
In 2021, he helped me launch the America First Policy Institute, which he later told me was the most important team he would ever be a part of. Instead of kicking his feet up, he spent his final years coaching America back to greatness and inspired countless Americans along the way — including me. The last time I saw him, he was still working, still laboring, still leading for the causes he held dear — God and America.
Whether on the football field, on the civic field, or on the field of faith, Coach Holtz carried the ball and kept the flame of greatness alive. Although he’s no longer with us, his dedication to truth and goodness lives on in the lives of those he impacted. There are so many who will walk in the paths he set forth without knowing it was him who gave them the opening drive. But we who know, we who loved him, we will always remember.
Thank you, Coach, for your life, for your example, and for your faith. We won’t let you down.
* * *
Brooke L. Rollins is the 33rd U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.
Disclaimer: Brooke Rollins is writing in her personal capacity as a private citizen and the views expressed herein are solely her own.

Notre Dame Fighting Irish

Remembering Lou Holtz, The Coach America Needed

Charity

Coach

Football

NCAA football

Notre Dame University

Opinion

Secretary of Agriculture

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1930-president-trump-endorses-jake-paul">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.
* * *
The New York Post published an article yesterday based on a new survey that&#8217;s just come out.
The headline reads:
<blockquote>‘Hotwifing’ — the sexy new couples trend that’s ‘strengthening’ marriages across the country</blockquote>
Now, to be clear, I don&#8217;t encourage you to read the article or the survey, but this is part of a broader cultural trend, a broader cultural normalization of polyamory, of “consensual non-monogamy.” That&#8217;s the new gross clinical jargon they use to sanitize their own perversions.
From the article:
<blockquote>Could ‘hotwifing’ save your marriage? 71% of kinky couples say loaning their wives out for that thing that only husbands and wives are supposed to do together strengthened their union.</blockquote>
Seventy-one percent. The overwhelming majority of these &#8220;kinky couples&#8221; say it strengthened their union. In reality, these are people whose unions are probably not all that strong to begin with. But they say — and these are people who are obviously very, very confused about a lot of things — that pimping out their beloved actually strengthened their union.
Color me a little bit skeptical.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Could &#8216;hotwifing&#8217; save your marriage? 71% of kinky couples say loaning their wives out for sex &#8216;strengthened&#8217; their union <a href="https://t.co/U2cynXcIlF">https://t.co/U2cynXcIlF</a> <a href="https://t.co/aA51Nem0Eu">pic.twitter.com/aA51Nem0Eu</a>
— New York Post (@nypost) <a href="https://twitter.com/nypost/status/2031777390880309504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In any case, you hear a lot about this right now. When some people read this, they react in the old fuddy-duddy way: “Geez, these kids today. This is crazy. Can you believe what they&#8217;re doing now? In the olden days an inch of stocking was looked at as something shocking, but now anything goes.”
That&#8217;s the wrong approach. Because this is not novel. This is not an innovation. There&#8217;s nothing new about this. This is just paganism.
Our culture — the West, sometimes we describe our nation as a Christian nation — but even what we call the West is really a pale shadow of what we used to call Christendom, which was Christian civilization that thrived from roughly the age of Constantine up through the Protestant Revolution, which then starts to crack it up a little bit. But still you had a substantially Christian civilization, albeit amid wars of religion.
Then with the Peace of Westphalia and the Enlightenment, people tried to preserve Christianity but without taking religion all that seriously. You get into modernity and you&#8217;re really living on the fumes of Christendom. Soon enough that gives way to overt paganism.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1930-president-trump-endorses-jake-paul"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054531" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" data-wp-editing="1" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Here’s what Tertullian, an early Christian writer and Father of the Church, has to say about how pagans versus Christians regarded sex. 
A great line from Tertullian in his &#8220;Apology&#8221;:
<blockquote>All things are common among us, except our wives. We give up our community where it is practiced alone by others who not only take possession of the wives of their friends but most tolerantly also accommodate their friends with theirs.</blockquote>
It&#8217;s a great observation — almost Chestertonian millennia earlier. He says: we Christians are different from the pagans in that we share everything except our wives, and the pagans share nothing with each other except their wives. They won’t share their money, they won’t share their food, they won’t share their resources, they might not share their time — but they will share their wives.
But we Christians are the opposite. We&#8217;ll give anything to each other except for our wives.
Saint Jerome has a famous line in his commentary on Hosea:
<blockquote>Rarely does a heretic love chastity.</blockquote>
Every so often there is a heresy that promotes chastity, but generally speaking you notice — especially in modern religion, with wacky pastors of weird breakaway schismatic churches — they’re always promoting strange sexual practices. That’s the one common thread among all the weird heretical forms of Christianity today.
Rarely does a heretic love chastity.
What this new study reveals — the one meant to shock us with a New York Post headline, “Can you believe 71% of these kinky couples say it’s actually great for their marriages when they cheat on each other?” — is not a new discovery about the present. It reveals how ignorant we are of the past.
This is what paganism was always like.
It&#8217;s amusing when people think they&#8217;ve discovered something new. These people promoting orgies and decadence and bacchanalia think they&#8217;ve discovered freedom. “In the old days people were uptight, but now we’re free. We have free love, we’re doing drugs, we’re polyamorous.”
It makes you think: wow, no one has ever thought of that before — doing drugs and behaving like degenerates. What innovators you are.
It just reveals how little we understand the past. We pretend we understand ancient paganism. We pretend we understand what Christianity replaced. We really don’t.
A great example of this is in the Bible. In Exodus, the Israelites leave Egypt, and Moses goes up Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments. Five seconds later, the Israelites abandon the God who led them out of Egypt and start worshiping a golden calf.
Moses comes down and essentially says: what are you doing? Stop worshiping this golden calf.
When people imagine that scene, they think the Israelites were just bowing down saying, “Oh golden calf, we worship you.” But that’s not really what was happening.
They were actually doing the same stuff modern pagans do. They were indulging in food and drink, engaging in all kinds of strange sexual behavior, revelry, and excess.
It’s the same pattern.
There is nothing new under the sun.
So when we come across these “new discoveries” about relationships and marriage and free love, what we’re really doing — wittingly or unwittingly — is rejecting Christianity, reverting to a kind of base, degraded paganism, and pretending that we’ve discovered some new revelation.
But it’s the opposite of a new revelation.
It’s the rejection of revelation.

Couple At A Restaurant Meal

‘Hotwifing’ Is Being Sold As A Marriage Booster — Yes, Really

Marriage

Michael Knowles

Paganism

A peculiar ritual has emerged on Sunday afternoons in online evangelical discourse. After the benediction, after the coffee, after lunch, some settle in to read David French at The New York Times. He is, after all, a self-proclaimed evangelical and political conservative (this, despite using his platform to repeatedly hector evangelicals for all their supposed shortcomings, namely, voting overwhelmingly for Donald Trump).
This past Sunday, French turned his <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/08/opinion/james-talarico-christian-democrat-texas-primary.html">column</a> into something of a paean to James Talarico, the freshly minted Texas Democratic Senate nominee who has parlayed his Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary enrollment into a national brand. French called Talarico a “Christian X-ray” and reframed the country’s primary political divide not as Left versus Right but as decent versus indecent. The implication, apparently, is that a smiling seminarian who talks about love, who denies essential doctrines of the Christian faith, and who supports unfettered access to abortion and affirms gender ideology represents the decent side in opposition to “MAGA Christianity” that trades virtue for cruelty. In truth, Talarico is a walking caricature of the very worst elements of progressive Christianity, coupled with his Boy Scoutish looks and deep Southern folksiness.
To be fair to French, he does note his disagreements with Talarico. That caveat deserves acknowledgment. But a caveat buried in a column is not a serious engagement. It is a cover for a bait-and-switch that occurs later in the column. While espousing heresy is a grave error for Talarico, only slightly less severe is papering over doctrinal errors and legitimizing them on the pages of The New York Times, as French has done.
And French gets something else right before we can understand where he goes wrong. French has consistently and correctly argued that too many Christians have, at times, embraced a pragmatic ethic when evaluating Donald Trump. That is a real problem, and character defenses that are, in fact, indefensible can cheapen Christian witness. Paul’s instruction to Timothy is not optional: “Watch your life and doctrine closely” (1 Tim. 4:16). But in my estimate, I do not regard Donald Trump as a Christian (even while I maintain the importance of upholding good character for all politicians). The framing French relies upon is more acutely applied to Talarico than to Donald Trump. Doctrine and character go hand in glove. The Christian moral tradition has never treated them as divisible, even as we understand that on-the-ground politicians do not always neatly align with Christian desires. But what French is doing is far worse than the hypocrisy he accuses “MAGA Christians” of; he’s now embarking on a final phase of his transformation by downplaying doctrine and elevating practice, which is a historic trajectory seen in the journey toward theological progressivism.
And here is the difficulty. French is making, in his treatment of Talarico, the precise error he has spent years denouncing, an error that malforms Christianity as a packaged whole. He is accepting the appeal of a charming political figure while setting aside the doctrinal catastrophe underneath. He is doing with progressive Christianity exactly what he accuses MAGA Christians of doing with Donald Trump: trading away sound doctrine for the aesthetic satisfaction of a candidate who seems nicer, nay, “decent.” But consider: Talarico says, “God is non-binary.” He supports the dismemberment of unborn children in the name of reproductive freedom. He does all of this with the backing of Christian moralism. He publicly positions Christian faith as the engine for a progressive political program that would have been unrecognizable to any historic expression of the Christian tradition. This is not a candidate with some character flaws. This is a candidate whose stated theology repudiates the faith he claims to represent.
The Apostle Paul did not admonish his readers to focus solely on their ethics. He also admonished them to watch their doctrine, and to understand that the two cannot be disaggregated. Kindness is a genuine Christian virtue. It is not sufficient. A kind heretic is still a heretic. A man who speaks about Jesus with warmth while denying the moral order that Christ himself affirmed is not a Christian statesman. He is a wolf in a very well-pressed suit (Matt. 7:15). What French is doing in his column is making an unbiblical tradeoff—accepting the legitimacy of bankrupt doctrine under the ethics of character while accepting Talarico’s dubious, silver-tongued deceitfulness.
What is saddest about French’s column is not the argument itself, but what the argument reveals. There is a deep and corrosive bitterness driving it. His contempt for conservative Christians who have voted for Trump has mutated over time into something uglier: a reflexive and condescending derision of anyone who refuses to share his political judgments, dressed up as prophetic moral clarity. Let us all take a lesson that deep-seated rage at Donald Trump and his Christian supporters does not justify placating doctrinal error. When you begin describing a progressive politician who affirms abortion as a “Christian X-ray” that illuminates the failures of orthodox Christians, you have not elevated your commentary. You have descended into trollish editorializing with a more elite platform.
And here is the frustrating thing: none of this requires choosing between character and moral substance. Christians are perfectly capable of walking and chewing gum. We can and should refuse to excuse indefensible behavior from any politician, Republican or Democrat. We can acknowledge that character matters across the board. And we can simultaneously recognize that there are genuine, serious moral asymmetries between the two major party platforms on questions near and dear to evangelicals, namely abortion, human dignity, and religious liberty. Recognizing those asymmetries is not capitulation to MAGA Christianity. It is an honest moral assessment of less-than-ideal political realities.
Progressive Christianity is not Christianity. Any movement, and any thirty-something seminarian, that denies the core doctrines of the Christian faith has not offered a fresh reading of the tradition. It has departed from the tradition. The tradition has a word for that departure. It is called heresy. And anyone, including certain New York Times columnists, who aids and abets such departures by insisting they still count as authentic Christianity, is not offering serious commentary on the Christian faith. It is offering theological malpractice to a very large audience.
* * *
Andrew T. Walker is Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a Fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

A Kind Heretic Is Still A Heretic

Homosexuality

Progressivism

Religion

Transgender

“Before we go further, we need to acknowledge that our trans community needs abortion care, too.” That’s what Texas Democratic Senate candidate and State Representative James Talarico <a href="https://x.com/Protestia/status/2029225998416245095">claims</a> in a video circulating on X, in which he preaches at a church about the intersection of transgenderism and abortion. To further his argument, Talarico claims that “our neighbors with a uterus” have become “the property of the state” via laws protecting unborn life.
This isn’t the kind of thing that Texas Christians hear in their churches, unless they’re going to one whose orthodoxy is determined by the Democratic Party.
Other bangers from that same <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?mibextid=wwXIfr&amp;v=422454413430414&amp;rdid=dVHm68J8e6TVbN9U">sermon</a> include: “Being Christian and being pro-choice are absolutely consistent, because Christianity is a feminist religion”, and “Did they teach you in Sunday school that Jesus Christ Himself was a radical feminist?”
It’s as if Democratic consultants who have no idea what a Christian believes asked an A.I. to create their perfect candidate. He’s clean-cut, well-mannered, and he’s out there on Sundays bringing the heresy.
Talarico is a leftist atheist&#8217;s idea of a good Christian: a progressive culture warrior in lockstep with the secular world and uninterested in foundational Christian principles like sin, repentance, or salvation.
The idea that it’s possible — and normal — for a person to change sexes, and that such a person deserves the right to murder her child, is theologically beyond the pale. It’s also political insanity in a state like Texas.
But we shouldn’t underestimate the possibility that Talarico’s lies could have some appeal among young people desperately searching for meaning in life.
While Bible-believing Christians will easily see that Talarico’s representation of Christianity is incompatible with Scripture, Americans less familiar with God’s Word are at risk of falling for his heresy hook, line, and sinker. Democrats are counting on this — and the only thing it will cost the people who listen is their souls.
For them, it’s a small price to pay to turn Texas Blue.
Unfortunately, Talarico has had help in spreading his gospel of manipulation to the masses — including via the most famous spiritual seeker in America, Joe Rogan. 
On a July 18, 2025, episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Talarico claimed that his pro-abortion views are informed by Mary’s choice to bear Jesus. The angel Gabriel, Talarico says, asked Mary “if this was something she wanted to do,” which apparently denotes the importance of consent to pregnancy.
If Mary had said no, presumably Jesus is destined not for the manger but for the same ash heap Talarico would consign so many other children.
Of course, the lawmaker’s presentation of the passage is entirely inaccurate. The angel asks Mary no such thing. Talarico’s attempt to use Mary’s acceptance of Jesus’s conception to justify legally poisoning and dismembering babies before birth isn’t idiotic; it’s intentionally and absurdly evil. Viewing Jesus’s advent in this way perverts the gospel: His miraculous arrival was a rescue mission to save us from our sin, not a politically convenient allegory about bodily autonomy.
In 2021, reacting to Texas’ ban on transing minors he <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1016410325787907">said</a>, “Texas Republicans have passed their anti-trans bill.  Over and over Christians used scripture to justify bullying trans kids. I told them in my faith, God is non-binary.”
God refers to Himself repeatedly in the scriptures as King, Father, and Lord. The Creator of all things made us male and female (Gen. 1:27), making gender fluidity and “transitioning” genders both a scientific and Biblical impossibility.
Getting this wrong means misunderstanding both human nature and God Himself. And Talarico is smart enough to know he is getting it wrong on purpose.
On the political side, the outcomes of such positions are disastrous. Encouraging men, women, boys, and girls to mutilate their bodies and lie about their biology leads to the possibility of lifelong <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6626312/">sterility</a>, <a href="https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(24)00123-4/fulltext">mental instability</a>, and increased rates of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40250154/">suicide</a>. The insistence that males can become female and vice versa has set itself up as an enemy of free speech, parental rights, and child protection.
Abortion murders an innocent human being, and no one, including women who believe they’re men, should have the right to kill a baby.
In the Texas House, Talarico <a href="https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/177454/james-talarico">voted</a> against every measure to protect unborn babies, gender-deceived children, and parental rights. He is on the record supporting the abolition of prisons. “It’s hard to imagine a world without prisons,” he remarked. “But just because it’s hard doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.”
Talarico is a radical in every sense, an unmitigated prophet of falsehood who seeks to twist the language of faith to serve his evil aims. That’s why the spiritual angle of Talarico’s platform is even more troubling than his politics. Not only does he defend extreme views, but he also weaves them into Christian theology, presenting a progressive form of Christian Nationalism wherein his newfangled interpretation of the Bible informs the law of the land.
See, Democrats don’t have a problem with the Bible, so long as they can just revise it and re-read it to support whatever they currently think about anything. That’s what you get with a candidate who knows just enough about Christianity to try to exploit it.
Unfortunately, Talarico’s pleading pastoral tone could prove persuasive to many — not only to voters, but to spiritual seekers. He claims to hold to Jesus’s words, but rejects all the words that conflict with his worldview. In Talarico’s framing, Jesus is not our Savior from sin and King of the universe; He is reduced to a mascot for left-wing causes, a means by which people can be manipulated into supporting Democrats’ policies.
In &#8220;Screwtape Letters,&#8221; C.S. Lewis warns against using Christianity as a means to the end of social justice. Screwtape, a demon, encourages this misuse of the faith, knowing it leads people away from Jesus, not toward Him:
“We do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything — even to social justice. For the Enemy [God] will not be used as a convenience.”
Talarico’s campaign must be defeated by voters and politicians, yes. But even more importantly, his message must be opposed by pastors and Christians. As toxic as his policies are for our country, the bigger threat is his theology, which is damning to our souls.
* * *
Allie Beth Stuckey is a conservative commentator, host of the podcast “Relatable,” and New York Times bestselling author of “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Empathy-Progressives-Christian-Compassion/dp/0593541944/ref=sr_1_1?crid=UANYF7F4G527&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.SR4Z9YTZBiD-LIyJWIe2NqrPQSJrs7v_SeJwqdKhprgz4bRzXt9yi_yz87GrsiKreKNDkh5cktyvWqnwYqCvq-AAWTJyW9idmKxIIFSxmJU.Q-uGoH9skFCMDxfjq4I70mRhShGY4nULiXDRrFrj1Nw&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=Toxic+Empathy%3A+How+Progressives&amp;qid=1749579102&amp;sprefix=toxic+empathy+how+progressives%2Caps%2C55&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion</a>“
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Talarico gpt

Democrat Strategists Asked ChatGPT To Create A Christian Candidate. They Got James Talarico.

Artificial Intelligence

Democrats

Leftists

U.S. Politics

There are two basic ways to critique any belief system. You can critique it externally, by judging it according to standards it doesn’t accept, or you can judge it internally, by judging it according to standards it does accept.
Therefore, an external critique of Islam will judge it according to standards that come from outside its own sources, whether philosophical, historical, or theological, whereas an internal critique will begin from the Quran itself and ask whether Islam can stand on its own terms. 
The Islamic Dilemma is this kind of argument. It doesn’t impose Christian assumptions onto Islam. Instead, it begins with what the Quran itself says and follows those claims to their logical conclusion.
One of the strongest internal critiques of Islam is what’s commonly called the Islamic Dilemma. When followed carefully, it presents Muslims with a serious problem that can’t be resolved without undermining the authority of Islam itself.
The Quran repeatedly affirms that God revealed genuine Scripture before Muhammad, specifically the Torah and the Gospel. It speaks of these writings as guidance and light, given by Allah to earlier prophets. Just as importantly, the Quran commands Jews and Christians to judge by what God revealed in those Scriptures. Nowhere does the Quran clearly or explicitly teach that the Torah or the Gospel were lost, corrupted, or unreliable at the time of Muhammad.
The Quran doesn’t merely acknowledge earlier Scripture in passing. Instead, it repeatedly speaks of the Torah and the Gospel as real, authoritative revelations from God that were present and functioning in the world of Muhammad.
For example, Surah 5:44 states that “the Torah, in which was guidance and light,” was revealed by Allah and used for judgment. 
Likewise, Surah 5:46 affirms that Jesus was given the Gospel, “wherein is guidance and light,” confirming what came before it. 
These verses describe living Scriptures that guide God’s people, not lost or corrupted texts.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/plc-260226-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054605" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/Matt-Fradd.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
More striking still, the Quran commands Jews and Christians to judge by these very writings. 
Surah 5:47 instructs Christians to “judge by what Allah has revealed in the Gospel.” 
Surah 5:68 tells both Jews and Christians that they have no firm standing unless they uphold the Torah and the Gospel. 
These commands only make sense if those Scriptures were accessible and trustworthy in the seventh century — when the Quran was written.
Finally, Surah 10:94 tells Muhammad himself that if he’s in doubt, he should ask those who read the Scripture before him. That appeal would be meaningless if those Scriptures were already corrupted or unreliable.
Taken together, these passages show that the Quran affirms the Torah and the Gospel as genuine revelation, present, readable, and authoritative at the time of Muhammad.
This creates a dilemma — with only two possible and mutually exclusive options.
Option one: The Torah and Gospel available in the seventh century were trustworthy.
If that’s true, then Islam faces a decisive contradiction. The Gospel preached in Muhammad’s time proclaims core Christian doctrines that Islam explicitly denies. It teaches that Jesus is the Son of God, that He was crucified, and that He rose from the dead. The Quran denies all three. So if the Gospel is trustworthy, then the Quran contradicts God’s prior revelation. That would mean the Quran can’t be from God.
Option two: The Torah and Gospel were corrupted before Muhammad.
This option also collapses Islam. If the Scriptures were corrupted, then Allah either failed to preserve his earlier revelation or allowed his followers to be misled for centuries. Worse still, the Quran commands Christians to judge by the Gospel they possess and appeals to those Scriptures as confirmation of Muhammad’s message. If those texts were already unreliable, then that doesn’t make sense. In that case, the Quran would be affirming and appealing to corrupted documents, which undermines its claim to divine wisdom.
Either way, Islam is trapped. It can’t affirm the Bible without contradicting itself, and it can’t deny the Bible without undermining its own authority.
Muslims often try to escape this dilemma by claiming that the original Torah and Gospel were pure but later altered. Yet that claim is historically unsupported. We possess New Testament manuscripts that predate Muhammad by hundreds of years, and they teach the same doctrines Christianity teaches today. There’s no evidence of a lost, non-Trinitarian, non-crucified version of the Gospel that Islam could appeal to. That so-called “original Gospel” exists only as a theological escape hatch.
The dilemma is therefore decisive. If the Bible is true, Islam is false. And if the Bible is false, then the Quran is false for affirming it. Islam depends on earlier revelation that it can’t consistently affirm or deny.
Christianity, by contrast, welcomes scrutiny of its historical claims. It stands or falls on events in history, especially the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If Christ didn’t rise from the dead, then Christianity is false. Islam avoids history by rewriting it centuries later, but in doing so, it contradicts the very Scriptures it claims to respect.
The Islamic Dilemma doesn’t merely challenge Islam from the outside. Instead, it exposes an internal incoherence at the heart of its theology. And a revelation that contradicts itself can’t come from God.

Closeup of Muslim hands reading holy Quran book with Arabic text under warm light. Concept for Ramadan Kareem, Islamic religion prayer, spiritual faith, God worship, and reading scripture.

Menu