Responding to Phil Johnson

Comments · 136

• TH

  @TheOtherPaul · 2 weeks ago

  I spent my children's inheritance for back-to-back cruises in retirement just to watch this.

  66

• JO

  @johnmoline8688 · 2 weeks ago

  “I don’t think he did the reading” 😂

  25

• VI

  @virtualpilgrim8645 · 2 weeks ago

  “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our CHRISTIAN NATION to select and PREFER CHRISTIANS for their rulers. National prosperity can neither be obtained nor preserved without the favor of Providence.” ~ John Jay 1816

  21

• LO

  @Longthegam3 · 2 weeks ago

  I find these response videos very helpful. Answering the critics is an important part of advancing.

  16

• EL

  @eli27049 · 12 days ago

  I really needed this . Thank you 🙏. I had a lot of questions and I was confused about this topic but now everything gets clearer

• BI

  @bigsnacks2350 · 12 days ago

  I believe if Phil were to watch this video he would genuinely not understand what was being talked about.

  8

• KI

  @kimberlyo2037 · 2 weeks ago

  I don’t always stick around, but I did for this one😊 so good!

  2

• JA

  @jaredwins155 · 2 weeks ago

  having 'not done the reading' myself this is helpful and clears some things up. thank you! i'd love to read your book in the future

  2

• MO

  @ModernReformer · 2 weeks ago

  Will there be a day where Stephen does not have to say, "I don't think he did the reading"?

  23

• BB

  @bbbhhhaaa7008 · 3 days ago

  Stephen Wolfe really is one of the premier Christian intellectuals of our time

• VI

  @virtualpilgrim8645 · 2 weeks ago

  The core problem in this entire debate is that people project the modern federal government backward onto a constitutional order that simply didn’t exist at the founding. Under the original Constitution, the federal government had almost no jurisdiction over the states and virtually none over individuals. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were restraints on <b>federal</b> power only — they were never intended to regulate state governments or define individual rights at the state level. As a result, states were free to suppress voting, restrict speech, impose religious tests for office, and enforce whatever moral or religious framework they chose. That was not a constitutional violation; it was the constitutional design. When modern arguments about Christian nationalism assume a strong, centralized federal authority capable of enforcing national religious norms, they are operating entirely within a post–14th Amendment framework, not the founding-era system in which states held broad autonomy over religion, rights, and civic participation.

  11

• PA

  @parallelparks-sm9xz · 2 weeks ago (edited)

  Phil Johnson’s only goal was to inoculate his congregation against any and all views of Christian Nationalism via the association fallacy.<br><br>He should have more respect for his congregation.

  44