The right for Satanic statues to exist in state capitol buildings has found some segments of Christian support. Jenna Ellis has embodied this and has condemned Michael Cassidy for decapitating the Satanic idol and Christians for supporting what he did. Jenna Ellis was on the Trump election legal team which lost every case, unlike the heavy-hitting Trump impeachment legal team. She was since charged for her legal services for President Trump and pled guilty after raising money to defend her innocence. But in addition to supporting Disney in its fight against Governor Ron DeSantis, Jenna Ellis is also advocating that religious liberty means we protect Satanic statues in public.
The Christian Nationalist crowd is the new BLM.
— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 16, 2023
Both cheer tearing down statues and destroying property they don’t like in the name of their cause.
Both are wrong.
Jenna Ellis declared that Christian Nationalists are the new Black Lives Matter for cheering the tearing down of statues, drawing a moral equivalence between statues of American heroes and statues of Satan.
America is not Old Testament Israel. We do not follow levitical law, but the Constitution.
— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 16, 2023
There are three types of law in the Bible:
Moral
Civil
Ceremonial
Perhaps in not reading the Old Testament, Jenna Ellis missed that every king of Judah is judged on their tolerance for idols in public and high places. The best kings commonly attacked both cesspools of idolatry, and these are models that Christian politicians should emulate for they “did good in the sight of the Lord.”
The Christian Nationalists are saying it out loud: they want blasphemy laws.
— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 16, 2023
Compelled religion and civil government punishment for noncompliance. It’s Christian wokeness.
This is antithetical to everything the Founders stood for: liberty and justice for all. https://t.co/tpHDSbgpbY
Jenna Ellis claims to be an originalist of the Constitution yet missed the first word of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Properly understood, the First Amendment restricts Congress from establishing a Church of America in the same way the British had a Church of England. In the beginning of America, there were blasphemy laws, state-sponsored churches, and religious requirements for public office at the state level. But these facts are lost when one is indoctrinated by a liberal law school.
And there it is.
— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 17, 2023
CN’s are not actually concerned satanism is not a “real religion.”
They want a theocracy and to forcibly compel everyone in America to assent to their version of Christianity. pic.twitter.com/DDeXSDR0UY
In attacking William Wolfe, a thought leader in the Christian Nationalist movement, Jenna Ellis went full Reddit employing a strawman against a fairly ecumenical movement.
At the end of the day, Jenna Ellis is not someone whose legal acumen commands respect. She does not hold to an originalist view of the Constitution unless you view Earl Warren as its author. Quite frankly, Christians really shouldn’t care to hear from someone who raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend the truth only to confess to lying at the first chance she got in a battle she chose to engage in across state lines lecture us on integrity.
7 Responses
What seems to be lost is the definition of a religion by it’s intent. Does the constitution protect a subversive political movement (like Islam) as a Religion or the Satanic Church also opposed t normative life in America. Does the 1st amendment for that matter (when stating guarantees for freedom of the press) established to maintain a check on Government also protect pornographic content designed to destroy our way of life. Do we any longer have a simple majority who understand enough philosophically to feel threatened by the chief actors in the present war?
Sorry Jenna, my conscience will not allow me to condemn a man for destroying a satanic idol, nor will it allow me to justify wickedness.
“He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the Lord.” – Prov. 17:15
I myself drew the comparison to BLM in an earlier post here, only to show the hypocrisy and to expose the true motives of the marxists. At any other time they would be yelling from the rooftops the fact that slavery and racism are satanic. And they’d be correct about that. Satanic statues should be the first statues they seek to destroy. But the reason they aren’t is not because of racism, slavery, or skin color, but because their true motive, and higher priority, is to advance marxism and to destroy Christianity.
She is falling into the false dichotomy that we either have some sort of unworkable pluralist, multi-standard, technocratic, conflicting standards imposed at the federal level, as is now the futile pursuit, and which essentially amounts to established religious beliefs at the federal level, or we have a theocracy. As a lawyer, and a conservative, she should know that those are not the only two options. She’s a contributor at “The Federalist”, for crying out loud.
Well, I’m here to break the news to her as long as the federal government takes it upon itself to establish and impose beliefs at the federal level, Christians are going to advocate that those beliefs be in line with scripture. If the choice is Pagan Nationalism or Christian Nationalism, which does she think we would choose? Of course we’re going to choose Christian Nationalism.
If she doesn’t like it, then she needs to start advocating for the undoing of all beliefs that have been imposed at the federal level, starting with the imposition of so-called “gay marriage”, legalization of sodomy, funding of the slaughter of the unborn, “pronoun” usage, transvestism, forced extortion of Christians to support and endorse abominable sin … the list is a mile long.
If the republican party doesn’t like it, they can start by undoing their own imposition of immorality when they formally and officially made support for abominable sin a part of their party platform, imposing beliefs at the national level, and in fact leaving us with no party platform we can support that has a hill of beans chance of ever winning an election.
What in the sam hill do these people expect from us?
This is a perfect example of the sort of conflict the federalist framework was originally designed to avoid.
As long as the federal government is trying to legislate beliefs, this sort of thing is going to happen and it’s going to happen more and more. Everybody destroying everybody else’s statues, going to war with everybody else, to determine who comes out on top, and who’s beliefs will prevail at the national level.
Well, since they started that war, we’re going to have fight it. The Bible says to resist the devil, not to lay down and be his doormat.
Give me a choice solely between government establishment of porneia, slaughter of the unborn, violation of the conscience of Christians, and extortion of Christians, versus Christian Nationalism, and I’m going to choose Christian Nationalism.
I believe Federalism is more in line with scripture. I believe it is the best approach. And I’m going to advocate for it. But at the end of the day, if you only give me those two options, then I’m going to advocate for the option that does not demand and force Christians to violate our conscience, and try to extort us into supporting wickedness and condemning righteousness. And calling me names like “theocrat”, or otherwise trying to intimidate me into submission, won’t budge me an inch. I can assure her of that.
They’d be wise to figure this out quickly, sooner rather than later. Some introspection on their part is in order. If they don’t want the backlash, they’d better start backing off. If they keep pushing us to the point where we have to choose, and keep backing us into corners, they’re not going to like the choice we make. I can tell them that for a fact. Those who honor God’s word will make that choice accordingly.
Nationalism vs Federalism is just a matter of scope. If the smaller granularity of Federalism is denied, destroyed, and made impossible, then the next smallest granularity of Nationalism becomes the reasonable approach. It’s that simple. They’d be wise to put their efforts more toward how to get us back to a federalist framework, and less toward bellyaching about theocracy. I can assure them if they keep trying to force us to violate our conscience, we’re not going to give a flying hoot whether or not we’re called theocrats. It’ll reach a point where we’ll say if theocracy is our only option, then so be it. We did not start this conflict.
“If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.” – John 4:20
If you love your brothers and sisters in Christ, you don’t advocate for the violation of their conscience, you don’t advocate for their extortion, you don’t demand that they support, endorse, or justify wickedness, you don’t back them into corners forcing them to choose between survival and honoring the Lord. If you love your brothers and sisters in Christ, you don’t do such things.
Plain and simple …
I can’t say I’ve come to the CN viewpoint, but I am sick of the moral equivalence. I’ve tried it; it doesn’t work. I have always believed in, and still do, the “freedom” that we enjoy, but as many have pointed out, freedom without virtue is no freedom at all. And the only source of virtue is God’s Word. I totally support the beheading of the idol.
On another note, I wonder if Jenna is just trying to save face by trying to ride the fence.
Ms. Ellis helps to perpetuate stereotypes about blondes; she is apparently unaware that there’s no such thing as a “statue of Allah,” because Muslims deplore idolatry. If there were a “statue of Allah” in the Iowa State Capitol, it would be a Muslim and not a Christian who would destroy it.