No.Nonsense.

A friend sent me a story today about how the pastor for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (I refuse to call him the War Secretary because though accurate, it’s still stupid), called on Texas Senate candidate James Talarico to be “crucified with Christ”.

Those of us who know the Bible understand that reference as being from Apostle Paul in the book of Galatians where he says, “I am crucified with Christ, yet not I but Christ who lives in me,”

Brooks Potteiger of Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship in Tennessee, was calling on Talarico to have a religious conversion, not to actually be killed. And herein lies the problem.

He was on a Christian podcast at the time but not all listeners are Christian. He was using religious language that doesn’t translate to a non-religious crowd. He used a direct quote from scripture with a secular audience.

And that doesn’t work.

I disagree with Talarico on almost all of his political views as well as many of his religious ones. His most controversial statements of the most recent election cycle was that God is non-binary and that there is no explicit opposition to abortion in the Bible.

Nope. Nope. And nope.

I’m not going to go into the apologetics concerning these statements but feel free to message me and I’ll explain how out of bounds on biblical teaching these two statements are. Plus, scriptural discussions are not the point of this particular column.

Going back to the topic at hand, later in the podcast discussion, Potteiger and the host say other things like they pray for God to kill him and to use “any means necessary” to bring his conversion. Do I, as a Christian, understand why they would use this phraseology? I will admit that I don’t. If they mean it only figuratively, the imagery they use is a militant one that diminishes the message they are trying to convey. Prior to the crucified scripture, Paul is discussing being a new person in Christ when he “died” as Saul and was reborn as Paul. I believe they were poorly referencing this part of the passage, calling on God to bring Talarico his own Damascus road encounter. Of course if they did mean it literally and they believe that Talarico doesn’t have a personal relationship with Jesus, they’re basically telling him to go to Hell.

Either way, the words we use matter. If our speech creates a misunderstanding then we’ve lost. If our speech is hateful, then we’ve lost. If our speech is so holy that no one can understand it, then we’ve lost.

Jesus was known for his radical speech when it came to standing up to the religious leaders. He forcefully and unapologetically called them out. For the sinners, he reached out to them in love and plain, relatable language.

Growing up in church, I spent my life deciphering the language of religiosity that made no sense to the outside world. I’m pretty good at figuring out the symbolism and intent of the words. But when I speak to others about my faith, I do it in plain language. I don’t use terminology like “born again” and “are you saved”- I’ll ask someone if they know Jesus in a real and personal way. I don’t ask people to rise up to me, I kneel down to them. I don’t put myself on a pedestal of piety because I am a deeply flawed human being. We need to stop expecting those outside of the church to understand the jargon within the church.

I do pray someone will come along who will show Talarico where his doctrine is off-track. More than that, though, I hope every Christian will take from this whole news cycle one lesson- stop with the religious terminology and speak plainly and clearly. The gospel is simple- Jesus loves you and wants you to love him. We’re the ones that make it more complicated than it needs to be.

As for my friend, thanks for sharing this story and allowing me to explain the reference to you. I hope I did it well.