Jenna Ellis: We would like to take a moment to thank our sponsor, PreBorn. When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound and hears their heartbeat, it's a divine connection and the majority of the time she will choose life. But she can't do it without our help. Preborn needs us, the pro life community, to come alongside her. One ultrasound is just $28 and to donate dial pound250 and say the keyword baby or visit preborn.com afr Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Rad
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God. Because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time. This is Jenna Ellis in the morning.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. It is Monday, October 12th and the defense Department announced Thursday the execution of Nidal Hassan, who is the ex army major who is convicted in the 2009 killings of 13 people at Fort Hood, will be live streamed on December 3rd. So executions themselves, apparently the death penalty is still somewhat controversial in the United States but among conservatives we all recognize Romans 13, the government carries the sword. The death penalty of course is allowed after due process. And in fact in, in my opinion and in reading of scripture the the mainstream stream orthodox position of Christianity is that the death penalty is absolutely appropriate for the state to impose after due process for the the seriousness of crimes like premeditated murder. So so that part of it is less controversial within Christian and conservative circles. But what is controversial still is this issue of live streaming. And so this will be the first person to be publicly executed in the United States in nearly a century, but certainly the first one to be live streamed and livestream, you know according to some is the new public square. This is a way that there can be be accountability and deterrence and for people in the United States to see that their government is taking this seriously. So Trump was asked as he was headed toward Marine One earlier last weekend if he approved the livestream execution. This is what he had to say. Cut one. Did you personally authorize or approve the execution? The live stream execution of the court? Did you approve? Did you absolute. And then Vice President J.D. vance also responded to the controversy of the livestream execution. This is what he had to say Cut to.
JD Vance: Well first of all I've seen these announcements. I don't know that that's actually going to happen. Let's, let's sort of see what I think it's going to happen in December when, when he's executed. But what I try to remind people is look this is a guy who committed in my view the worst terrorist attack attack on American soil outside of 9 11. The people that he was meant to treat, the army soldiers that he was m. Meant to treat for mental illness and other problems. He took them at their most vulnerable and gunned down these people where they live. So whatever the controversy is about the method of the execution, I hope that people don't forget that this is a guy who brutally murdered a lot of innocent people. Now that said, I mean look, if it's ultimately live streamed I'm not going to be watching it.
Jenna Ellis: I think I fall along the lines of agreeing with Vice President Vance that absolutely this this person Hassan deserves the death penalty. clearly if you look back into what actually happened and if you if you know the history of this case and the brutal murders, he deserves the death penalty. In terms of the method of execution which will be by firing squad, it'll be the first ah, person who is ah executed that is part of the military since I believe about the 1960s and the first person again in over a century or about a century to be publicly executed. But whatever that method he deserves the death penalty. The question then is live streaming appropriate? So let's welcome in Orin McIntyre who's a host at the Blaze and Oren. You know, in thinking about this and considering the all aspects of this where I fall and I think that this is a debatable question among Christians I don't think that there is a moral response to say that it is absolutely immoral to livestream or that justice requires a public execution. I think that for the Department of Defense to do this, I'm not sure that they have met the threshold, at least if I was a juror in my opinion of saying that this is necessary for deterrence. But I can see why especially in today's current climate that that they would want to, to use livestream as as the new public square. but my concern is that this becomes a spectacle because like some of the killings in or the public executions in the United States that have become more of a circus and people going simply to participate in advocating the Death of the perpetrator. this shouldn't be something where people are going to get their popcorn and saying, let's hold a watch party. This is something that whenever the death penalty is handed down, something obviously absolutely, utterly, morally reprehensible and evil happened. And so this should be taken soberly and seriously. And I'm not, I'm just not sure that livestream, meets that threshold. What are your thoughts?
Auron MacIntyre : I guess I understand the arguments for this, but I really don't get the concern. When we look at, you know, Christian civilization throughout history, public executions were common, that there was nothing strange or, you know, it was not seen in any way as morally corrupting for the public. You, know, none of this was considered the case previously. I also think that there's a fair point, that I would make, which is, you know, if something's being done on your behalf, you should have the, you know, kind of the responsibility to at least understand what's going on there. It doesn't mean everyone needs to watch it. But I don't think there's anything wrong for the public to, you know, to have made available the ability to watch what's being done on their behalf. There's nothing immoral, as you say, about executing this man. We've seen reactions ultimately from the Pope, of all people, who apparently has never read the Bible, all the way down to strangely conservative pro life advocates who are saying that this is somehow inconsistent with, a pro life message. This man shot and killed 13 people, I believe, wounded 30. One of the women, who was murdered, was pregnant. this guy's a monster. He's a serial killer, He's a terrorist. he deserves in every way, shape or form to meet his end and just punishment. And if people see that live, there's, I don't think there's anything evil or wrong or morally degrading with that. I think that again, you know, that doesn't mean every person needs to watch it. I'm not saying super keen on watching someone get shot, but I do think that having that available is perfectly reasonable.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is what, Pope Leo posted on social media, which I find fascinating because he's using, the modern public square to get his message across and to communicate. And yet he is, he is objecting to the use of livestream, which is a new form of a public square as well. But his, his objection is just to the death penalty, which is interesting. this is what he posted. The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviability and dignity of the person. The common good can be safeguarded and the requirements of justice can be met without recourse to capital punishment. Effective systems of detention have been developed that protect citizens while at the same time do not completely deprive those who are guilty of the possibility of redemption. Hashtag no death penalty. I think he seriously misses the, as. As we've discussed, but that's what he posted. And and so it's interesting that even the death penalty, because we are, We've been so removed, globally, I think, at least in. In Westernized, culture, Western civilization from the death penalty that I think should actually be utilized more, not less. And it would be a deterrent. It would be justice. I mean, we look at what's going on in Tennessee with the. The botched execution of, this murderer, Christina pike, and how, that took 30 years when she murdered a classmate and then was bragging about it. I mean, that's justice. That should have come in the form of the death penalty a lot sooner. but when we're talking about the live streaming, again, I don't think it's immoral, but I tend to agree with, Vice President Vance that I'm not going to watch this. I don't think that it's necessary for people to watch this to know that it happened. what. I get your point that if this is being done on behalf of we the people, which the government should always do things and does on, on behalf of their citizens, then citizens should be able, to participate to the extent that they're able. But it used to be that executions in the public square, you actually had to physically go and be present. So it was more of a localized community activity, and sentence and death to those who were actually, in the community affected. So when this is reaching such a national audience, that that becomes a much bigger public square. And so I'm not really sure that the purpose of a public execution, you know, again, that the DoD has really justified why they would use the method of live streaming.
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, I think that that right there is probably the best argument against it. I still don't think that, you know, I still think there's a problem with it. I think your point about it being, a streamable remote event as opposed to something in your local community, you're going to. Because this person did something to your community, you have to travel to see it, you have to be there. Viscerally and you understand the direct connection to how it impacted the community around you. I think those are all fair points. But ultimately I still think that, you know, when you have a crime of this magnitude, it is something that can impact the entire nation. And if this, as you point out, was a timely execution, I think it would have. You know, I remember when the Fort Hood shooting took place, it shook the nation. you know, this was a mass terror attack by a military, ah, officer, at that moment. And that was something that really, I think, hit people hard, especially given his justification, for what he did. So I think if it had been an execution in a more timely manner, it probably would have addressed, something that had impacted everybody at that time. But as you're pointing out, due to the, you know, the length of time there, ultimately, that kind of fades. And many of the people who would even be watching the execution probably don't remember the event that occurred. that said, I think that, you know, there's two things that might be true here. One, I don't think it's going to get a huge amount of viewership, or if it does, I don't think it's going to have the impact that people think it will. Because honestly, people see a lot of, you know, have acts, people who want to have access to that, that kind of, experience just for the rush or some kind of perverse thrill. They can already watch, you know, Ukraine war footage or, you know, all kinds of stuff coming in from Gaza or whatever. There's plenty of violence in the world that you could see on the Internet, that if you're just looking for some kind of perverse pleasure, I think in this case it will probably be less shocking than people would assume. but also ultimately, I do think that. I think that in our culture we hide death. Too often people send their parents off to nursing homes before they die. You know, death is hidden from us all the time in a way that it wasn't previously. I think it's hard for us to take these things seriously when we know the process is happening. So where we know people are being born, people are dying, but we're so clinically separated on a regular basis that it's hard to make that connection. So I do think that having, you know, having people see what's happening there does make a certain level of a sense. You know, the execution is, is just. But, you know, it's also deterrent. It's also. It connects us to something, to the consequences of the Actions and also to the weight. You know, people should know when their government is executing someone, it costs people something. one of my favorite philosophers, Joseph de Maistre, talked about the central nature of the executioner to society, how the executioner is actually the cornerstone of society, because if he's not there, there's no ultimate penalty for the ultimate wrong. And therefore all other consequences, all other laws come apart. But at the same time, what the executioner does is, in a sense, extremely dark. And it is something that is, you know, society should feel the burden of that justice even while knowing that that is the correct thing to do. And I think if no one witnesses these things, if they're done entirely in secret or hidden away, then that does disconnect the community from the gravity of the experience. And I think that matters.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And, you know, that's a really, valid argument. And this is why, you know, as I started this segment, for those listening, I think this is a debatable question. I don't think that it is a matter of, morality or immorality to say that, you know, that being live streamed, must happen in today's society or that it absolutely shouldn't happen and it would be immoral. And I do think, that there is a distinction here that's also important, Oren, that actually, lends me to think, okay, the live streaming is appropriate because this isn't a private citizen at the time of the murders. This isn't Christina pike, who was a private citizen when she chose to murder a classmate. This isn't, Lindsey Clancy, if she had ended up facing the death penalty, with her family. this is someone who was part of the United States military. This was someone who was a member of public service in the military. I do think that that also is a distinction that we aren't, in the broader conversation. Isn't being recognized enough that there is a difference between a military execution versus a private citizen as well?
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, no, that's a good point as well. As you say this is a public figure. you know, their murder was the heinous crime that, he ultimately carried out was against other serving members. and so there's a level of accountability and visibility that wouldn't exist if it was just some person no one had ever heard of and, you know, would never have interacted with otherwise. you know, you hold public officials accountable, hopefully in a way that you don't hold, you know, private citizens accountable. And, you know, military is the same thing. You know, we expect A high degree of professionalism, a high degree of, you know, action when it comes to, our military. And obviously, you know, one, of the things that's so shocking about what happened was not just that this was a mass shooting, though that itself was very shocking. But it was because it was carried out by a military officer. It was supposed to be somebody who was serving the United States, protecting us from exactly the kind of thing he ended up doing. And in the name of, you know, Allah, and in the name of a foreign enemy, God, that ultimately is being perpetrated against the United States. And so I think, you know, your point about, you know, the distinction between the public figure and the private figure and the nature of this particular crime, I think it does change the level of public accountability that becomes necessary.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, I do think that distinction matters. And, you know, on, on the left, of course, they are pushing back, leftists against, the death penalty in general, but then also the administration, the Trump administration, and any decisions that they make. And so CBS News and other outlets, but, you know, I happen to be reading from CBS News this morning, is making the point that, public executions only currently, at least in over the last, century or so, have stopped. And so the only two countries that routinely carry out public executions are, countries that, as they say, the United States has accused of gross human rights violations. And so they link this to being an inhumane sort of form of, public spectacle. I think that comparison is really inappropriate because the nature and the due process here of the death penalty being imposed is a completely different legitimate purpose and action that the government of the United States is taking versus, for example, Iran.
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, I mean, this is just what C.S. lewis called chronological snobbery. you know, it's saying that, well, because we're doing this in the future, it must be more civilized. and so, you know, yeah, America may have done all of these public executions previously. Plenty of other civilizations that we thought of as being advanced or, you know, otherwise, kind of modern. At their time, they did public executions. But now, you know, it's all. It's forbidden because these countries decided not to do that. And the only people left doing it are a few other countries. I just don't think that holds at all. The question is, is this right or wrong? Is it moral or immoral? I don't think that, you know, moral progress actually exists. Like, either the thing is right or wrong in God's eyes. And that's the end of the question. That's the Only question we need to be answering. I don't care. If Iran or Saudi Arabia is doing something immoral and we're doing it well, then it's moral. If we're both, if we're doing something immoral and they're not, well then we're the ones who are wrong. But it's just running out there and saying, oh well, because this one other country still does it and then we're doing it, then somehow that makes it moral or immoral or barbaric or not. That's just a completely false statement.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, it's a totally false equivalence. I mean, you know, Iran and Afghanistan, you know, they, they eat food as well. So is that immoral for us because they're, you know, we don't agree with their politics in their nation and the way that they carry out inhumane human rights violations? Well no, you have to actually look at the action itself and say is this and the method and the purpose, the due process, all of those concerns, are we carrying out this appropriately in this country? and not just say, well, just because other countries are doing it, we can't. So. Orin McIntyre, really appreciate it. We're going to continue to talk about this topic when we come right back. M. Hi, I'm Jenna Ellis. Did you know that this content is listener supported? Without people like you this podcast would not exist. And that's why we need you. A generous monthly gift of any amount will help sustain American Family Radio and specifically this podcast. Please consider becoming a monthly financial partner today by visiting afr.netforward/give. That's afr.net give welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And we're still talking about ah, this public execution of of Hassan who is the ah, and I'm needing to get his his name back here. What is, what is his name? Nadal Hasan. that would be the first live streamed public execution ever. And the ethics and the morality of this, and, and I think this is a debatable question, as I said in the first segment, I don't think that there is a, a morally correct position here that it is an absolute must that in order to serve the interests of justice and morality it has to be live streamed. Obviously we've never done that in the history of, of our country. But also I don't think that it is a, ah, moral wrong if it is live streamed. however, there are some elements of wisdom that we need to take into account and so I want to welcome in. Orion Helfenbein, who's the Vice President of Communications at Liberty University and the Executive Director of the Standing for Freedom Center. And Rhyen, you know, one of one of the other issues, that we need to address with a potential livestream is not just the ability of citizens to then witness this public execution, and it's being done, you know, in the interest of justice on our behalf, as Orin McIntyre argued in the first segment. But the ability of livestream, it allows to then replay it over and over and over again, to clip it to, you know, I mean, to set it to music. I mean all of these things, you know, these response videos just shared over and over again. It's not the same as a public execution in the, the original sense of this, where people could go witness the one event and then it was done. They could only talk about it like we could if it was just reported. And so, so I think that that is a concern, in terms of live streaming and also because when you're dealing with an execution like execution by firing squad, which is what this is set to be, there are multiple shooters, so that not one individual is actually knowingly acting as the executioner. But if this is a live stream video, I mean, people are going to have their opinions, they're going to figure out the ballistics, the trajectory, you know, all this stuff, and just overanalyze this. So, you know, overall, what are your thoughts on the pros and cons of live streaming and a public execution?
Ryan Helfenbein: Well, this is, this is a great question and I'm actually glad to see the debate publicly. I think it's one of those things that it's forcing Americans to, you know, think about historic claims, you know, historic executions that we did long ago. Understanding too, the morality behind the justice of a just death penalty, just echoing some of the comments that Oren McIntyre just made. I think they're good and I think they're sound. I think it's one of the things that the west has to come to a reckoning that for many, many decades, especially in America, we've had so much leniency, when it comes to capital murder trials. In this case, this was a terrorist act that was committed on American soil. you know, this was the Fort Hood massacre going back, you know, back 2009. and so you had multiple, many, many service members who lost their lives, their lives were taken from them and victims in many ways have been reduced, their status in society, in Western society, some might say, well, how so? How is their status reduced? Well, if their lives are taken and ultimately justice, is delayed, in many ways that too, can be perceived as giving greater status, greater legal, rights and protections for the murderer. many ways, you know, we live in a society where things are upside down, you know, where, people are trying in so many ways to argue on behalf of, you know, and there is a concern, of course, for brutality. There's a concern of course, for, you know, the sort of the de. Evolution of, you know, the sacredness of life. But no one ever really makes that argument, or seldom do we see those arguments, at least from secularists and from modernists and from progressives being made on behalf of the victim themselves. And so when I look at this, particular case, and of course it's coming from the Department of War, and there's obviously greater discretion that can be, passed because of executive authority. You know, I think this is something that can actually be a good thing. But the issue with media itself, and to your question, if something is live streamed and it's going to be up there forever, even if it's taken down later, people will have that questions have arisen. You know, could this be used as, an aggressive recruiting tool, by those, in Hamas and the Houthis and other terrorist organizations? Would they look at this potentially, and become more aggressive? Those questions have actually been circulated, you know, and I would say this, I don't think that that should be our ultimate concern. The question is whether it's moral, just and prudent. And I think it is moral. I do think it is just. And in terms of prudence, I think that would be the ultimate question. Is it prudent and wise to broadcast that, you know, potentially, is there any blowback? would it be those who are part of the firing squad? Could their faces be seen? Hopefully not. but that is the ultimate question, is that what would be the potential repercussions? at the end of the day though, I think the Islamic world, I think the United States, when it comes to those who are changing the legal system before our very eyes. Millions of babies that we kill in the United States through abortion, it's been legalized. We dehumanize the person, in so many ways, and in so many ways the victim, Victims are not recognized. And so I think it's a good reminder even in the midst of this execution that we show and that we demonstrate, look, these American service Members, and these families who have lost their loved ones brutally, lost them mercilessly, lost them, well over 15 years ago. their blood calls for justice. And we need to demonstrate that America is in fact, a just nation. So I do believe so strongly in the death penalty as a Christian argument. not one that is barbaric, not one that is just wrapped up in the Old Testament, but the NewSong Testament as well. I do think Romans 13 shows that the state does not bear the sword in vain. And, we even see the words of Paul, where he talks about just penalty for, m. Moral misconduct. the state has a responsibility and it must carry that responsibility out. And so, you know, I'd be hard pressed to make any arguments against the death penalty, but I do believe when it comes to a live stream, it's really a question of prudence and wisdom and what makes the most sense. And I'll just add this. You know, we do have, an unauthorized video of Saddam, Hussein's hanging. I do remember and recall many years ago, when he was brought to trial and there was a public trial, it sent a message around the world that he was put on trial and there were. There was due process. He was afforded a legal defense, but ultimately, you know, he was found guilty of war crimes. he was a dictator. He brutalized his own people, in Iraq, and yet there was a public execution, but it was not supposed to be, videotaped. It was not supposed to be recorded, and yet somebody did and then leaked that video. And so later we were able then publicly to see that, you couldn't see his face, but it was definitely him. and so it does send a message around the world when we recognize that no one escapes ultimately the justice of the state, but in recognition that symbolically the state is God's beacon of justice, that he's ordained, they do not escape the wrath of God.
Jenna Ellis: Really, really well said, Rhyen. And, And I agree with you that the question is not one of. Of morality or, of right versus wrong. It's a question of wisdom and prudence. Prudence is the perfect, word here to describe, what the. The contemplation is. And, you know, I was talking with my. My producer Luke, as we were preparing this topic, you know, over the weekend, and he said, and I think this is such a great line where, you know, we were talking about how if this is done, you know, soberly and. And with, gravity and weight of exactly what you're describing, then that purpose can ultimately be met. but if, and this is not at all something that, hopefully that Trump is contemplating at all. But just, you know, to kind of put this in more of a, of a Trumpian vein, what Luke was saying was that, you know, if we're, if we're having this live streamed and you know, Kid Rock is opening, with a concert to the live stream, you know, and this is kind of something that's a little bit more of a rally framework or something like that. that in my view would be unpredent, would be inappropriate, that would be more of a spectacle. Right. And so it really depends on how the dod, frames this, how, ah, how they are. I mean, we can't help how other people may use this dream, just like Saddam, Hussein after the fact. But in terms of the prudence of actually showing that this is what justice requires, this is what our country, is willing to do to advance the interests of justice on behalf of the victim, the victims, and also on behalf of a righteous nation, then, you know, I, I can see how, prudence could, in fact, not just make this legitimate, but even require it. So, Rhyen Helfenbein, you're stick with me through the break. We'll be right back with more. We're living in a defining moment in history. Today, a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can order the abortion pill online, often before anyone has had the chance to tell her she is loved and that she's not alone or that there is hope. That's why you are needed right now. You were made for this moment. At, PreBorn Network clinics, mothers are welcomed with compassion, practical support, and a free ultrasound. And when she sees her baby and hears that tiny heartbeat for the very first time, fear often gives way to hope. In fact, more than 80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on an ultrasound and at a PreBorn Network clinic. That one moment can save a baby's life and open a mother's heart to the hope of Jesus Christ. This is our moment to stand. For those who cannot speak for themselves, just $28 provides one life saving ultrasound. $140 helps rescue five babies. Please don't wait. Dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 baby. Or give [email protected] afr that's preborn.com afr Together we can save lives one heartbeat at a time. welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm still here with my special guest, Rhyen Helfenbein, who's the vice president of communications at Liberty University. And speaking of the death penalty penalty and just the removal of society in 2026 and you know, kind of our modernization of the concept and the reality of death, this was a really frankly disturbing article in the Economist, that I saw on social media and the tag on X from the Economist or the the caption was death induces debilitating terror, but simulations of dying could help reduce such anxiety. And so this is what this article says and again this is incredibly disturbing and I want to talk through the ethical and moral implications of what this is contemplating. So this story goes on to say death has always had a marketing problem. Okay, right off the bat, that's the Economist lead. That is, that is utterly disgusting frankly. But says death has always had a marketing problem. The debilitating terror it induces has been linked to everything from money hoarding to workaholism. And worrying about death can even be self fulfilling. Anxiety can double the risk of death in patients with heart disease and cause others to avoid screening tests most likely likely to catch cancer early. So all credit the Economist says to the brave folks in Australia who signed up for a quick practice of kicking the bucket experience. It's experiencing a cardiac arrest and out of body journey in a virtual reality or VR. The 10 minute VR experience called passing Electrical Storms by Shawn Gladwell was shown at the National Gallery of Victoria in 2023. Visitors lay on a bed that initially vibrated with their heartbeat while wearing a VR headset showing them on a table in the gallery. The simulation then takes over as their heart rate seemingly crashes. The volunteers watch doctors try and fail to resuscitate them after brain death. They then see themselves leave their body and appear to flee float through the universe before shrinking inside cells and atoms. Six large fans provide the associated cooling effects. And then participants reactions to the experience were analyzed by researchers before being published in a journal, last June. So Rhyen, we don't even have time to go through all of the, the just various ways we could talk about this and how disturbing all of this is. but first of all, what happens after we die is not an experience that can ever be replicated by virtual reality because no living human being actually knows what that experience is like. And second, to suggest that somehow this type of virtual reality experience supposed to help give peace to people, by saying, well I've already experienced that, so I'm going to be okay. Experiencing that is literally taking away what the Bible, says, you know, is, is a rational and, and for the non Christian, for the unbeliever, a fear of death should be a motivating factor to seek out what actually is the truth of the gospel of Christ and what happens in, in eternity. And so, you know, there are so many moral implications with this. But, your reaction to this type of, question and suggestion that death has only had a marketing problem.
Ryan Helfenbein: Yeah, there's certain ideas that are so insane, and lacking in common sense that they could only, you know, sort of be lived out and promoted, and researched really in a very progressive Western society, that is trying to explain everything through atoms and molecules and scientism only. And I just, I laugh at the idea of any kind of virtual reality kind of experience where people are trying to simulate these things and say, well, we know. And when anyone says that, we know what death is like and we know what this experience will be. In fact, we even know visually, what the senses of the body will pick up, that is absolutely nonsensical. And we have to, as Christians, we have to obviously approach this from a biblical perspective. we ultimately hold to God's authority, contained within his word, that his authority is greater than man's authority. And oftentimes, when it comes to science, we have to recognize that science must ultimately bow and bend the knee, to the word of God. And I would just say that, when you look at all the things that are shaping and shaping up in society, medical aid and dying being a big one, you know that this is happening in Canada. There are states, in the United States that are trying to legalize euthanasia. you know, you go back, I remember being in high school and reading about Dr. Kevorkian, who was that? you know, scientist, medical doctor that was trying to basically bring, bring about early death rather than trying to fight for life as soon as this enters in. It's just another example of the suicidal pathology that we see in the West. We recognize death is the product of the curse and the fall. The fear of death, as you say, and I fully agree, is a good motivating factor for all men and women. God has put the heart of eternity, put, put eternity in the heart of every man and woman. And there is a natural fear because we know that death is actually not natural. It was not a part of God's intention, His design. It is a product of the curse. The fall. It's the just consequence of sin that there will be a ultimate death one day. Every single person who draws life's breath will draw their last. And we will be in that grave one day. And ultimately it's a question about our just standing before God. When Jesus came, to die for us, ultimately to serve as the perfect sacrifice and atonement for our sin, Jesus defeated sin. He defeated the devil, but he also defeated that, perennial enemy, death. Death, where is your victory, O Death, where is your sting? As the apostle Paul echoes from the Old Testament that ultimately we can have hope, we can have healing, we have a future promise of a resurrection where our physical bodies will be united with our spirit. And, in the ultimate sense, we live in an embodied reality. And so, human beings are not supposed to know ultimately what that experience of death is going to look like. there's no way to simulate it. There's no way to prepare for it other than prepare your hearts to meet your maker. prepare your hearts that you might be able to stand unashamed before the judgment, seat of the Lord Jesus Christ, knowing that you, ah, ultimately have a redeemer, someone who died for you, somebody who shed his blood for you, someone who, forgives sins not on the basis of forgiveness only, but on the basis of the fact that he actually was your substitute, he had a substitutionary atonement. and that is our just standing before God. I'll just say this too. You know, every single, religion around the world has to deal with the consequence of death. Has to deal with the consequence of sin. And, you know, just even in my study more recently about Islam, even Islam believes that there is such a thing as a substitute. And in the ultimate, objective of jihad, it's so that the infidel might pay in hell for your sin, so that you can be in heaven with Allah. And so there are all kinds of religions around the world that deal with, what do I do with my guilt, my shame, my sin, how do I handle that? And all of them are going to have answers. But ultimately, in the Bible, ah, we recognize that, there are two deaths. there is the death. We die in the natural, and then there is a spiritual death that is eternal. And as Christians, we recognize that while we have a physical death, we have no need to fear that eternal death and damnation in hell. Why? Because Jesus Christ has given us the free offer of the good news of the gospel, that he has paid our sins in full. It is finished. And so we look to him, ultimately for our righteousness. We look to him for the satisfaction of the penalty of the law. we look to him really for a hope and a glory that the world has never, never known. that we can rest eternally secure in our salvation and eternal life because of what he has done. And I'll just add one more thing. The story of Lazarus is a great story. It's in Jon chapter 11. And Jesus ultimately raises him from the dead. But in that passage, it contains the shortest verse of the Bible. his family members are weeping and Jesus stops and it says, jesus wept even he wept over the natural death of his people. And I think that we recognize that it is a time for mourning in a time of great grief because death is actually not natural. And in God's design and creation, it is the curse of sin that brings about death.
Jenna Ellis: Absolutely. And you know, what a. What a wonderful, articulation of the biblical worldview. And, and it is true. And the Bible also says, that precious to the Lord, precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints. And you know, that that term, precious in the. In the original ah, language, means it's something that he cares about, he's. He's concerned for. And and I believe theologically that the Bible is very clear that the experience of death is very different for the Christian, in that moment, preparing to meet the Lord versus the non Christian, preparing to meet their fate of eternal damnation. And you know, it's these types of ways that the world just cannot, grapple with the ultimate, eternal question that they try to make these experiences and these virtual realities, to soften what is the hard line of eternity that either you will. Either way m. You will meet your Creator and you will stand before the Lord. Revelation speaks of the three judgments, you know, of the judgment of the nations. But then of the two judgments of first, the individual and whether you are saved or not, whether your name is written in the book of life or not. And then for the Christian, when we have passed that first test of whether our name is written in the book of life, then we go to the judgment of being rewarded for, our ministry here, here on earth. And the Bible talks about, you know, the crowns of the martyrs, which Charlie Kirk, I believe received that at his second judgment. and it talks about the various crowns that Christians are rewarded with. And when we look at something like this, I mean, this article even goes on to say participants reactions to this virtual reality experience, I mean they call it an experience that's not what death is supposed to be. were analyzed by researchers and most participants, found it a pleasant trip. Many emerged less anxious about death. If death were as simple as that, I'd be very happy, one volunteer said. Another compared the experience to yoga. One participant brought up to believe in hell admitted to being relieved. And I thought that insert into the Economist is exactly why we need to be very careful about virtual reality, about these types of experiments, this type of experiment experience, because that's exactly what it's driving for Rhyen, is to undermine the truth of the gospel that eternity is written in the hearts of man and that the only way to overcome the fear of death is not to disregard it or think it's going to be a pleasant journey or say, you know what, I'm relieved that there is no hell in my belief. No, hell is described in the Bible as eternal separation from our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. That will be absolute nightmare. Beyond that is incomprehensible. And we should not diminish that as Christians. And we should never society should never diminish that. And so the purpose of this of course in the virtual reality is to lessen and to dampen the effect of that eternal separation with God rather than as the Christian should have this urgency to say, you don't have to fear death as long as you know your creator. And so last about 30 seconds. Rhyen, close us out.
Ryan Helfenbein: Yeah, I was just, I would just say that this all points back to the hope of the gospel. The hope of the gospel is that we have salvation and forgiveness through Jesus Christ. But there is a coming judgment. And that judgment we too need to be fearful about. Christians need to be fearful not so much in hey, am I going to undergo that? No, Jesus has already. But we need to be fearful for our neighbor. Our neighbor is what we need to focus on.
Jenna Ellis: And this sense of urgency, absolutely. You know, and as Halloween is coming up, consider Christian. Are you celebrating death? Minimizing that saying, you know, it's okay, it's this, you know, happy, candy filled experience. Or can you use this, this holiday quote unquote to share the urgency of the truth of the gospel of Christ? As always, you can reach me and my team, Jenna fr.netpreborn has rescued over 400,000 babies from abortion. And every day their network clinics rescue 200 babies lives. Will you join PreBorn in loving and supporting young moms in crisis? Save a life today go to preborn.com afr.
Jenna Ellis: We would like to take a moment to thank our sponsor, PreBorn. When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound and hears their heartbeat, it's a divine connection and the majority of the time she will choose life. But she can't do it without our help. Preborn needs us, the pro life community, to come alongside her. One ultrasound is just $28 and to donate dial pound250 and say the keyword baby or visit preborn.com afr Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Rad
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God. Because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time. This is Jenna Ellis in the morning.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. It is Monday, October 12th and the defense Department announced Thursday the execution of Nidal Hassan, who is the ex army major who is convicted in the 2009 killings of 13 people at Fort Hood, will be live streamed on December 3rd. So executions themselves, apparently the death penalty is still somewhat controversial in the United States but among conservatives we all recognize Romans 13, the government carries the sword. The death penalty of course is allowed after due process. And in fact in, in my opinion and in reading of scripture the the mainstream stream orthodox position of Christianity is that the death penalty is absolutely appropriate for the state to impose after due process for the the seriousness of crimes like premeditated murder. So so that part of it is less controversial within Christian and conservative circles. But what is controversial still is this issue of live streaming. And so this will be the first person to be publicly executed in the United States in nearly a century, but certainly the first one to be live streamed and livestream, you know according to some is the new public square. This is a way that there can be be accountability and deterrence and for people in the United States to see that their government is taking this seriously. So Trump was asked as he was headed toward Marine One earlier last weekend if he approved the livestream execution. This is what he had to say. Cut one. Did you personally authorize or approve the execution? The live stream execution of the court? Did you approve? Did you absolute. And then Vice President J.D. vance also responded to the controversy of the livestream execution. This is what he had to say Cut to.
JD Vance: Well first of all I've seen these announcements. I don't know that that's actually going to happen. Let's, let's sort of see what I think it's going to happen in December when, when he's executed. But what I try to remind people is look this is a guy who committed in my view the worst terrorist attack attack on American soil outside of 9 11. The people that he was meant to treat, the army soldiers that he was m. Meant to treat for mental illness and other problems. He took them at their most vulnerable and gunned down these people where they live. So whatever the controversy is about the method of the execution, I hope that people don't forget that this is a guy who brutally murdered a lot of innocent people. Now that said, I mean look, if it's ultimately live streamed I'm not going to be watching it.
Jenna Ellis: I think I fall along the lines of agreeing with Vice President Vance that absolutely this this person Hassan deserves the death penalty. clearly if you look back into what actually happened and if you if you know the history of this case and the brutal murders, he deserves the death penalty. In terms of the method of execution which will be by firing squad, it'll be the first ah, person who is ah executed that is part of the military since I believe about the 1960s and the first person again in over a century or about a century to be publicly executed. But whatever that method he deserves the death penalty. The question then is live streaming appropriate? So let's welcome in Orin McIntyre who's a host at the Blaze and Oren. You know, in thinking about this and considering the all aspects of this where I fall and I think that this is a debatable question among Christians I don't think that there is a moral response to say that it is absolutely immoral to livestream or that justice requires a public execution. I think that for the Department of Defense to do this, I'm not sure that they have met the threshold, at least if I was a juror in my opinion of saying that this is necessary for deterrence. But I can see why especially in today's current climate that that they would want to, to use livestream as as the new public square. but my concern is that this becomes a spectacle because like some of the killings in or the public executions in the United States that have become more of a circus and people going simply to participate in advocating the Death of the perpetrator. this shouldn't be something where people are going to get their popcorn and saying, let's hold a watch party. This is something that whenever the death penalty is handed down, something obviously absolutely, utterly, morally reprehensible and evil happened. And so this should be taken soberly and seriously. And I'm not, I'm just not sure that livestream, meets that threshold. What are your thoughts?
Auron MacIntyre : I guess I understand the arguments for this, but I really don't get the concern. When we look at, you know, Christian civilization throughout history, public executions were common, that there was nothing strange or, you know, it was not seen in any way as morally corrupting for the public. You, know, none of this was considered the case previously. I also think that there's a fair point, that I would make, which is, you know, if something's being done on your behalf, you should have the, you know, kind of the responsibility to at least understand what's going on there. It doesn't mean everyone needs to watch it. But I don't think there's anything wrong for the public to, you know, to have made available the ability to watch what's being done on their behalf. There's nothing immoral, as you say, about executing this man. We've seen reactions ultimately from the Pope, of all people, who apparently has never read the Bible, all the way down to strangely conservative pro life advocates who are saying that this is somehow inconsistent with, a pro life message. This man shot and killed 13 people, I believe, wounded 30. One of the women, who was murdered, was pregnant. this guy's a monster. He's a serial killer, He's a terrorist. he deserves in every way, shape or form to meet his end and just punishment. And if people see that live, there's, I don't think there's anything evil or wrong or morally degrading with that. I think that again, you know, that doesn't mean every person needs to watch it. I'm not saying super keen on watching someone get shot, but I do think that having that available is perfectly reasonable.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is what, Pope Leo posted on social media, which I find fascinating because he's using, the modern public square to get his message across and to communicate. And yet he is, he is objecting to the use of livestream, which is a new form of a public square as well. But his, his objection is just to the death penalty, which is interesting. this is what he posted. The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviability and dignity of the person. The common good can be safeguarded and the requirements of justice can be met without recourse to capital punishment. Effective systems of detention have been developed that protect citizens while at the same time do not completely deprive those who are guilty of the possibility of redemption. Hashtag no death penalty. I think he seriously misses the, as. As we've discussed, but that's what he posted. And and so it's interesting that even the death penalty, because we are, We've been so removed, globally, I think, at least in. In Westernized, culture, Western civilization from the death penalty that I think should actually be utilized more, not less. And it would be a deterrent. It would be justice. I mean, we look at what's going on in Tennessee with the. The botched execution of, this murderer, Christina pike, and how, that took 30 years when she murdered a classmate and then was bragging about it. I mean, that's justice. That should have come in the form of the death penalty a lot sooner. but when we're talking about the live streaming, again, I don't think it's immoral, but I tend to agree with, Vice President Vance that I'm not going to watch this. I don't think that it's necessary for people to watch this to know that it happened. what. I get your point that if this is being done on behalf of we the people, which the government should always do things and does on, on behalf of their citizens, then citizens should be able, to participate to the extent that they're able. But it used to be that executions in the public square, you actually had to physically go and be present. So it was more of a localized community activity, and sentence and death to those who were actually, in the community affected. So when this is reaching such a national audience, that that becomes a much bigger public square. And so I'm not really sure that the purpose of a public execution, you know, again, that the DoD has really justified why they would use the method of live streaming.
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, I think that that right there is probably the best argument against it. I still don't think that, you know, I still think there's a problem with it. I think your point about it being, a streamable remote event as opposed to something in your local community, you're going to. Because this person did something to your community, you have to travel to see it, you have to be there. Viscerally and you understand the direct connection to how it impacted the community around you. I think those are all fair points. But ultimately I still think that, you know, when you have a crime of this magnitude, it is something that can impact the entire nation. And if this, as you point out, was a timely execution, I think it would have. You know, I remember when the Fort Hood shooting took place, it shook the nation. you know, this was a mass terror attack by a military, ah, officer, at that moment. And that was something that really, I think, hit people hard, especially given his justification, for what he did. So I think if it had been an execution in a more timely manner, it probably would have addressed, something that had impacted everybody at that time. But as you're pointing out, due to the, you know, the length of time there, ultimately, that kind of fades. And many of the people who would even be watching the execution probably don't remember the event that occurred. that said, I think that, you know, there's two things that might be true here. One, I don't think it's going to get a huge amount of viewership, or if it does, I don't think it's going to have the impact that people think it will. Because honestly, people see a lot of, you know, have acts, people who want to have access to that, that kind of, experience just for the rush or some kind of perverse thrill. They can already watch, you know, Ukraine war footage or, you know, all kinds of stuff coming in from Gaza or whatever. There's plenty of violence in the world that you could see on the Internet, that if you're just looking for some kind of perverse pleasure, I think in this case it will probably be less shocking than people would assume. but also ultimately, I do think that. I think that in our culture we hide death. Too often people send their parents off to nursing homes before they die. You know, death is hidden from us all the time in a way that it wasn't previously. I think it's hard for us to take these things seriously when we know the process is happening. So where we know people are being born, people are dying, but we're so clinically separated on a regular basis that it's hard to make that connection. So I do think that having, you know, having people see what's happening there does make a certain level of a sense. You know, the execution is, is just. But, you know, it's also deterrent. It's also. It connects us to something, to the consequences of the Actions and also to the weight. You know, people should know when their government is executing someone, it costs people something. one of my favorite philosophers, Joseph de Maistre, talked about the central nature of the executioner to society, how the executioner is actually the cornerstone of society, because if he's not there, there's no ultimate penalty for the ultimate wrong. And therefore all other consequences, all other laws come apart. But at the same time, what the executioner does is, in a sense, extremely dark. And it is something that is, you know, society should feel the burden of that justice even while knowing that that is the correct thing to do. And I think if no one witnesses these things, if they're done entirely in secret or hidden away, then that does disconnect the community from the gravity of the experience. And I think that matters.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And, you know, that's a really, valid argument. And this is why, you know, as I started this segment, for those listening, I think this is a debatable question. I don't think that it is a matter of, morality or immorality to say that, you know, that being live streamed, must happen in today's society or that it absolutely shouldn't happen and it would be immoral. And I do think, that there is a distinction here that's also important, Oren, that actually, lends me to think, okay, the live streaming is appropriate because this isn't a private citizen at the time of the murders. This isn't Christina pike, who was a private citizen when she chose to murder a classmate. This isn't, Lindsey Clancy, if she had ended up facing the death penalty, with her family. this is someone who was part of the United States military. This was someone who was a member of public service in the military. I do think that that also is a distinction that we aren't, in the broader conversation. Isn't being recognized enough that there is a difference between a military execution versus a private citizen as well?
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, no, that's a good point as well. As you say this is a public figure. you know, their murder was the heinous crime that, he ultimately carried out was against other serving members. and so there's a level of accountability and visibility that wouldn't exist if it was just some person no one had ever heard of and, you know, would never have interacted with otherwise. you know, you hold public officials accountable, hopefully in a way that you don't hold, you know, private citizens accountable. And, you know, military is the same thing. You know, we expect A high degree of professionalism, a high degree of, you know, action when it comes to, our military. And obviously, you know, one, of the things that's so shocking about what happened was not just that this was a mass shooting, though that itself was very shocking. But it was because it was carried out by a military officer. It was supposed to be somebody who was serving the United States, protecting us from exactly the kind of thing he ended up doing. And in the name of, you know, Allah, and in the name of a foreign enemy, God, that ultimately is being perpetrated against the United States. And so I think, you know, your point about, you know, the distinction between the public figure and the private figure and the nature of this particular crime, I think it does change the level of public accountability that becomes necessary.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, I do think that distinction matters. And, you know, on, on the left, of course, they are pushing back, leftists against, the death penalty in general, but then also the administration, the Trump administration, and any decisions that they make. And so CBS News and other outlets, but, you know, I happen to be reading from CBS News this morning, is making the point that, public executions only currently, at least in over the last, century or so, have stopped. And so the only two countries that routinely carry out public executions are, countries that, as they say, the United States has accused of gross human rights violations. And so they link this to being an inhumane sort of form of, public spectacle. I think that comparison is really inappropriate because the nature and the due process here of the death penalty being imposed is a completely different legitimate purpose and action that the government of the United States is taking versus, for example, Iran.
Auron MacIntyre : Yeah, I mean, this is just what C.S. lewis called chronological snobbery. you know, it's saying that, well, because we're doing this in the future, it must be more civilized. and so, you know, yeah, America may have done all of these public executions previously. Plenty of other civilizations that we thought of as being advanced or, you know, otherwise, kind of modern. At their time, they did public executions. But now, you know, it's all. It's forbidden because these countries decided not to do that. And the only people left doing it are a few other countries. I just don't think that holds at all. The question is, is this right or wrong? Is it moral or immoral? I don't think that, you know, moral progress actually exists. Like, either the thing is right or wrong in God's eyes. And that's the end of the question. That's the Only question we need to be answering. I don't care. If Iran or Saudi Arabia is doing something immoral and we're doing it well, then it's moral. If we're both, if we're doing something immoral and they're not, well then we're the ones who are wrong. But it's just running out there and saying, oh well, because this one other country still does it and then we're doing it, then somehow that makes it moral or immoral or barbaric or not. That's just a completely false statement.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, it's a totally false equivalence. I mean, you know, Iran and Afghanistan, you know, they, they eat food as well. So is that immoral for us because they're, you know, we don't agree with their politics in their nation and the way that they carry out inhumane human rights violations? Well no, you have to actually look at the action itself and say is this and the method and the purpose, the due process, all of those concerns, are we carrying out this appropriately in this country? and not just say, well, just because other countries are doing it, we can't. So. Orin McIntyre, really appreciate it. We're going to continue to talk about this topic when we come right back. M. Hi, I'm Jenna Ellis. Did you know that this content is listener supported? Without people like you this podcast would not exist. And that's why we need you. A generous monthly gift of any amount will help sustain American Family Radio and specifically this podcast. Please consider becoming a monthly financial partner today by visiting afr.netforward/give. That's afr.net give welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And we're still talking about ah, this public execution of of Hassan who is the ah, and I'm needing to get his his name back here. What is, what is his name? Nadal Hasan. that would be the first live streamed public execution ever. And the ethics and the morality of this, and, and I think this is a debatable question, as I said in the first segment, I don't think that there is a, a morally correct position here that it is an absolute must that in order to serve the interests of justice and morality it has to be live streamed. Obviously we've never done that in the history of, of our country. But also I don't think that it is a, ah, moral wrong if it is live streamed. however, there are some elements of wisdom that we need to take into account and so I want to welcome in. Orion Helfenbein, who's the Vice President of Communications at Liberty University and the Executive Director of the Standing for Freedom Center. And Rhyen, you know, one of one of the other issues, that we need to address with a potential livestream is not just the ability of citizens to then witness this public execution, and it's being done, you know, in the interest of justice on our behalf, as Orin McIntyre argued in the first segment. But the ability of livestream, it allows to then replay it over and over and over again, to clip it to, you know, I mean, to set it to music. I mean all of these things, you know, these response videos just shared over and over again. It's not the same as a public execution in the, the original sense of this, where people could go witness the one event and then it was done. They could only talk about it like we could if it was just reported. And so, so I think that that is a concern, in terms of live streaming and also because when you're dealing with an execution like execution by firing squad, which is what this is set to be, there are multiple shooters, so that not one individual is actually knowingly acting as the executioner. But if this is a live stream video, I mean, people are going to have their opinions, they're going to figure out the ballistics, the trajectory, you know, all this stuff, and just overanalyze this. So, you know, overall, what are your thoughts on the pros and cons of live streaming and a public execution?
Ryan Helfenbein: Well, this is, this is a great question and I'm actually glad to see the debate publicly. I think it's one of those things that it's forcing Americans to, you know, think about historic claims, you know, historic executions that we did long ago. Understanding too, the morality behind the justice of a just death penalty, just echoing some of the comments that Oren McIntyre just made. I think they're good and I think they're sound. I think it's one of the things that the west has to come to a reckoning that for many, many decades, especially in America, we've had so much leniency, when it comes to capital murder trials. In this case, this was a terrorist act that was committed on American soil. you know, this was the Fort Hood massacre going back, you know, back 2009. and so you had multiple, many, many service members who lost their lives, their lives were taken from them and victims in many ways have been reduced, their status in society, in Western society, some might say, well, how so? How is their status reduced? Well, if their lives are taken and ultimately justice, is delayed, in many ways that too, can be perceived as giving greater status, greater legal, rights and protections for the murderer. many ways, you know, we live in a society where things are upside down, you know, where, people are trying in so many ways to argue on behalf of, you know, and there is a concern, of course, for brutality. There's a concern of course, for, you know, the sort of the de. Evolution of, you know, the sacredness of life. But no one ever really makes that argument, or seldom do we see those arguments, at least from secularists and from modernists and from progressives being made on behalf of the victim themselves. And so when I look at this, particular case, and of course it's coming from the Department of War, and there's obviously greater discretion that can be, passed because of executive authority. You know, I think this is something that can actually be a good thing. But the issue with media itself, and to your question, if something is live streamed and it's going to be up there forever, even if it's taken down later, people will have that questions have arisen. You know, could this be used as, an aggressive recruiting tool, by those, in Hamas and the Houthis and other terrorist organizations? Would they look at this potentially, and become more aggressive? Those questions have actually been circulated, you know, and I would say this, I don't think that that should be our ultimate concern. The question is whether it's moral, just and prudent. And I think it is moral. I do think it is just. And in terms of prudence, I think that would be the ultimate question. Is it prudent and wise to broadcast that, you know, potentially, is there any blowback? would it be those who are part of the firing squad? Could their faces be seen? Hopefully not. but that is the ultimate question, is that what would be the potential repercussions? at the end of the day though, I think the Islamic world, I think the United States, when it comes to those who are changing the legal system before our very eyes. Millions of babies that we kill in the United States through abortion, it's been legalized. We dehumanize the person, in so many ways, and in so many ways the victim, Victims are not recognized. And so I think it's a good reminder even in the midst of this execution that we show and that we demonstrate, look, these American service Members, and these families who have lost their loved ones brutally, lost them mercilessly, lost them, well over 15 years ago. their blood calls for justice. And we need to demonstrate that America is in fact, a just nation. So I do believe so strongly in the death penalty as a Christian argument. not one that is barbaric, not one that is just wrapped up in the Old Testament, but the NewSong Testament as well. I do think Romans 13 shows that the state does not bear the sword in vain. And, we even see the words of Paul, where he talks about just penalty for, m. Moral misconduct. the state has a responsibility and it must carry that responsibility out. And so, you know, I'd be hard pressed to make any arguments against the death penalty, but I do believe when it comes to a live stream, it's really a question of prudence and wisdom and what makes the most sense. And I'll just add this. You know, we do have, an unauthorized video of Saddam, Hussein's hanging. I do remember and recall many years ago, when he was brought to trial and there was a public trial, it sent a message around the world that he was put on trial and there were. There was due process. He was afforded a legal defense, but ultimately, you know, he was found guilty of war crimes. he was a dictator. He brutalized his own people, in Iraq, and yet there was a public execution, but it was not supposed to be, videotaped. It was not supposed to be recorded, and yet somebody did and then leaked that video. And so later we were able then publicly to see that, you couldn't see his face, but it was definitely him. and so it does send a message around the world when we recognize that no one escapes ultimately the justice of the state, but in recognition that symbolically the state is God's beacon of justice, that he's ordained, they do not escape the wrath of God.
Jenna Ellis: Really, really well said, Rhyen. And, And I agree with you that the question is not one of. Of morality or, of right versus wrong. It's a question of wisdom and prudence. Prudence is the perfect, word here to describe, what the. The contemplation is. And, you know, I was talking with my. My producer Luke, as we were preparing this topic, you know, over the weekend, and he said, and I think this is such a great line where, you know, we were talking about how if this is done, you know, soberly and. And with, gravity and weight of exactly what you're describing, then that purpose can ultimately be met. but if, and this is not at all something that, hopefully that Trump is contemplating at all. But just, you know, to kind of put this in more of a, of a Trumpian vein, what Luke was saying was that, you know, if we're, if we're having this live streamed and you know, Kid Rock is opening, with a concert to the live stream, you know, and this is kind of something that's a little bit more of a rally framework or something like that. that in my view would be unpredent, would be inappropriate, that would be more of a spectacle. Right. And so it really depends on how the dod, frames this, how, ah, how they are. I mean, we can't help how other people may use this dream, just like Saddam, Hussein after the fact. But in terms of the prudence of actually showing that this is what justice requires, this is what our country, is willing to do to advance the interests of justice on behalf of the victim, the victims, and also on behalf of a righteous nation, then, you know, I, I can see how, prudence could, in fact, not just make this legitimate, but even require it. So, Rhyen Helfenbein, you're stick with me through the break. We'll be right back with more. We're living in a defining moment in history. Today, a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can order the abortion pill online, often before anyone has had the chance to tell her she is loved and that she's not alone or that there is hope. That's why you are needed right now. You were made for this moment. At, PreBorn Network clinics, mothers are welcomed with compassion, practical support, and a free ultrasound. And when she sees her baby and hears that tiny heartbeat for the very first time, fear often gives way to hope. In fact, more than 80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on an ultrasound and at a PreBorn Network clinic. That one moment can save a baby's life and open a mother's heart to the hope of Jesus Christ. This is our moment to stand. For those who cannot speak for themselves, just $28 provides one life saving ultrasound. $140 helps rescue five babies. Please don't wait. Dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 baby. Or give [email protected] afr that's preborn.com afr Together we can save lives one heartbeat at a time. welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. And I'm still here with my special guest, Rhyen Helfenbein, who's the vice president of communications at Liberty University. And speaking of the death penalty penalty and just the removal of society in 2026 and you know, kind of our modernization of the concept and the reality of death, this was a really frankly disturbing article in the Economist, that I saw on social media and the tag on X from the Economist or the the caption was death induces debilitating terror, but simulations of dying could help reduce such anxiety. And so this is what this article says and again this is incredibly disturbing and I want to talk through the ethical and moral implications of what this is contemplating. So this story goes on to say death has always had a marketing problem. Okay, right off the bat, that's the Economist lead. That is, that is utterly disgusting frankly. But says death has always had a marketing problem. The debilitating terror it induces has been linked to everything from money hoarding to workaholism. And worrying about death can even be self fulfilling. Anxiety can double the risk of death in patients with heart disease and cause others to avoid screening tests most likely likely to catch cancer early. So all credit the Economist says to the brave folks in Australia who signed up for a quick practice of kicking the bucket experience. It's experiencing a cardiac arrest and out of body journey in a virtual reality or VR. The 10 minute VR experience called passing Electrical Storms by Shawn Gladwell was shown at the National Gallery of Victoria in 2023. Visitors lay on a bed that initially vibrated with their heartbeat while wearing a VR headset showing them on a table in the gallery. The simulation then takes over as their heart rate seemingly crashes. The volunteers watch doctors try and fail to resuscitate them after brain death. They then see themselves leave their body and appear to flee float through the universe before shrinking inside cells and atoms. Six large fans provide the associated cooling effects. And then participants reactions to the experience were analyzed by researchers before being published in a journal, last June. So Rhyen, we don't even have time to go through all of the, the just various ways we could talk about this and how disturbing all of this is. but first of all, what happens after we die is not an experience that can ever be replicated by virtual reality because no living human being actually knows what that experience is like. And second, to suggest that somehow this type of virtual reality experience supposed to help give peace to people, by saying, well I've already experienced that, so I'm going to be okay. Experiencing that is literally taking away what the Bible, says, you know, is, is a rational and, and for the non Christian, for the unbeliever, a fear of death should be a motivating factor to seek out what actually is the truth of the gospel of Christ and what happens in, in eternity. And so, you know, there are so many moral implications with this. But, your reaction to this type of, question and suggestion that death has only had a marketing problem.
Ryan Helfenbein: Yeah, there's certain ideas that are so insane, and lacking in common sense that they could only, you know, sort of be lived out and promoted, and researched really in a very progressive Western society, that is trying to explain everything through atoms and molecules and scientism only. And I just, I laugh at the idea of any kind of virtual reality kind of experience where people are trying to simulate these things and say, well, we know. And when anyone says that, we know what death is like and we know what this experience will be. In fact, we even know visually, what the senses of the body will pick up, that is absolutely nonsensical. And we have to, as Christians, we have to obviously approach this from a biblical perspective. we ultimately hold to God's authority, contained within his word, that his authority is greater than man's authority. And oftentimes, when it comes to science, we have to recognize that science must ultimately bow and bend the knee, to the word of God. And I would just say that, when you look at all the things that are shaping and shaping up in society, medical aid and dying being a big one, you know that this is happening in Canada. There are states, in the United States that are trying to legalize euthanasia. you know, you go back, I remember being in high school and reading about Dr. Kevorkian, who was that? you know, scientist, medical doctor that was trying to basically bring, bring about early death rather than trying to fight for life as soon as this enters in. It's just another example of the suicidal pathology that we see in the West. We recognize death is the product of the curse and the fall. The fear of death, as you say, and I fully agree, is a good motivating factor for all men and women. God has put the heart of eternity, put, put eternity in the heart of every man and woman. And there is a natural fear because we know that death is actually not natural. It was not a part of God's intention, His design. It is a product of the curse. The fall. It's the just consequence of sin that there will be a ultimate death one day. Every single person who draws life's breath will draw their last. And we will be in that grave one day. And ultimately it's a question about our just standing before God. When Jesus came, to die for us, ultimately to serve as the perfect sacrifice and atonement for our sin, Jesus defeated sin. He defeated the devil, but he also defeated that, perennial enemy, death. Death, where is your victory, O Death, where is your sting? As the apostle Paul echoes from the Old Testament that ultimately we can have hope, we can have healing, we have a future promise of a resurrection where our physical bodies will be united with our spirit. And, in the ultimate sense, we live in an embodied reality. And so, human beings are not supposed to know ultimately what that experience of death is going to look like. there's no way to simulate it. There's no way to prepare for it other than prepare your hearts to meet your maker. prepare your hearts that you might be able to stand unashamed before the judgment, seat of the Lord Jesus Christ, knowing that you, ah, ultimately have a redeemer, someone who died for you, somebody who shed his blood for you, someone who, forgives sins not on the basis of forgiveness only, but on the basis of the fact that he actually was your substitute, he had a substitutionary atonement. and that is our just standing before God. I'll just say this too. You know, every single, religion around the world has to deal with the consequence of death. Has to deal with the consequence of sin. And, you know, just even in my study more recently about Islam, even Islam believes that there is such a thing as a substitute. And in the ultimate, objective of jihad, it's so that the infidel might pay in hell for your sin, so that you can be in heaven with Allah. And so there are all kinds of religions around the world that deal with, what do I do with my guilt, my shame, my sin, how do I handle that? And all of them are going to have answers. But ultimately, in the Bible, ah, we recognize that, there are two deaths. there is the death. We die in the natural, and then there is a spiritual death that is eternal. And as Christians, we recognize that while we have a physical death, we have no need to fear that eternal death and damnation in hell. Why? Because Jesus Christ has given us the free offer of the good news of the gospel, that he has paid our sins in full. It is finished. And so we look to him, ultimately for our righteousness. We look to him for the satisfaction of the penalty of the law. we look to him really for a hope and a glory that the world has never, never known. that we can rest eternally secure in our salvation and eternal life because of what he has done. And I'll just add one more thing. The story of Lazarus is a great story. It's in Jon chapter 11. And Jesus ultimately raises him from the dead. But in that passage, it contains the shortest verse of the Bible. his family members are weeping and Jesus stops and it says, jesus wept even he wept over the natural death of his people. And I think that we recognize that it is a time for mourning in a time of great grief because death is actually not natural. And in God's design and creation, it is the curse of sin that brings about death.
Jenna Ellis: Absolutely. And you know, what a. What a wonderful, articulation of the biblical worldview. And, and it is true. And the Bible also says, that precious to the Lord, precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints. And you know, that that term, precious in the. In the original ah, language, means it's something that he cares about, he's. He's concerned for. And and I believe theologically that the Bible is very clear that the experience of death is very different for the Christian, in that moment, preparing to meet the Lord versus the non Christian, preparing to meet their fate of eternal damnation. And you know, it's these types of ways that the world just cannot, grapple with the ultimate, eternal question that they try to make these experiences and these virtual realities, to soften what is the hard line of eternity that either you will. Either way m. You will meet your Creator and you will stand before the Lord. Revelation speaks of the three judgments, you know, of the judgment of the nations. But then of the two judgments of first, the individual and whether you are saved or not, whether your name is written in the book of life or not. And then for the Christian, when we have passed that first test of whether our name is written in the book of life, then we go to the judgment of being rewarded for, our ministry here, here on earth. And the Bible talks about, you know, the crowns of the martyrs, which Charlie Kirk, I believe received that at his second judgment. and it talks about the various crowns that Christians are rewarded with. And when we look at something like this, I mean, this article even goes on to say participants reactions to this virtual reality experience, I mean they call it an experience that's not what death is supposed to be. were analyzed by researchers and most participants, found it a pleasant trip. Many emerged less anxious about death. If death were as simple as that, I'd be very happy, one volunteer said. Another compared the experience to yoga. One participant brought up to believe in hell admitted to being relieved. And I thought that insert into the Economist is exactly why we need to be very careful about virtual reality, about these types of experiments, this type of experiment experience, because that's exactly what it's driving for Rhyen, is to undermine the truth of the gospel that eternity is written in the hearts of man and that the only way to overcome the fear of death is not to disregard it or think it's going to be a pleasant journey or say, you know what, I'm relieved that there is no hell in my belief. No, hell is described in the Bible as eternal separation from our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. That will be absolute nightmare. Beyond that is incomprehensible. And we should not diminish that as Christians. And we should never society should never diminish that. And so the purpose of this of course in the virtual reality is to lessen and to dampen the effect of that eternal separation with God rather than as the Christian should have this urgency to say, you don't have to fear death as long as you know your creator. And so last about 30 seconds. Rhyen, close us out.
Ryan Helfenbein: Yeah, I was just, I would just say that this all points back to the hope of the gospel. The hope of the gospel is that we have salvation and forgiveness through Jesus Christ. But there is a coming judgment. And that judgment we too need to be fearful about. Christians need to be fearful not so much in hey, am I going to undergo that? No, Jesus has already. But we need to be fearful for our neighbor. Our neighbor is what we need to focus on.
Jenna Ellis: And this sense of urgency, absolutely. You know, and as Halloween is coming up, consider Christian. Are you celebrating death? Minimizing that saying, you know, it's okay, it's this, you know, happy, candy filled experience. Or can you use this, this holiday quote unquote to share the urgency of the truth of the gospel of Christ? As always, you can reach me and my team, Jenna fr.netpreborn has rescued over 400,000 babies from abortion. And every day their network clinics rescue 200 babies lives. Will you join PreBorn in loving and supporting young moms in crisis? Save a life today go to preborn.com afr.
Jenna Ellis discusses the controversial topic of the live streaming of Nidal Hasan's execution, the implications of the death penalty, and the moral debates surrounding public executions. Joined by special guests, they explore the biblical perspective on justice, the role of the state, and the societal impact of such actions.
Live
Did you know American Family Radio is listener-supported? Your monthly financial support will allow us to continue upholding Godly values through our numerous channels, like American Family Radio, One Million Moms, The Stand magazine, and many more.
Become a Great Commission Partner TODAY to help AFR transform culture by rebuilding the family. When you donate today, you’ll get access to:
