Christians should never be impressed by religious language alone. 

Any person, regardless of their personal relationship with God and His teachings, is capable of publicly quoting Scripture, discussing prayer and preaching messages of justice, mercy and love. However, biblical words can be hollowed out and refilled with meanings that oppose what Scripture teaches.

That is why Christians are commanded to practice discernment.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God…” 1 John 4:1 says.

That command is for protection. Biblical teachings point out that deception does not commonly sound openly evil; it’s normally presented as compassionate, educated and moral, borrowing faith-based language while actually moving people away from God’s Word.

Paul gave a similar warning in Colossians 2:8: “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition…”

Modern politicians are fully versed in adapting their language in order to appeal to the right-leaning, Christian voterbase, whether or not they actually intend to stand on Christian doctrine when in office. We’ve witnessed this time and time again, when self-reported Christian Congressmen campaign as Republicans with conservative values, and then pedal progressive ideologies when they take office.

Now, Christians should not be cruel and overly suspicious of everyone who speaks about faith. But we should pay close attention when Christian language is used to defend ideas that contradict Christianity.

Take the issue of life.

Scripture speaks of unborn life with reverence. David wrote, “For You created my innermost parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb” in Psalm 139:13. God told Jeremiah, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you” in Jeremiah 1:5.

Those verses have shaped Christian belief for generations. Human life has intrinsic value that is not derived from state recognition. Human life is valuable because every person bears the image of God.

So when a public leader speaks about compassion while defending abortion access, Christians should stop and ask what kind of compassion is truly being offered. Compassion for a mother in crisis is biblical. The church should care deeply for women who are afraid, poor, abandoned or overwhelmed. But compassion that requires the death of an unborn child is not biblical compassion, it is a redefinition.

The same pattern appears in the debate over children, sex and identity.

Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”

That verse is foundational. The male and the female are part of God’s created order.

Let me be clear that Christians should treat every human being with dignity. A gender-confused child is not a political enemy; nor is a hurting teenager. Families navigating these struggles need patience, prayer and pastoral care. However, there is a stark difference between loving a person and affirming an ideology. There is a difference between walking with someone in pain and telling them that God made a mistake.

When leaders or churches call gender confusion “liberation,” and when they encourage children to reject their biological sex, Christians should test that claim against Scripture, asking whether that reflects the teachings of Christ or the spirit of the age.

This is where the language of “love” is often misused.

Biblical love is not the same as sentimental approval. Jesus loved sinners, but He did not condone sin. He showed mercy, then said, “Go. From now on do not sin any longer” in John 8:11. He ate with tax collectors and sinners, but He also called people to repentance. His compassion existed alongside a call toward holiness.

Modern public religion often wants the comfort of Jesus without the authority of Jesus. That is not genuine Christianity, it is a political use of Christian vocabulary.

Now, believers can disagree about many political questions. Christians may have different views on tax policy, infrastructure, local budgets, foreign aid or zoning. Those debates are sound because not every issue carries the same moral weight.

The protection of unborn life carries significant moral weight, alongside God’s creation of the male and the female and the authority of the Scripture.

This concept is why many Texas Christians are taking a closer look at State Rep. James Talarico (D-HD 50), who is the Democratic nominee in the 2026 U.S. Senate election in Texas.

 

Talarico frequently speaks about his Christian faith and often references Scripture in public appearances. To many believers, that may sound encouraging. However, when examining the policies he supports and the organizations associated with his church community, a very different picture emerges.

 

According to publicly available information, St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin, where Talarico is a member and has preached sermons, supports a variety of organizations that advocate positions far outside historic Judeo-Christian teachings on the sanctity of life, biblical sexuality, and family values.

 

Among the organizations listed as partners or supported causes are groups that advocate for abortion access, including Planned Parenthood and organizations that assist Texans seeking abortions outside the state. For Christians who believe that life begins at conception and that every child is created in the image of God, such partnerships raise serious concerns.

 

The Bible is explicitly clear that human life is sacred. The aforementioned passages in Psalm and Jeremiah have led generations of Christians to defend the unborn and champion the protection of innocent life.

 

Yet Talarico has publicly supported abortion rights and has argued for legal protections that would expand access to abortion. While he frames his position through his personal interpretation of faith, many pastors, theologians, and Christian leaders would strongly disagree with his conclusions.

 

As Texans evaluate future leaders, they should carefully examine not only what candidates say about faith, but also what they support, what organizations they align with, and what values they ultimately promote.

 

The Bible tells us, “So then, you will know them by their fruits.” (Matthew 7:16 NASB).

 

For Christian voters seeking leaders who uphold traditional Judeo-Christian values, that biblical principle remains as relevant today as ever. Any public leader can sound Christian; the question is whether the fruit matches the faith being claimed.

 

Feature photo: Antonioaesparza, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons