Tucker Carlson Exposes How Patrick Bet-David and Sean Hannity Promote Israelism Over Christianity
Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.
Up Next
Tucker Carlson Warns Donald Trump Against War With Iran Despite Media Pressure and Netanyahu Push
1:46:46
Megyn Kelly on Mark Levin's Attacks, Charlie Kirk's Legacy, and Rising Anti-Christian Hostility in Conservative Media
10:46
Tucker Carlson Questions Who Benefits From Potential Iran War as Massive Military Buildup Unfolds in Middle East
11:31
Tucker Carlson Exposes How Patrick Bet-David and Sean Hannity Promote Israelism Over Christianity
Tucker Carlson dismantles claims made by Patrick Bet-David and Sean Hannity that reveal a troubling shift in American Christian thought. Bet-David accuses Catholics of having inherent issues with Jews while comparing the Vatican to the Iranian theocracy. Hannity, a lifelong Catholic, questions whether the Pope has even read the Bible when the pontiff speaks against violence. Carlson argues both men exemplify a new religion he calls Israelism, a faith that prioritizes Old Testament warfare narratives while ignoring the New Testament's central message of peace. He challenges viewers to recognize the difference between Christianity, which follows Jesus's teachings against violence and anger, and this emerging ideology that justifies modern military actions through selective biblical interpretation. Carlson calls for intellectual honesty about what belief system is actually being promoted.
Tucker Carlson opens by showing a clip from Patrick Bet-David's podcast where Bet-David makes sweeping claims about Catholics and their relationship with Jewish people. Bet-David states he doesn't understand why Catholics have issues with Jews, comparing the centralized structure of Catholicism unfavorably to what he describes as the decentralized nature of Judaism.
Bet-David points out that the global Catholic population numbers around 12-13 billion while Jews number only 15 million. He emphasizes that Catholics have a central authority figure in the Pope, while Jews do not have such a singular leader. He claims that only Catholics and Muslims have supreme leaders that followers must obey, with Catholics being even more centralized than Muslims.
The conversation in the clip identifies only two theocracies in the world: the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Vatican. This comparison, Carlson notes, effectively equates the Vatican with the Iranian mullah government—two systems that share complicated dress codes and, according to Bet-David, hatred of Jews.
The Slander Against the Catholic Church
Carlson characterizes these statements as slander and an open attack on the world's largest and oldest Christian denomination. He identifies the source of this antagonism as political support for the Netanyahu government in Israel. According to Carlson, the new standard being established is clear: anyone who supports every decision of the Netanyahu government, regardless of how violent or extreme, is considered good. Anyone who questions these decisions is labeled a Nazi, and their religion itself is deemed inherently anti-Semitic.
This casual dismissal and mockery of the Catholic Church, Carlson argues, reveals a larger pattern. The loathing directed at traditional Christianity is not hidden but openly expressed. He suggests this represents the emergence of a new faith system.
Sean Hannity and the Pope
Carlson turns to another example: Sean Hannity's response to President Trump attacking the Pope. Hannity, a lifelong Catholic, questions whether the Pope has even read the Bible. In the clip, Hannity criticizes the Pope for advocating against violence and conflict, asking if the pontiff has read about the wars in the Bible where God empowered the Israelites to defeat their enemies.
Hannity references David slaying Goliath, the wars of King Saul, and Israel's history of being surrounded by enemies while prevailing as God's chosen people. He finds it "pretty amazing" that Israel keeps winning against all odds.
Carlson finds it absurd that anyone would suggest the Pope hasn't read the Bible, noting the humor in a cable news host questioning the biblical literacy of the leader of the Catholic Church. However, he argues the content of Hannity's criticism reveals something more significant and troubling than simple ignorance.
The Pope's Conventional Christian Message
The Pope's position, Carlson explains, is entirely conventional Christian teaching. As a Christian leader consulting the gospel, the Pope expressed opposition to war. While acknowledging that just war theory might allow for defensive conflicts, the Pope made no extreme claims, engaged in no name-calling, and presented no departure from Christian theology and ethics as understood for thousands of years.
The response from Hannity, however, points to Old Testament accounts of violence and warfare. Hannity is correct that these stories exist in the Bible—Israel was constantly under attack from neighbors like the Amalekites and Philistines, and they fought back with God's blessing. These accounts are indeed in scripture.
The Old Testament Versus the New Testament
But here Carlson makes his central point: these stories are not in the New Testament. For Christians, this distinction is everything. The Old Testament is not irrelevant to Christian faith—Christians understand scripture as one continuous story. Jesus himself said he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it, to bring it to its intended conclusion.
However, Jesus never once orders anyone to kill or hurt anybody. In the entire New Testament—the four gospels, the letters primarily from Paul, and the book of Revelation—there is not a single page or sentence where Jesus advocates violence against annoying people, threats, dissenters, or people of other faiths. The message is the opposite.
The contrast is so clear, Carlson argues, that it raises serious questions about who has actually read the Bible and who hasn't.
The Sermon on the Mount
Carlson directs attention to Jesus's first sermon in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 5, known as the Sermon on the Mount. This famous teaching addresses violence and greed clearly and radically. Jesus doesn't simply restate Old Testament prohibitions—he intensifies them to shocking levels.
Jesus teaches that while Moses said not to commit murder, he himself says don't even be angry. If you curse somebody, you risk hell. These demands are shocking to modern ears, to ancient ears, to any human being. The standards Jesus sets are not of this world, which is precisely the point of Christianity.
The implications are impossible to misunderstand. Whatever interpretation one applies, whatever debate exists about living up to these standards, one cannot conclude that Jesus favors dropping bombs on children, destroying apartment buildings, or abusing prisoners. The conclusion is the opposite. Anyone reaching such conclusions by referencing Old Testament texts like the Book of Ruth is espousing religious tenets, but they are not Christian tenets.
Defining Israelism
This is the new religion Carlson calls Israelism. He challenges those promoting this ideology to be honest about what they're advocating. Give it a proper name. Outline a creed. Provide ten points people can recite. Establish consequences for non-believers. But stop deceiving people by claiming that something clearly anti-Christian is actually the real Christianity.
Carlson concludes that this kind of deception is making everyone crazy. The intellectual dishonesty of rebranding Old Testament militarism as Christian doctrine while ignoring the explicit teachings of Jesus creates confusion and undermines genuine faith. He calls for clarity and truthfulness about what belief system is actually being promoted in American religious and political discourse.