Talarico’s Changing Views on God and Gender

James Talarico has recently clarified that he doesn’t actually believe God is non-dualistic.

Those looking for theological insights from the Texas Senate candidate might feel a bit dizzy. Talarico is attempting to smooth over past controversial remarks—like one about God’s non-conforming gender—as he prepares to face Republican candidate Ken Paxton, who’s been marred by scandals.

A former Presbyterian seminarian, Talarico previously sought to link the Bible with radical gender ideology.

During a debate in 2021 regarding whether biological males ought to participate in women’s sports, he asserted, “God is both masculine and feminine and everything in between. God is non-binary.”

Now, he claims he was just trying to provoke thought, yet in the debate video, he sounds just like a traditional pastor delivering a serious sermon on a Sunday morning.

When asked about his statement, the Democratic Party remarked that God transcends human definitions.

It’s true—God doesn’t have a physically male or female body.

However, it’s also important to note that God is often referred to with masculine terms in the Bible, such as “Father,” “King,” and “Husband.”

Talarico also pointed to a famous passage by the Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians: “There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

This highlights the unity of Christians in Jesus Christ, irrespective of their backgrounds or genders, but it doesn’t really support modern gender theories.

It’s quite contradictory to claim otherwise when Paul talks about the biological differences between genders and their respective roles, suggesting that “Husbands should love their wives sacrificially, just as Christ loved the church,” while “Wives should respect and submit to their husbands.”

On the topic of gender, Talarico also sought to retract a 2021 comment claiming there are six biological sexes, which he attributed to “modern science.”

While there are indeed two main biological sexes—male and female—he emphasized that people with chromosomal variations should be treated with dignity.

But if that’s all he intended to convey, he really could have just said it more clearly.

He also backtracked on a past statement from the COVID-19 era where he claimed white people were spreading the “virus of racism” through various means.

He remarked, “You don’t need to display a white hood or Confederate flag to be contagious,” citing this as merely a call-out for racism.

Many people manage to denounce racial prejudice without making such sweeping charges about their ethnicity.

In an interesting twist, Talarico mentioned that a few years back, his Texas House campaign adopted a vegan lifestyle to advocate for animal rights and tackle climate change. Now, however, he’s positioning his Senate campaign around traditional Texas barbecue.

Tofu is out, brisket is in, with the campaign likely racking up the takeout bill at Franklin Barbecue in Austin.

This shift prompts questions about what’s preferable: a candidate who firmly embraces a “woke” perspective or one who adopted trendy views only to discard them when they became inconvenient.

Neither option reflects well on James Talarico.

Regardless, he might find support in his campaign thanks to Ken Paxton’s numerous shortcomings.

In this new era of flexibility regarding discussions about God and the gender spectrum, Talarico appears proudly ambiguous as a politician.