Truce

Season 5 of the Truce Podcast was a blast! I'm hard at work on season 6, which will discuss how American evangelicals got tied to the Republican Party. It is already coming together so well! I can't wait to share it with you. God willing, season 6 will drop in the fall or early winter of 2023. Like, subscribe, sign up for the email list, and remember the show in your prayers! Godspeed! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to support the Truce Podcast On March 4, 1933, FDR delivered his inaugural address. In it, he used the phrase "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". I did a little searching and this phrase is used a LOT in Christian books. So often. But it almost always refers to the fear one person has in their heart. In reality, it is a comment on collective fear. The Great Depression started in 1929 and was exacerbated by a bank run in which Americans lost faith in the value of our currency and the banking systems. That is an important distinction. FDR's speech is about collective fear. As I've contemplated the modernist/fundamentalist debate this season, I keep returning to the idea of fear, not in the US economy but in God's economy. He commands us to love the Lord, keep His commands, love our neighbors, turn the other cheek, and give to those who ask of us. Why do we forget to do this important work? Could it be because we've lost faith in God's economy? This episode features a clip from my discussion

Love Truce? Give a little to help support the show! "The ends justify the means" is a phrase we hear occasionally. Often it is used to justify bad behavior, so long as it creates a profitable outcome. But we Christians know that we are called to live righteous lives. Are we people of the ends, or should we be known as a people of the means? Chris is joined this week by Pastor Ray McDaniel of First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY, and his twin brother Nick Staron to discuss this important issue. Discussion Questions: What does "the ends justify the means" mean? How have you seen that philosophy played out? Is that something you believe? How would things change if we focused more on the way we do things instead of our goals? How have fundamentalists justified their goals with poor behavior? How have modernists? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give a little to help Chris continue to make Truce! In 1945, C.S. Lewis published his excellent book "The Great Divorce". It happens to be one of my favorite books. It has many themes, the biggest of which is that there can be no hell in heaven. The two are divorced from each other (hence the title). Another is that humans are easily distracted from God's work and the gospel. This season I've been telling the backstory of Christian fundamentalism. I think many of us have been distracted from the gospel because of politics or the people around us. If you were joined by a loved one who passed away or an angel who challenged you to walk to heaven, would you? What distracts you from following Jesus? From really going for it? Special thanks to my improv troupe (Nick, Josh, and Jackie) who helped with voices. Additional vocal work came from Paul Hastings from the "Compelled" podcast and Jerry Dugan from "Beyond the Rut". Give their shows a listen and let me know what you think! Sources: The Great Divorce by C.S.

In the fall of 1814, the powers of Europe gathered together to discuss what to do with the continent after the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon had changed a lot in his time in power! He cowed the Roman Catholic Church, ended serfdom where he went, freed Jews from their ghettos, took away kingdoms, and placed new kings in charge. The Congress of Vienna was tasked with a Humpty Dumpty scenario and they couldn't put Europe back together again. The various countries also wanted to be compensated for their efforts to stop Napoleon. Couldn't they take a little piece of land? Encroach on one of the lesser kingdoms? Install their own puppet governments? In trying to undo all of the changes Napoleon made, they became little Napoleons themselves. In the same way, when we confront extremism with extremism we become exactly what we dislike. Shouldn't Christians be more focused on simple righteousness than culture wars? Select Sources: The Rites of Peace by Adam Zamoyski Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts (a great place to

Donate to help Chris make Truce! The first-century Christian Church had a lot going on. Their Savior died and was resurrected, sending the Holy Spirit and leaving them with the command to take this new message to all tribes and tongues. The book of Acts records some of their travels, as they went all over the known world with this good news. But they were not the only people evangelizing. So were the gnostics. Gnosticism takes a lot of different shapes. It was a belief system that challenged Christianity, even as some tried to incorporate elements into the faith. Now consider modernist theology - what we've been talking about all season. It is a belief system that doesn't believe in the miracles or the divinity of Jesus. To evangelicals of the 1800s and 1900s, this was a real threat. Like Gnosticism before it, modernism threatened to destabilize the gospel message. What to do? In this bonus episode, Chris takes a look at 1-3 John to see what they have to say about dealing with heresy. Chris is hard at work o

US Senator Joseph McCarthy unleashed an era of suspicion on the American people as he went looking for communists. His trials, both public and behind closed doors, focused on the government as well as Hollywood and the Army. He claimed that he had lists of communists, but failed to produce that list. It wasn't until the Army-McCarthy hearings in the spring and summer of 1954 that his unfounded hearings were put to rest. One year later the play Inherit the Wind opened. It was supposed to be a critique of the McCarthy era set inside of a re-telling of the Scopes "monkey" trial. In doing so, it got many of the facts wrong. John Scopes never spent any time in jail. He didn't have a girlfriend, and that girlfriend was not berated on the stand. The townspeople of Dayton, TN were welcoming to both Bryan and Darrow. To explore this work of art and revisionist history I spoke with the hosts of the Seeing and Believing podcast Kevin McLenithan and Sarah Welch-Larson. Select differences between the Scopes trial and Inh

Love Truce?? Donate to keep the show going! The trial was basically over. The prosecution won. John Scopes was moments away from being convicted of teaching evolution in Dayton, Tennessee. The ACLU and the prosecution had what they wanted. But Clarence Darrow did not. He wanted to make a monkey out of William Jennings Bryan, the famous "fundamentalist". But how? Darrow knew that if he turned down the chance to make a closing argument that Bryan would not be able to make one either. That meant that Bryan's carefully crafted words would never get heard. But he had one more trick up his sleeve. He would call Bryan, the lawyer for the prosecution, to the stand. Imagine that! The case was no longer about the defendant. It was about the lawyers trying to flex. Bryan took the bait. He got on the stand outdoors next to the Rhea County Courthouse in front of an audience of millions. Darrow, in a masterstroke, hit him over and over with the questions of any village atheist. Did Jonah really get swallowed by a large fis

Give to help Chris do Truce full time! Tennessee was the first state in the United States to crack down hard on the teaching of evolution in public schools. Others had dabbled, but Tennessee went all the way. The ACLU wanted to challenge the validity of the case in the courts. In order to do that they needed an educator to teach it, get busted, and be brought to trial. At the same time, the town of Dayton, TN needed a boost. After the biggest employer closed down it faced serious economic trouble. What if the men of Dayon could manufacture a court case to draw the attention of the nation? They found a young teacher named John Scopes and convinced him to participate in their scheme. They booked Scopes, even though he probably never taught evolution. The ACLU had its case. Soon William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow hopped on board and it went from a publicity stunt to something for the history books. This is the event that some historians (wrongly) point to as the death of Christian fundamentalism in the U

Give to help Truce! Donate here. In the 1600s, an Irish Archbishop named James Ussher did a bunch of math. The Bible is full of numbers and genealogies. He sat down and calculated that, in his opinion, the Bible dated creation at 4004 BC. According to Ussher, that is when God created man. That number has really stuck around! I gathered my small group together to explore the Adams Synchronological Chart. It is a 23-foot-long timeline of human history, beginning in 4004 BC and ending in 1900. There it was! The 4004 BC number! Which brings up an interesting question, right? What did Christians really believe about evolution just before it became a linchpin battle for fundamentalists? I turned to Edward Larson for answers. He's a professor at Pepperdine University and the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Summer for the Gods". The book chronicles the Scopes "Monkey" trial that we'll be covering in the next two episodes. But it also gives us a great introductory look at what Christians believed about evo

Give to help Chris make Truce! Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were wealthy young men in the early 1920s. They lived in big homes in Chicago and had world-class educations. They were both pushed hard academically, and Richard was sexually abused as a child. Both graduated early from high school and college. The two were an odd pairing. Nathan was quiet and awkward, not particularly handsome. Richard was gregarious and outgoing, good-looking... and a psychopath. Nathan loved Richard, and the two sometimes had sex with each other. Richard realized he could control Nathan by trading intimacy for criminal activity. They started with typical juvenile delinquent behavior. Soon, though, Richard wanted more. He considered himself a master criminal, someone too smart to get caught. He and Nathan were exposed to the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche wrote that the ultimate purpose of humanity was to evolve into what he called the ubermensch or superman. Leopold and Loeb thought they were that evolved human. There

Eugenics. It's one of those words that gets thrown around these days, often by people accusing "the other side" of wrongdoing. But what is eugenics? I invited law professor Paul Lombardo, author of "Three Generations, No Imbeciles", to join me to try to answer that very question. It turns out that that question is harder to answer than you'd think. In the early 1900s, the word "eugenic" was often used to mean "pure" or to imply that a product was healthy for babies. But that word also extended into segregating certain populations from society and forced sterilizations. It is important to understand the history of eugenics because some Christians use the fear of eugenics as a lens to understand the Scopes "Monkey" trial. I think that is an accurate connection, but we really should understand it. Did William Jennings Bryan support eugenics? Can Christians support eugenics? Many did. There were even competitions that rewarded pastors for writing pro-eugenics sermons. That was especially true for liberal pastors.

Truce will be back on January 10th! Chris is working through the whole break in order to prepare for his big presentation in front of his church. He's trying to get Truce fully funded for 2023. New episodes are already done, but he's trying to create a little cushion of extra episodes in case of emergencies. Thanks for your support of the show!!! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Harry Emerson Fosdick had a certain reputation. He was the theological "bad boy" of modernist theology when he stood at a lectern in the 1920s and delivered his famous sermon "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?". He was in New York City. One preacher, preaching one sermon. But this one talk spread all over the country and created real upset. Could modernist theology win in the Northern Presbyterian denomination? J. Grescham Machen didn't think it should. He was a fundamentalist and wrote in response to Fosdick's sermon. But how does one keep out heresy? The fundamentalists decided to call in a big-name Christian celebrity -- William Jennings Bryan. He was on a cross-country crusade to stop the teaching of evolution in public schools. Not because he didn't believe in science. He did. The problem that Bryan saw with teaching evolution in school was the cruelty that humanity would express if they believed they were nothing more than animals. The battle between liberal

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! So far this season I've covered William Jennings Bryan, a man who enjoyed the nickname "Mr. Fundamentalist". But he wasn't really a fundamentalist. Experts point to another man as the true face of fundamentalism. That man was William Bell Riley. He was a famous preacher in his day, bouncing around the midwest until he settled in Minnesota. He founded the Northwestern schools to spread his vision of Christianity and picked debates with modernists at the University of Chicago. He formed the World's Christian Fundamentals Association to help deliver denominations from modernism. But... he lost. A bunch. In this episode we explore the life of William Bell Riley to discover why he and the fundamentalists burned brightly, only to fizzle out a few years later. Helpful Links: God's Empire by William Vance Trollinger Minnesota History article about Riley New Hampshire Confession Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden The Evangelicals by Frances

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Send checks to: Truce Media LLC PO Box 3434 Jackson, WY 83001 The modernish/ fundamentalist controversy was heating up in the early 1900s. Conservatives saw this coming a long way off but could not stop modernism from taking control of seminaries and popular pulpits. It was everywhere. It all came to a head with WWI. Theological conservatives saw WWI as evidence that the world was getting worse. To them, it was a chance to fight for patriotic reasons. Modernists were also pro-war because they thought this was the "war to end all wars". There would be no more war after this and democracy would take over the world. The liberals fired the first shots in this theological battle because they thought that premillennialism encouraged people to root for the end of the world. William Jennings Bryan was Secretary of State in the US during this time and did his best to keep us out of the war. This episode features the voices of George Marsden (author of "Fundamentalism an

Want to help Truce? Give via Venmo at: https://account.venmo.com/u/trucepodcast Help via Paypal Help via Patreon Pledge to help Truce Or support Truce via check by sending it to: Truce Media LLC PO Box 3434 Jackson, WY 83001 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Walter Rauscenbush published his classic book Christianity and the Social Crisis in 1907. It went on to become a defining work of the social gospel movement. We've spent a lot of time talking about the social gospel this season. That is because it has been identified by historians as the key movement that fundamentalists rebelled against. So we really should understand it, right? In this episode, Chris takes us through highlights of this classic book in order to understand how the social gospel differed from evangelical Christianity. While it lifted up the necessity of doing good works, the social gospel often omitted salvation altogether. Contrast that to evangelical preachers like D.L. Moody who lived their lives with the sole purpose of evangelism. This division between evangelicalism and liberal theologies led to the Great Reversal when theologically conservative Christians went from participating in public acts of goodwill to distancing themselves from it.

Between 1910 and 1915 a collection of 90 essays was distributed by two wealthy oil magnates. These essays attempted to nail down the basics of the Christian faith and counteract the growing modernist movement. "The Fundamentals" is often mentioned in history books about Christian fundamentalism, but it is rare for anyone to discuss the essays themselves. So I thought we should break down at least 6 of them together! I'm joined this episode by some good friends to introduce you to "The Fundamentals". This influential time capsule document takes us inside the proto-fundamentalist movement, just before it really took off. Discussion Questions: What would you include in your own list of fundamentals? Is creationism fundamental? What is the role of evolution in our modern theology? The fear of evolution wasn't just about people thinking we'd come from chimps. It also revolved around concerns of people applying evolution to other areas of life. How have you seen evolution applied to other studies? Is the Bible

What kind of Bible do you have? Most of us would answer with the translation we carry. Maybe it's New Living, the King James, or the New International Version. I've heard plenty of conversations about translations in my life. But I've never heard a serious discussion about the notes in various Bibles. Continuing our long exploration of the Christian fundamentalist movement, we explore the Bible version that nudged the United States toward a particular negative theology. One that encouraged people to question the trajectory of history itself. That was one of the purposes of the Scofield Reference Bible, named for its author C.I. Scofield. The Scofield Reference Bible emphasizes the premillennial dispensationalist theology we've been talking about all season. It expects that world history is sliding into chaos. That was not the primary view in the late 1800s and early 1900s in the US. Most people thought that humanity could improve things until Jesus returned. This Bible is one of the things that changed that.