The Moment People Realized Acts 29 Was Going Woke

Welcome to the Conversations That Matter podcast. I'm your host, John Harris. A few things that I wanted to show you before we get into the topic today really briefly is I fail to mention this so often.

So if you live in Indiana, I'm gonna be in Indiana, October 20th at Fellowship Bible Church in Kendallville. And I'm gonna be talking about social justice. And then October 22nd, Syracuse, Indiana for the Jesus and Politics Conference.

You can find the RSVPs for both events in the info section by clicking on the link provided or just go to worldviewconversation .com and you can RSVP if you wanna come. I'm gonna be talking about rebuilding from the ruins.

What do we do now that we've seen all the carnage that's come from social justice and other things really, but how do we rebuild a robust institutions? And so it'll be profitable. It's stuff I haven't talked about on the podcast I'm gonna be talking about.

And also the retreat, the men's retreat, still got some openings. I'll put the link in the info section. If you wanna come to the Adirondack Men's Retreat, I've already been contacting people in regards to transportation and sending out the schedule to everyone and we got music and it's gonna be great.

So the deadline was October 1st, but I've extended it. So you can still sign up. We still got openings. Would love to see you at the Adirondack, I can say the word, Men's Retreat with Dr. Russell Fuller, October 28th through 30th.

Contact me if you are looking for rides from your region and I'll see what I can do. All right, one last thing too. I should let everyone know as the season gets colder to get yourself a cup of some Gold River tea.

Gold River is a company that shares your values. It's not a company that hates you, which many companies do. I hate shopping at places that hate me and hate my God and hate the Bible and hate the values that I believe in.

Gold River is not one of them. They're pro-America, pro-Western Civ, pro-Christianity. And you can go to goldriverco .com, type in the promo code conversations and if you type in that promo code, you'll get 15 off your order.

They got their pumpkin spice tea out there right now. If you're in a warm climate, you can still get iced tea if you want. Where I am though, you're not drinking the iced tea. You're gonna wanna go get some of the, either the 1776 Breakfast Black Tea, if you're patriotic, or my favorite, I think, it's between these two, but I think the peppermint green tea edges out the gunpowder green tea by just a little bit.

So if you want a good tea, I would recommend getting either that one or the pumpkin spice, but they're all good. They have chamomile and like I said, put in that promo code conversations at checkout to get 15 off your order today.

So goldriverco .com, Gold River Tea Company. Now, let's talk about the subject for today. This is gonna be a little open-ended. This is a montage or a compilation I made of various clips from a panel discussion at an Axe 29 event in 2017.

So kind of a blast from the past here, going back five years. And the reason I'm playing this is because I've been doing some research into Axe 29 and man, they really have bought into a lot of social justice stuff, unfortunately.

It is unfortunate, it really is. And with this particular panel, I see this as kind of, it was a moment. It was a seminal moment. And there's moments that I can think of that are important for this whole debate in social justice and Christianity.

In 2018, there was three of them. There was the Southern Baptist Convention had Resolution 9, which endorsed critical race theory as an analytical tool, that passed. You had T4G and David Platt's preaching about disparities and how you're guilty if you're white because you don't care enough about the lack of diversity in the room.

And then you also had the MLK50, which showed that Southern Baptist seminaries and the Gospel Coalition were putting on really what amounted to a political event. The gospel was compromised at the event in Russell Moore's speech and you had, it became a left-leaning political event.

And so people were waking up at that point, some people saying, what's going on? Well, I think that happened a year earlier in Axe 29 in the church planning network. And this was the event that some people who were there at the time thought, wow, something's going, something's wrong.

And if you wanna see the whole discussion, go to the link in the info section. There's also a link to this particular montage. So this is, I think, like 20 minutes long, if I'm not mistaken, which the whole thing is over an hour.

So I couldn't really, in one episode, do an hour. Actually, this is only 14 minutes. So I've broken it down to 14 minutes. I'll fill in some gaps, but this is what was happening in Axe 29 in 2017. And it's still, to some extent, happening.

Some of the people on the stage here are still at, like Eric Mason and Thabiti Annabueli, I can't speak for the others, but they're still advocating the same ideology. And Axe 29 hasn't deviated from this.

My research is, and really another brother in Axe 29 has helped me locate these things. A lot of that has gone through 2020, but I'm gonna be looking at stuff through 2022 and just seeing what they're still putting out.

But through 2020, they were still putting out stuff that would be congruent with this. So this was the moment. This, I think, was the big moment for Axe 29 when people started realizing within the network something was wrong.

And it's clips from a panel discussion called Understanding Race and Reconciliation in the USA, which that was before 2020, the term everyone used in evangelicalism to promote ideas that would be adjacent to critical race theory or liberation theology, or just even just sort of leftist views on race and race relations.

It was framed in this racial reconciliation language. So without further ado, here is Matt Chandler opening up what you're about to hear.

And so what I thought we could do with our time, what I wanted to do with my time is just ask some brothers to come up here, and I just want them to talk to us. Because how they feel matters, and how they see matters.

And we are not, I'll say it, I know it, we are not in a position to understand. So we must try to seek it. I cannot, with the education I have, the background I have, and life experience I have, be an expert in this space.

But I can say that I'm not, and I can try to learn. I want you, as we have the conversation today, to kind of look for these things in your heart. If when our brothers are speaking, you begin to think in your mind how you could explain to them of why they shouldn't feel that way, or why they shouldn't think that, I would just flag that in your mind as an example of what I'm talking about.

Because I think when you go, oh, let me try to explain to them why they shouldn't, that's just bad pastoral ministry at any level.

Privilege is a real thing.

All right, so the way that Chandler frames this whole thing from the beginning is if you're in the audience, picture yourself as you're in the audience. This is, I believe, at a pastor's conference. So you're a pastor, you're sitting there for Acts 29, and you're being told you're inadequate.

You can't critique what you're about to hear. Don't try to contradict what you're about to hear if you have a concern. You need to just listen. Shut up and listen because you don't have the education or the background or the understanding.

And these people are the experts. And apparently, it's bad pastoral care to think that you can critique them. You need to just listen. And this is, you're gonna hear this sort of standpoint theory stuff come up later on where you can't critique someone who doesn't have your experience if they have a quote-unquote oppressed experience because of the nature of their, in this case, ethnicity, but it could be gender, it could be other factors.

All right, so that's how the whole thing is framed. And then you hear, you see here, I think this is Lacone Crump talking first here. And he is making the point, really, he's making a point about white privilege.

And so we will, let me back it up a little.

It's called privilege. When you can look back and say, well, we're Irish, here's our seal, here's our crest, here's our family, and you have 13 of the population that, for the most part, cannot do that, that's privilege.

And that's what it's like to be a black man in America.

So that's part of having white privilege is if you can trace your lineage, but because if you're black, you can't trace your lineage, then you have some kind of a privilege, some kind of an advantage.

And I only bring this up to give you highlights because there's a lot more that was said, but that's just one example of, in a sea of many examples that were given of this panel, saying that essentially they had it really rough.

And maybe some of them did, but they had it, it was really bad for them. Life was not great. It wasn't as great as it could be if they were white. And that's the first part of this whole panel. And it really does till the ground.

If you think of the analogy of trying to plant a seed, if you wanna plant a seed, you gotta water it, it needs sun, it needs to grow. But before you do any of that, you need to till the soil so that it's not hardened.

And I think what I've often seen this pattern where on the front end, there needs to be these emotional stories, there needs to be a playing on your emotions, specifically your emotion for empathy or sympathy, that this is horrible.

What can we do? That's the next question you generally have in your mind. What can we do to make sure that this right is wrong? There are many wrongs you can't right. These things happen over the course of hundreds of years.

But in this particular case, he's picking something that I thought, and there's many other things they pick, some of them serious, some of them though are kind of innocuous or they're kind of, they're just like, I mean, I know a lot of people who can't or they're not, some of them maybe not interested in, but there are many people who can't trace back.

In fact, my own family for a while, we couldn't trace back because General Sherman had burned down the churches where the family public records were kept during the Civil War. And so, am I supposed to look back on that and be very upset that that happened and hold it against people who maybe their lineage traces back to General Sherman?

They were Union soldiers, therefore I should be very angry at them because they prevented me from tracing my lineage back. You can see that this isn't obviously a unique thing to black people, but he universalizes it like this is all black people.

And there's other factors that go into this. It's not just slavery. In fact, now I can't speak for every individual case, but this is often the case that records were sometimes better kept here in the United States, even for slaves and those who are descendant from slaves, than they were for the descendants, than their ancestors in Africa, records weren't kept.

So the very fact that there are some records is because sometimes due to the fact that within Western civilization, it's important. There's more of a priority to keep records. The very fact that he gives you right here can be just as easily turned around.

The very issue he brings up at least can be turned around as a positive thing that look how white people, quote unquote, people from Europe have contributed to helping peoples who weren't keeping records to now start to keep better records.

That's ignored though. That's totally ignored. And it's just, you should feel bad, I guess, or you should just realize being white, you have such a privilege, such an advantage, and they don't have it.

And there's nothing to be proud of. If you're white in this particular circumstance, there's nothing that you've are made to feel that you've contributed to the situation when in fact, you could make a case that actually the opposite to some extent is true.

And that doesn't, by the way, that doesn't justify slavery. That doesn't justify, often that's the retort that I'll often get is if I point out some of these things, it's like, well, you're just justifying slavery.

No, no, I'm just not justifying it. I'm just saying that it's a result of interaction between European peoples and other peoples, including Africans that have led to some of the advances such as record keeping.

That shouldn't be controversial to say that, but I need to just play it because if I get nitpicky here, this podcast is gonna be forever.

Shaping of white people. And this is, I'm not endorsing it as, I'm not endorsing it, but it's my shaping. Is my mom telling me white people crazy, right? It's just regular white people crazy. And would teach me that because I was 50 pounds ago, a pretty good athlete and enjoyed worldly popularity and all that good stuff, was teaching me I couldn't trust white people.

And she would tell me if I go out, she knew I was going out to a party, say somebody was having a party at their lake house, which meant they were white because we don't own no lake houses. And so she would say, she would always say, boy, be careful.

And I was like, well, we're just gonna be at the lake house, you know, doing what we do. And she would say, no, you can't do what they do. She said, cause if something go wrong, they gonna go home, you going uptown and I can't come get you out of jail.

You can't do what they do. And, and, and.

Kind of wondering what they were doing, just curious, but he didn't really say.

And they can't be trusted. Now that I know that's a stereotype. I know that, I know that's broad and all that good stuff, but that was shaping and it would be proved over and over again that I couldn't, I couldn't trust and I couldn't do what white folk did.

The reason.

Okay, this is interesting because Thabiti Anambuili is making an admission that I think is very significant. I've, I've said this about, okay, so back up a little here. I've said before on the podcast that there's a combination of two things going on.

Often when you hear these, these stories, you have sometimes legitimate racism that has been experienced sometimes in the present, but oftentimes it's, it's in generations past. And I, I've, I've said, what I've said about that sometimes is that it's curious to me that those who hold the most resentment are those who experienced it sometimes the least.

And those who lived through, and I'm using the term racism, I should probably say ethnic partiality or something just because the left has made that word almost a word that has no definition. But what I mean by that is hatred of other people due to their ethnicity.

So, so people who actually did live through hatred against them and opposition and barriers, often they're not as jaded and upset as those today who have experienced them less and are currently experiencing them much less.

And that's a curious thing, but I've said it's a combination of that, some legitimate opposition because of their ethnicity and mistrust and all of that, and conditioning, and conditioning. That there's some, oftentimes I sense a conditioning because I'll meet people, even in college ministry, who it's like, they don't, their examples of suffering racism are like, well, a woman clutched her purse once when I walked in and I noticed it.

And I'm like thinking, let's just assume that's all true. Really? That's the thing that's causing you to have so much opposition to Donald Trump and a fear that you're gonna be lynched or something like, really that?

And it's because I think there's so many stories, there's so many, there's a whole industry that it seems like their end goal is to make black people and other racial minorities, and women to some extent, and LGBT folks, but in this case, black people feel insecure about themselves.

Like they are viewed by everyone else as less than, that they can't do the same things. They can't, they're going to be treated differently. That, and for people who haven't experienced those things, they live vicariously through the experiences of others.

That's the conditioning, or it's just suggested to them, the police are gonna do this. And so I've seen that just in my generation and the generation under me, where I'm like, well, like, well, you didn't go through, you're talking about, you're reaching back to slavery, which ended a long time ago to justify the hangups you have today with, and mistrust you have for white people.

That's an odd thing. Don't you think that's an odd thing? That's at least how I approach it. I'm not going back in time to find out what, okay, my mom's from Ohio, you're right, am I? There's a rivalry between Ohio and Michigan, and sometimes it gets pretty zesty.

And maybe you're saying, well, that's a stupid example, John. Well, maybe it is, maybe it is. But I got some diehard Ohio fans in my family. Like, I'm not reaching back to find mistrust for Michiganders.

I'm not reaching back to the Civil War times to try to find mistrust, let's say, for, I have soldiers on both sides of my family, but the Harris line comes from the South. Am I gonna have mistrust then for people in the North?

Do I have a mistrust for Anglicans because of what my Puritan forefathers, Presbyterian forefathers, went through? You see where I'm going with this. And you can do that, any group can really do that, depending on how far you wanna go back.

I mean, you could be Hebrew and say the Egyptians, you don't trust Egyptians because of thousands of years ago what they did to Hebrews. So it's not the way that everyone lives. And I'm not saying, I'm not trying to say that in all situations or all scenarios, it's not understandable.

There are certain scenarios where it becomes understandable, but it's, in our day and age, often it's a lot of conditioning contributes to this. And when Thabiti mentioned that, I just thought to myself, well, that's part of it.

There's some conditioning going on there. His, so he wasn't arrested at this, I don't know if it was a drinking party or what he was at, but he wasn't in trouble. He didn't get in trouble, but his mother telling him that it's gonna be different for him was what conditioned him to, and that's what he says, it was formative for him.

It formed the way he viewed white people in general. And later on, you're gonna hear them talk about these cultural lenses we all have. So what's interesting to me is Thabiti at the beginning says, I don't endorse this, but this is part of my shaping.

It's part of, and then later on they're saying, well, you have all these cultural lenses that you read even theology through. So if this is part of Thabiti's shaping, is this is part of his lenses, part of the way he views the world, part of the way he thinks of white people was these impressions, this conditioning he got from his rearing, then how does he transcend that?

How does he transcend that? What you heard from Matt Chandler at the beginning was, if you're, and he's talking to a room of mostly white people, that you don't have, you can't understand what you're about to hear.

You can't criticize it, because guess what? You're trapped, you're conditioned in your white quote-unquote culture, whatever that is. You're gonna hear that even said again later on in this. And my question is, Thabiti here admits that there's also a conditioning that he has.

How does he transcend that? If we're, are we just all trapped in our cultural boxes? Is that, because that's the impression you get after listening to this. You could very easily at least get that impression.

And I would like to suggest there's objective truth. There's ways of navigating these things. And even if you've been told things and you've experienced things, you can transcend those things and times have changed, if you haven't noticed as well, since Thabiti was a child.

And it, that doesn't have to color your whole perception. You can overcome those things. So, especially in the church, you would think. So anyway, let's keep going with it.

I got my doctorate degree, to be honest, why I did a hard master's degree and a doctorate degree was so that people in Christianity would at least respect what I have to say because of my degrees, which that's why I got them.

Not just to get a biblical education, but because I believe I have dignity and I wanted my theological education to communicate that dignity even before people met me. And sometimes I've been confronted with the fact that I am still a nigger with degrees.

And so, I'm working through a lot.

Okay, so this was a video published by Axe 29. If someone ever says that, you know, John Harris had a racial slur on his show, this might be the only time I've ever played something like that. And the only reason is just to show you, this is what Axe 29 has put out there, what Eric Mason is saying, and in no shape, way, or form, I endorsing that.

But the point, the deeper point here that Eric Mason is making is sad to me, that he got his degree because primarily, it sounds like, he wanted to impress white people. He wanted them to respect him.

He's trying to get respect. And to me, that is absolutely heartbreaking. And I've run into this, I run into this all the time with all kinds of different people. I have noticed though, sometimes with people who are conditioned to think of themselves more as victims, that that insecurity can just be, it can hamstring someone.

It is so sad. It is so grievous to me that there's people out there that feel the need to, he has to, he had to prove himself. He had to get these degrees or else, you know, people wouldn't listen to him.

And I, and you might say, some people who are woke be listening, you know, John, you never felt that way because you're white. People will always listen to you. And that's just not true at all. But I never, I always thought of degrees as education.

I wanted to gain a certain set of skills. I don't care what other people think. And it's, you know, does it give you some accolades? I guess. For me, it was, it's embarrassing to be honest with you where I got my degree from, my MDiv at least.

I, my heart just goes out to someone who feels that way. And I don't think it needs to be that way. You can just be secure in the truth and in your God and in who he made you to be and where he puts you.

And you don't, I don't think you should have to go get degrees or something to gain respect. The, if you think about the situation all these guys are in right now, various levels of education, and they're all on a panel in front of a bunch of white people who mostly are paying the bills for this denomination.

It's not a nomination, this church planning network. And, but yet who's platformed? Who's on the stage? Who's the one that's lecturing everyone else? And everyone else is told that they can't really critique it.

That, it's a little interesting to me. It's not because of their degrees, it's because of the color of their skin. It's because of their, and it's not even just because of the color of their skin, by the way, it's because of their, it's a combination of the color of their skin, their culture, and their commitment to activism within the church.

That's, that would be the reason these people are up here. That's why they're lecturing everyone else. So he has a position of authority. He has a position here of influence among a sea of white people.

And yet he's complaining that he had to get a degree or else people wouldn't respect him. There's people in there that I'm sure are more educated than Eric Mason. There's people on this panel that were less educated than Eric Mason.

It's a fantasy a little bit. What he's, he's getting a certain level of respect here. What it might be though, part of it could also be just wanting to, and I don't wanna impose this on Eric Mason, but this is just a thought I had about other people who have said similar things, that they, or the feeling they need to prove themselves.

And you don't have to be black, you don't have to be any color. But when people sometimes try to prove themselves, it's because they're trying to reinvent themselves or separate the weakness that they have, a weak version of themselves, something that they see as inadequate, something that they see as doesn't measure up.

They're trying to either get rid of that or separate the self that they're trying to build, this person with credentials and achievements from how they've been viewed or how they view themselves. So in other words, sometimes they're not trying to actually prove to other people that they're worth something, they're trying to prove it to themselves because there's an insecurity because for whatever reason, and in this case, maybe it's conditioning, I don't know, that they're told so often that they can't achieve or they're a victim or something.

And so it creates this need to try to point to something that shows I am, I'm in control, that I have achievement, I have worth, I have value, all of that. Keep in mind, this is a pastor's panel as we go through this.

This is supposed to be giving advice to pastors to how to navigate racial reconciliation in their congregation.

I'm gonna be done with white evangelicalism as a whole because for the few brothers like yourselves, there's been a thousand to tell me otherwise.

When you have

Okay, so in the context here, he's saying the panelist, and I believe that panelist is Lacone Crump again. What he's saying is that there's, for every person like Matt Chandler who's kind of wants to be woke, there's a thousand who are essentially racist in the left's meaning of that term.

And he just wants to be done with white evangelicalism. And so it's very discouraging, right? I mean, he's literally sitting in a room where there's a sea of white people, mostly. And he's on the stage being platformed and he's saying, I just wanna be done because the deck is so stacked against me.

I just, I hope you're seeing the irony of the situation when Eric Mason and this other panelist, when they're saying what they're saying, it's like, but do you notice the situation you're in right now?

It's odd, it's a little odd, but that's how he views white evangelicalism. It's just characterized by racism. I mean, that's a pretty bad ratio, right? There's only two people to every 1000 that aren't, I guess, racist in some way.

A Midwestern or mountain white man who communicates that relationships between blacks and whites were at their greatest during Jim Crow and slavery and nobody in evangelicalism rises up.

Yeah.

He's talking about Doug Wilson here and he's saying, his complaint is, man, he wrote something, it's the, I think 1996 book, if I'm not mistaken, I think it's called Slavery As It Was, something like that.

But Doug Wilson co-authored it with someone else. And there's a quote that people often take from that when they're trying to oppose Doug Wilson, where his co-author, it wasn't him, but his co-author, I guess, says that there was a mutual affection between master and slave, such as the world has never known in slavery, that this took place within the American context of slavery.

And then they go through and they try to, they demonstrate it. That's not the thesis of the book, as I recall, but that's the demonstration that they give is, I mean, they quote from a book called Time on the Cross by Stanley and Angerman.

They quote from Eugene Genovese, I believe, if I'm not mistaken. They quote from slave narratives. There's a lot of information that I think they draw upon to try to make that, the co-author, to make that charge.

So Eric Mason botches the quote, first of all, and because he's extending it to Jim Crow, which that wasn't part of it, and saying that race relations were never better. And that's not what was said. So he's already, this is a misrepresentation, but he's talking about Doug Wilson.

He's also calling him a Midwestern mountain man, which I think he's from Maryland and he lives in Idaho. So he's, but that's not, that's inconsequential. But anyways, he's using that as a Midwestern person or a mountain person.

They don't live among black people, I guess. That's the only reason I can think of for him bringing this up. So he must not know. But he grew up, I believe, in Maryland and he was in the Navy. So I doubt that that would be the case, that he wasn't around black people.

And to communicate that the historicity of well-known historians, the etymology, the ontological development of history is off, and to begin to say, nah, slavery wasn't bad as Negroes make it to be. Like, that's correct.

Like, that's correct.

That's, I mean, that's, I mean, I mean, that is, I mean, that is, I mean, I don't even know where to put it. You know what I'm saying? And then when you call yourself a Confederate, but then you see.

All right, let's stop here. So Eric Mason's critique is that Doug Wilson, that's who he's talking about here, went back, or no, he's innovative. He's contradicting all the historians and the sources and even what black people say about slavery experience.

And it just makes me wonder whether he's read black and tan, whether he, I mean, he's quoting Frederick Douglass. He's quoting slave narratives in his writings on the subject. In fact, if you go, I don't, I recommend this all the time.

I say, look, read primary sources. If you, I agree actually with something Eric Mason's saying here, which is go read the people who experienced slavery. Read what they said about it. We've read slave narratives on this podcast on multiple occasions.

And I've read negative experiences. I've read people who had experience that they didn't consider negative. But if you read the slave narratives, and I'm talking, and there's multiple slaves narratives, but the one specifically that the Works Project Administration did, the study they did in the 1940s where they found elderly slaves and interviewed tons of them, the vast majority of the accounts really don't have anything negative to say about slavery.

Does that justify slavery? No, I'm not saying it justifies slavery. I'm just saying that's, as a historian, you have to deal with that somehow. You have to interpret that. These are actual slaves that lived that life, and it's what they said about it.

And some of them would talk about missing their masters, looking forward to seeing them in heaven. I mean, this stuff really existed. You'd think today, if you just absorbed what Hollywood and the academia is telling you, that none of that ever happened.

But it's a little more complicated than the ideological interpretation that we're given today. It's not even worthy of the term interpretation. It's just, it's false. It's monolithic. It doesn't take into account all the various facts that would lead to a complete paradigm.

It's memory studies. It's revisionism. But yet the accusation is that Doug Wilson's the revisionist. So because I'm familiar with the sources to some extent, and I've had to read extensively on slave conditions and all of that for my history studies, my bachelor's, my master's, this isn't something that, this is something that I'm not taken in by.

Because I know the sources that are being drawn on to make the argument, which Eric Mason's kind of misrepresenting here. But I'd be curious what specifically, what historians, what arguments, or what, specifically what people are being contradicted here in innovative ways.

But this is, so this is an accusation Eric Mason is making against Doug Wilson.

Proclamation document that fundamentally and doctrinally, when you call yourself a confederate, you're basically fundamentally saying you want subjugation. And so nobody publicly in Christianity, except for Thabiti, which it came from him, but it should have come from the other side.

Like there needs to be, but like we used to say in the 80s, bum rush.

Okay, here's what he's saying. I'm familiar with the situation to some extent, at least. Thabiti and Abouille and Doug Wilson had it out online. And I think, so I'm not sure if he's referring solely to that or to a private confrontation, but there is definitely some kind of a confrontation there.

And Doug and Thabiti met, I think Don Piper kind of facilitated whatever the meeting was. And Doug Wilson has referred to himself as people accuse him of being a neo-confederate. And Doug Wilson says, I'm more of a paleo-confederate.

There's a video online of it. And my point in bringing all this up is not to defend Doug Wilson on all this stuff. It's to clarify and correct and set the record straight because Eric Mason's attacks are at best sloppy.

And at worst, there's lies in them. It's so inaccurate. So Wilson specifically says that it's because he believed that the Confederacy had a constitutional point. What would that be? Well, that's secession.

That's why he's used that term. Well, Eric Mason is now saying that it's connected to really racially insensitive views that Doug Wilson has. And that, and he's about to make the point that it's up to white people to keep Doug Wilson in check, to confront Doug Wilson, as if that hasn't happened, right?

There's tons of white people who have done this. But Eric Mason makes out like, white people wouldn't actually go after Doug Wilson, which to me is funny, because Wilson's had a lot of white people go after him.

And it was up to Thabiti and Abuele to confront him. And that shouldn't be. So, and again, this is an audience of white people that basically you gotta police yourself. You gotta police these bad boys, Doug Wilson being one of them.

Like, that means rush to the forefront. Like, we need whites who get it to like say, like you gotta, like, cause for me, I'm battling apologetics in my neighborhood because they view Christianity as apathetic towards race.

That's it.

Why do they view it? Why do they view it that way? That's the question I have. Is it because they've endured slavery? Is it because they, why is it that they view that way? Is there conditioning involved?

Is there a narrative about Christians that isn't fully accurate? Doesn't mean that Christians can't do bad things and Christians have done bad things and people who have done bad things who call themselves Christians who aren't.

Doesn't mean that doesn't happen. But there's a reason that historically in this country, black people have tended to identify more as Christian. Why is that? Have you thought about it? Have you wondered why did that present state of affairs come to be that black people, even people who their lives don't seem to look like they're Christian, but they still are culturally Christian?

If it's such a racist religion, if it's so oppressive to minorities, if it's white supremacist, if that's what Christianity is, when did that idea start taking place? It couldn't have been a long time ago.