AD Discussing Some Things with Native Speaks

Hanging out here and uh at the office and uh one brother in particular has been dropping diss records like Omarosa and Little Wayne mixtapes in 2005. So uh anyways uh our brother here had some some troubles um with some of the things that he was hearing and uh.

Introductions and Shared Christian Convictions

Um so I I think before we get into that though it'd be awesome just to kind of hear a little bit about maybe a couple minutes of who you are.

What you do and that sort of thing. Yeah no that's that's cool and I just want to make sure everybody knows because you know there are some people that follow me and like my videos and stuff that that I don't share their perspective on guys like you.

You guys I don't consider you guys my enemies you know I don't consider you guys uh presenting a false gospel or or non-christians and I know that there are some people out there that say that and I don't get that.

So I want that to be clear but but basically I've been talking about this stuff you know probably since probably November of last year and uh you know I I got into it. I I'm a I'm a reformed christian.

I pastor a very small church in Vermont. I got into it primarily after the election of Donald Trump. I didn't vote for Trump. I I didn't recommend anyone vote for Trump but but after Trump got elected uh to me it seemed like there was an imbalance uh in a lot of people's rhetoric and I and I'm not saying that that was wrong or right but I I certainly thought that it was uh coming from a lot of people that I didn't expect to hear it from.

In fact some of my mentors people that I I really respect a lot were saying some pretty crazy things about just kind of run-of-the-mill christians who who did happen to vote for Trump and uh that's how I got into this whole thing and I didn't start commenting on YouTube until like I said November and uh things kind of took off after that MLK conference that the ERLC did um that's that's what I guess.

That's how I got to today.

Yeah my name is uh KB I am an artist and um a I'm a lay leader in my church um I enjoy having conversations to you know help God's people think critically about the world and themselves uh in the scripture um and uh so David Speaks is a podcast that has uh just kind of come on the scene a few months ago that I've been a part of helping to start not necessarily a regular contributor but I do want to contribute to it more and help develop it into more things.

But my conviction is pretty uh pretty clear in my mind it's that the gospel would permeate every single aspect of society that that people would hear the gospel believe the gospel be challenged by the gospel um that the Lord Jesus Christ and his supremacy would uh would rule the nations as he does because he is now.

So um that that'd be realized everywhere is my life goal. And and that's what I love to do. Just a little bit about myself right. Uh same here man name's Amin Hudson also um a writer uh right for TGC right for the witness um also a podcast host um just really love love love the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I'm very interested in how the Bible uh intersects with culture and uh it's all kind of aspects of culture I don't just write about uh things that are theological like theologically centered but I also write about music um things of that nature um I speak on occasion as well uh and yeah man I just want to see the gospel of Jesus Christ just reign uh in the hearts of man and um and I definitely want to help the world be able to see how things that they interact with every day actually uh intersect with the truth of the Bible God's truth even if they don't know it.

Yeah um it's one of my passions. So um.

Yes a little bit by myself. So. So what you guys are saying is you are heretics right. Some people. No man. No listen honestly I could affirm everything you're saying. I I say hearty amen to that. And your guys's channel is pretty cool man.

I don't I think I subscribed like a month ago maybe maybe a little less.

But it's a good channel. I like it. Yeah we just you know one of the things that and whether or not this will I'm sorry I'm eating sunflower seeds but um no problem whether or not um this sort of interacts with the schedule of what y 'all are doing in native speaks is one thing but I think it's just cool to be able to hang out sometimes and talk to people who follow um and and even give individuals uh space to to say I don't agree.

Um that's I have certainly I've been a proponent of that for a very long time. You know individuals um um you know kind of get shy away from that but I think that it's for uh the good in certain situations.

And I think this conversation will prove whether or not it's fruitful or not. We'll see where it goes. But in some situations that could be helpful um you know conversate uh helpful um sort of resolution that comes out these conversations.

So we we hang it out. So my brother you um the first I did see I did see one of your response videos in in full it was the one where you sort of singled out the reparations. Sure operation comment that we made you mind because just to be honest with you brother I was I was a little I was a little confused.

Sure um that in in the things that you were saying kind of seemed like you were you know saying that you believe that the concept was biblical but you assumed that we were talking about black people getting paid back for from slavery.

Sure even though I had said that I that's not what I was saying four times but because I kept talking about the principle of reparation and how we approach it that felt like enough for you to say nah he's trying to get paid from white people so um so why don't you uh maybe clear of some of the things that we found that I found I mean that was one of the things that was kind of contradictory in the message.

Right. Hey x is not true. They're not saying that. I don't think he's saying that. Ah nah I think he's saying that he actually is.

Right right no I hear you. I can understand I can understand being confused because I was actually confused too. Uh so so maybe that's where it started but um.

You seem like you understood exactly what I was saying which happened to be what I was not saying because I wasn't saying that.

Right you said it four times I remember. Yeah. So so so I think that you guys are. Well I'll speak to you Kate because you're the one who said it. But I think that you're right to say that restitution is a biblical concept there's just no question about it.

You cannot read the bible without understanding what restitution is. It's in the old testament and it's in the new testament. And you both brought up Zacchaeus he he he was applying the biblical principle of restitution when he uh when he repented from his sins.

So there's no question about that. Um now the all I was saying was. And this is where the confusion. I believe you that you're not talking about uh reparations. As in you guys and maybe me. I don't know if I get the I get the cash too but you guys getting paid by white people you know what I mean.

I don't think that I believe you that you weren't saying that but. But maybe you should take that video down.

Then because you certainly said the exact opposite in that video.

No no I'm not I'm not going to take my video down but actually in the video in the video I actually did say that. I believe you. But when most people talk about reparations they're talking about um people that were descendants of slaves getting a payment from the government because the government allowed this slavery to happen right.

And so the government almost owes restitution. And so my whole thing about restitution is that the the bible doesn't allow for that kind of a restitution. So restitution is a biblical principle but we can't just say whatever we feel like restitution is that's what it is.

The bible actually lays it out pretty clear. Well brother do you think it's.

Fair for you to to to say I know that's not what you were saying my brother. Um because you you probably think that be unbiblical to say that we should do that. Would it be unfair for you to sort of use that as a launch pad to talk about uh the type of reparations that you don't agree with because it it seemed like because there was a point in the video when you said I know you're saying you're not saying that but you are saying what you what you said.

Yeah you think that if in your heart you're like I know these brothers aren't there does it make this for me to then go on a 15 minute. I don't know how long the video was tangent or we're not gonna call it tangent but uh sort of exposition on a point that they weren't.

Making. Yeah well I I think it could be uh if if the presentation is is confusing as yours was but we can clear this up right now. When you were making the case for biblical restitution what's the case that you were making that could apply to today.

Well the point that I said in the video was that our attitude towards the concept of reparation sure i .e restitution sure not be so co-opted by those we disagree with sure we can't appreciate the concept so that that's literally what I said in the video or the principle because remember he said I think one of the things that he said is that reparations or the idea of it cannot be an allergy for us.

Where we were saying and that was him uh getting across the principle and us not just him but us getting across the principle that when we're talking about restitution or reparation um that that cannot be something that we scoff at or that we you know that that that we kind of huff and puff over because people want to conflate they want to conflate the terminology with us thinking that we just want the government to pay back a a bunch of people some money right.

Um I think that what we were talking about was Christians not having a problem with the principle of of restitution. And uh seems like happened though is that that it was taken to say that we were saying that the government should pay back black people reparations.

So so I think that it gets it gets. The the thing for me is that I know that you think that it's confusing but the way that it gets presented to the public in your video is not in a way in which it seems like you think it's confusing kind of seems like you understand exactly you you know what we're saying and you're telling the public this is what they're saying this is the absolute and then you build a case around it or they they might be saying this.

So that's what when you kind of look at how when you kind of look at how people responded to it that's literally what they thought that you were saying. That we were saying.

And do you do you realize that that there are people that uh would call themselves conservative reform christians that actually do want reparations as I've described them.

I would you said do I realize that there are people out there that want yeah.

There are people that that. Yeah okay yeah. I definitely recognize that. Okay. Cool. No fair enough. So so then here's what I'll say about about my.

Video. Go ahead. I'm sorry brother. Go ahead and.

Respond no no go ahead I mean let me let me I was.

Gonna say that in in all honesty in that.

I don't know many sure who make you know I do.

I just discovered one person yesterday. Who who. I have respect for sure a sister of mine um who who's you know a kingdom citizen with us. Who who makes a a nuanced argument around that but. But she'd be the first person that I've heard.

But go ahead maybe you can even name some of those.

People so that. So then what I'll say then is this so so um my video. My video was confusing. So here's here's what I'll say about this. You are absolutely correct the principle of restitution or if you want to call it reparations though.

I think that confuses the issue. I think that that's a good principle. Um you guys are not making the argument for the government paying uh people who are descendants of slaves that's great because that's unbiblical and so the people who are making that argument shouldn't make those arguments for the reasons I cited in the video.

So I'm willing to say that. Okay. Yeah yeah. The conservative reform people that you mentioned I want to take their names down.

Yeah. So uh I'm not going to do that on air but I'll I'll message them to you in Facebook. Does that sound good. Cool sir. Great. That's cool. Yeah. Because I don't want this to turn into. Uh you know.

Let's let's chat about people.

Behind their back kind of thing because I went through some of your pages I mean some of your your videos and you call people's names out a lot. That's right Chandler you know. Oh yeah yeah Wheely you know.

So on and so forth seems like you're.

Comfortable. You know. I am I am but. But here's the thing. KB. Here's the difference. So um for the most part and this is not a hard and fast rule but I'll only do that with blue check marks or people who are propped up by blue check marks.

Does that make sense. So. Would you at least agree. There's not.

A lot of blue check mark people who are reformed and I guess uh at least socially conservative who would fit the fit the narrative.

That you talked about in your video. Um I would say that there's probably probably the majority of the big time leaders. Yeah I would say that they they have not come out and said that they're in favor of reparations I think.

That's true. So do. Does it. Does it it all make sense that why some people may be making the ghost argument. And and let me let me just before you jump on that brother let me just say there are always exceptions.

Of course there's no scenario that we can talk about where there isn't exceptions. But often what happens sometimes brothers that it feels is that it felt it feels as though excuse me sunflower seed it feels as though the risk I'm sorry.

Go ahead the lord is intervening. It feels as though that sometimes the reaction um is actually not matching the argument that the other side I hate to use that language but just for sake of argument it doesn't.

You're not actually reacting to the argument that the other side is making but instead sort of running off with made something that is maybe peripheral or something that is is a misrepresentation or something that.

Uh that's not always the case but but sometimes we hear that because it seems like we're not actually we're not actually engaging with each other to understand each other we're with each other to to critique or to respond.

And I and I think that the the burden of understanding is what I I want to see God's people capture around these issues. Yeah if we're going to line up on this is what I was trying to say in our video.

Is that of course we're going to have different we're going to land different places on the policy. But we we can't disagree with the principle in our hearts for us to be able to repent to one another.

The concept of repair I mean you just said here a second ago you feel like the word reparation kind of messes up or I don't want to misquote you but.

It's it's confusing right. Confusing word yet.

The word reparation is in the bible the the actual word you know and and so you have people who are using it who say they love Jesus. Perhaps they mean something biblical by it and I obviously do want to see some.

I just want to see more of an assumption.

Towards that direction go ahead. Yeah perhaps they do and I think you're right but I gotta I gotta be honest with you I think that that burden for for understanding falls on both the speaker and also the listener.

So I think you're right uh that that a guy like me has an obligation to brothers in christ to try to see them in a positive light to try to believe all things things like that. And uh and that's true and that's true but but reparations is a perfect example because if I if I got on youtube tomorrow and I said you know what I talked to the brothers last night and I gotta be honest for with you I'm for reparations and that's what I said.

Right. Um that would be very confusing to people because you're right the word is in the scripture and I think it's a synonym with restitution. I think I think these are synonyms um and so and so if I were to if I were to use the word reparations instead of restitution but what I meant was biblical restitution that would confuse many people and part of that confusion would be on me and so the blue check marks that I'm talking about like these guys like Chandler these guys like uh Sabini's not a check mark he should be but I think he I think he I don't think he is but these these leaders right.

A lot of their language is confusing and it's vague and so and so and I and I know that a lot of people don't agree with that but but but I think I think it is I think it's self-evidently vague and so um without clarifications that say hey you know I don't actually mean this.

Um it's I think it's irresponsible and I think that the burden for understanding on their side is is not being met and so the confusion is understandable in many ways. Obviously I'm defending myself there but.

Language, Labels, and the Meaning of Social Justice

Yeah well I would certainly say that that there are a lot of people who who don't share that confusion though I understand there are probably people gonna line up on both sides of this but I think a lot of people will walk away from conversations about various um loaded terms and will instead of because I'm saying like my confusion is not a invitation to slander because if I'm confused if I you said something I don't understand that I thought was off off and I just begin to react to that and begin spreading that to other people and it wasn't what I meant.

That confusion has not sanitized your slandering. You know I'm saying because it's it's untrue now if you're saying I'm not sure if that's what he meant if he was saying this then that's a problem and I and I think that that's a good word for us all to hear to be careful with each other's words because we're going to give an account for what we say.

So I want to be careful with you but at the same time I don't just get the if my confusion doesn't give me the liberty to basically say whatever I want to say.

Well well of course not but but at the same time you have to understand that. So I think we're talking about about my video right now. And and and are. Let me ask you this. Are you saying that I slandered you in that.

Video I was making a no no no I'm not I'm saying the video but if somebody.

But somebody might say that and and I and I've had interactions with people that they say I'm slandering them um.

But but here's the thing though did you in that video responded to. Well I do feel like your video with all brother with with with all due respect. I do feel like you had some contradictory. It was like he's not sure but he is saying this uh and it's in.

And my qualifications and my explanations were good enough. But I and I also feel like because you you were just you're responding to it in them. And listen you got the right. Do whatever you want to do brother to respond everything you want to do.

I'm not mad at it at all I'm just sure sure one of the characteristics of of dealing with an issue is taking it in context actually sitting with it. But when you're sort of taking it blow by blow you're just only reacting.

And I think that led to some misunderstandings that went into.

Some straw man. So that's what I think. Honestly though we don't we don't have to talk about that so much. But but I did watch the whole video before I responded. But but the point is well at least that section anyway.

Um. But the point though is though someone might say okay well I just uh ad just slandered kb because kb said he doesn't believe this but he's saying he does. And actually in the video I mean again you said it four times that I'm not saying that.

And I probably said it four times I believe you that you're not saying this but. And then I went into my thing so so so yeah that was that was mostly a joke though you know what I mean. So you cleared that I I can't I can't I can't.

You have to understand that I can't contradict myself in the space of two sentences right. You literally just said just now you were.

Like I didn't watch I said you didn't watch the whole video. You were like I.

Actually did watch the whole video. Well no I actually right that I I that's a clarification. I. I mean if we're not gonna if you're not gonna if you're not. Hold on hold on if we're not gonna. Allow for clarifications of misspeaking.

I mean we can't really even talk. Right. No no.

No I'm not trying to be petty brother I'm just saying that I'm I'm just sort.

Of saying yeah but the point is though but the point is though that I I I didn't say that you believed in reparations. It was I was I was cracking a joke kind of like kind of like the scriptures where it says answer the fool don't answer the fool in the space of two sentences.

It's obviously not a contradiction. And it's supposed to be sort of funny right. Um but anyway that being said so someone could say well well well 80 slandered KB. And really I didn't. It's a misunderstanding.

So part of that misunderstanding is on my part because it was confusing the way I said it and so you know I have to own that I have to own that video and I said yeah that was a confusing thing that I said let me explain.

I was trying to joke. KB said he doesn't believe in reparations. I believe him. But here's the case against reparations that you know he he seems to be making that it's a biblical concept which it is a biblical concept.

But we have to stop short of going all the way right. I I think I think you're on the same.

Page brother and I and I think so I you know I just for the sake of being petty. For being petty. I don't want to be petty brother that's the last right I want to be. Um but uh if you and if you clarify yourself and god bless you why don't we move on to some of the other things.

Um uh that we kind of discuss.

And by the way I I joke around a lot and I say things I don't actually believe in but I I think that people know their joke. I think people know that they're jokes but maybe they don't and I gotta take a good look in the mirror right.

Yeah it's it's I think that with certain people they can't know a lot of people can't tell jokes. And and and not only that but because of the the the atmosphere of the internet and trolls um a lot of jokes are just like ways to say something that you really actually mean but making it seem like a joke.

So um yeah I think that some people take your stuff like that. Yeah unfortunately. Um. So do you do you have any other questions that that you would like to bring to the table. You want us to ask a question.

No I mean uh it's your show you know you guys can can run the show and if if a question comes up I will not hesitate to ask.

Okay um it to me seems like the language thing was a big thing in the conversation. Yeah so. Can you define a social justice.

Warrior sort of. Uh not really I mean it's not it's not this is not really like a Webster dictionary kind of thing but but so you you need to know it because you.

Talk about it a lot so you gotta have some sort of.

Yeah oh yeah. No I can define it but it's not going to be precise. So here here's the thing. So I use this word and I know let me just say this I know it's a risk every time I use the word right. Why why do you think it's a risk.

I think it's a risk because um it is a pejorative and I am trying to um I'm trying to uh uh not label but but sort of label. Yeah I mean I'm trying to to group a certain group of beliefs into that label.

And essentially what I would say is just it's an advocate for social justice. Uh uh. And and usually it's a social media advocate or someone who's uh very boisterous online about it so it's not like an everyday person.

Uh that's that's how I would define it. But uh again this is not we're not talking science here.

Like an over advocate you're not saying it's an advocate at all but you're saying like correct someone who is like their whole identity is around advocating for such a social.

Issue right. And so I'll use the word social justice warrior. I'll also use the word social justice advocate and I use them differently. So someone who advocates for social justice but isn't um completely you know it is their it is their twitter feed.

You know what I mean like it's not. There's nothing else there right. Um you know that all they talk about so.

Someone's whose main conversation is about.

Social justice right. And and and it usually is going to take a certain style of communication to again. They're fuzzy lines here so I I mean I'm not. I'll admit that that's why I say it's.

Risky. Yeah I think that it's risky because well the reason that I think that the line is fuzzy is because there's not really an objective working definition of what a social that's true is it varies place to place but I think that is but I also think that it's it's risky because you are doing the same thing that you've accused us of with language because a lot of the people that I know that use social justice warrior are not christians like you.

They're they're hardcore right wing religion. Uh not religious but hardcore right wing fanatics. They're they're white nationalists. They're they're they're trolls online that that that are just trying to um stir the pot is just or or just trying to be uh a provocative or provocative.

So so when you talk about language I think that you have to apply that to yourself and use it the pejorative term social justice warrior because I don't think that that's a language that we came up with out of the church and you have the world using that to describe people that they would consider on the left or or liberals that they would consider or neo-marxists that they would consider our social justice warriors.

So if you're talking about the language thing it also has to apply to your vocabulary as well. You know what I mean that's fair that's. That's why I think that it's it's confusing because when I hear christians say it I'm like do you mean it the way that I see all of these internet trolls on twitter use it or because if you do then I think I have a problem if you're my brother in christ and that's and that's in the way that that you're using it as a pejorative is the same way that they're using it as a pejorative.

Sure. Sure we're talking about the language. I think it has to go both sides depending on what you believe about the language. Yeah it's not just about the.

Language though it's also about the ideology. I think you'd agree right.

But but that's why you have a problem with our language is because you think that our language communicates a certain ideology if it's not defined. So if social justice warrior pejorative language is used without being able to clarify the ideology then we are going to think of it the same way that we think of seeing everybody else's.

And and let me just add one more thing to that uh brother robes I I for maybe for your for for your audience um is uh so for some people um who aren't really into social medias you know I'm saying that on the tweeters and the facebooks and all that stuff when they hear okay so you're not familiar with social justice justice warrior as a as a ideology you're not familiar with it.

Um and you kind of hear that term well you think social you think society you think justice you think you know that which you know sort of flows from the heart of god for fairness. And then you hear warrior you think someone who fights.

And if you're not aware of the loadedness of that phrase you would you would think that it's a positive term you know what I mean uh oh yeah yeah there's not a pejorative so someone has explained to you you know hey which should be explained I'm not saying that that I'm not fighting that we use that word I need to say that five times I say it five times but I'm just saying that it's helpful to have working definition so if working definitions so we can know what what is meant because without that then folks will be like of course I'm a social justice warrior I mean I'm in society I want justice and I'm I'm also a prayer warrior and I'm also an evangelism warrior I mean that's who I am.

So you folks are having conversation we're having conversations that a lot of people are outside of and therefore need so having precise definitions that you can call on so we can be like boom that's what it is now you you said social justice warriors as an advocate for social justice.

But of course that that's not enough you you want to say it's somebody that is that's extra. Yeah I don't that's to me that's very ambiguous as to what extra me let me give you the because it's relative I googled a dictionary I'm sorry I mean no no I was just saying that I think that that is relative because what is extra what's not extra who determines.

What. Oh it's totally it's totally relative but that's why it's like calling someone a liberal or a conservative.

Yeah I agree with that. So I that's why it's it's confusing to me because when it's said to your audience it could mean anything to them. Like I don't I don't know what that would that would that. And they can take you to mean anything if you're not clearly defining what you're talking about.

Yeah. And then what is your definition of extra. How do we quantify that. Like so I think that I think that again. I say this because we're talking about language. And if we're talking about language you cannot be surprised when people hear you use those things and then you and then take your argument somewhere that you don't want them.

And then you say listen oh I'm not surprised about that. Yeah I'm also not. I'm also not accountable for that. I'm sorry I'm also not accountable. But we're.

Accountable for the words that we use. Uh like uh when it comes to that too. Because I mean you kind of said that in your video about our language. So in the length when you. So the argument that I just gave you about your language is the argument that you gave us in a video about right language right.

So it seems like it doesn't apply to you but applies to us.

No you know. Yeah no yeah I'm sorry brother so as far as the like sorry get a little feedback there. Anyway as far as the language is concerned um you know you you know you're right. If the ideology is not defined it might be difficult for me to hold anybody accountable for certain beliefs.

But off but very very often it is fleshed out a little bit. It's not obviously precisely defined. I mean uh we don't go around defining every single word we use every single time we use it. Obviously right.

But but for example like um you know you'll hear somebody I don't know who let's talk maybe Matt Chandler for example. He he'll preach a sermon about white privilege. Right. Right. And so I I cannot hold him accountable for every single use of white privilege.

Like the other day I saw uh some lunatic talk about pumpkin spice being an example of white privilege right. Um and that's that's that's lunacy. Obviously I can't hold I can't hold Matt Chandler accountable for that kind of stuff.

But what I can hold him accountable is for what he says in his in his sermon about what white privilege is and why it's a problem. And things like that. And so very often the ideology behind the word is fleshed out a bit.

I'm not going to say it's totally defined but it's fleshed out a little bit. And so I can hold people accountable for that. Right. Yes. And they can hold you accountable as well. So so right if I if I flesh out my ideology correct.

Right. So I guess in.

I'm sorry. Go ahead. No I and so. Social justice warrior. That's a that's a.

Negative term right. That's a thumbs down in my opinion it is. Are you going to are.

You going to stick with the an advocate for social justice and who talks about.

Social justice a lot is that is that. So so so. I I'm really not sure you really want me to like come up with a definition that I will absolutely stick to. I'm not going to do that on the fly with you.

I I don't know how to define it.