MEGAN BASHAM, HOST: Good morning!
Critical race theory and intersectionality. A lot of Christians have been debating these topics. We’ll explore what they mean and why this discussion matters.
CHANDLER: I have grown up with this sort of invisible bag of privilege that a lot of other brothers and sisters don’t have.
EICHER: A special Culture Friday ahead today: we begin with a review of a documentary film called “By What Standard,” then we will follow that up with a conversation with theologian, podcaster, and seminary president Albert Mohler.
And your listener feedback.
BASHAM: It’s Friday, January 31st. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Megan Basham.
EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!
BASHAM: Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news.
KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: WHO declares coronavirus a global health emergency » The World Health Organization on Thursday declared the new coronavirus a global health emergency.
That comes as China has raised the death toll from the virus to 170. It has now infected more people in China than were sickened there during the SARS outbreak of 2002 and 2003.
But WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus said that’s not the reason for the declaration.
GHEBREYESUS: Our greatest concern is deportation, for the virus to spread to countries with weaker health systems.
The virus has now spread from person to person in several countries, including Germany, Japan, Canada, and now the United States.
The husband of an Illinois woman with the virus also contracted it.
But Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said right now, there is still no cause for alarm.
AZAR: While this is a potentially serious public health threat, it does not at this time pose a risk to the American public. We have to be balanced in our approach. We will take all public health measures necessary to protect the American public.
Meantime, Russia is closing its 2,600-mile border with China. The Russian government has not confirmed any cases of the virus.
U.K. officially splits from EU tonight » It is a historic day in Britain as Brexit has finally arrived.
The U.K. officially splits from the European Union at 11 p.m. local time.
Brexiteers will celebrate in London tonight. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he will try to mark the occasion in a way that is respectful of everyone’s feelings.
JOHNSON: It is a great moment for our country. It’s a moment of hope and opportunity, but it is also, I think, a moment for us to come together in a spirit of confidence.
Johnson will address that nation live on his Facebook page at 10 p.m. local time.
Not much will change immediately. February 1st marks the start of a transition period until the end of the year. During that time, Britain will continue to follow EU rules and pay into its coffers. Business will carry on as usual while the two sides negotiate a new relationship on trade, security, and other issues.
Senate Q&A wraps up in impeachment trial, showdown on witnesses next » Senators wrapped up a two-day question-and-answer session Thursday in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
Senators submitted the questions in writing, but House impeachment managers and defense attorneys answered them out loud.
Democratic Congressman Hakeem Jeffries told senators that President Trump solicited foreign interference in a U.S. election.
JEFFRIES: It is wrong. It is corrupt. It is an abuse of power. It is impeachable, and it should lead to the removal of President Donald John Trump.
But White House counsel Pat Cipollone said House Democrats have shown nothing to justify taking President Trump’s fate out of the hands of voters.
CIPOLLONE: They don’t talk about the horrible consequences to our country of doing that. But they would be terrible. They would tear us apart for generations, and the American people wouldn’t accept it.
Now comes the long anticipated showdown over whether to call additional witnesses. Democrats have to persuade four Republican senators to break rank and vote for new witnesses. If that effort fails, the GOP majority will move to vote on a final verdict.
South Dakota House passes sex change limits » A bill that would protect minors from sex change surgeries is headed to the South Dakota Senate. The state’s House of Representatives passed the Vulnerable Child Protection Act by a vote of 46-23 on Wednesday.
Republican Representative Fred Deutsch said the bill protects children under age 16 from “being chemically castrated, sterilized, and surgically mutilated.” The bill does make an exception for children diagnosed with medically verified genetic disorders of sexual development.
The bill is likely to pass in the state Senate, but GOP Governor Kristi Noem has not yet said whether she’ll sign it into law.
Virginia Senate votes to lift protections for the unborn » Democratic Virginia Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax broke a tie in the state Senate this week to repeal legal protections for the unborn. WORLD Radio’s Kristen Flavin has that story.
KRISTEN FLAVIN, REPORTER: Governor Ralph Northam, also a Democrat, is expected to sign the controversial measure into law.
Senate Bill 733 undoes many of the state’s protections for unborn babies, including a requirement that only licensed physicians can perform abortions.
It also allows facilities to carry out abortions without offering an ultrasound or giving mothers certain information 24 hours in advance. The House of Delegates passed a twin bill earlier this week.
Both chambers moved from Republican to Democratic control this month.
Reporting for WORLD Radio, I’m Kristen Flavin.
COVINGTON: Mississippi inmate’s death the 13th since late December » Thirteen state inmates have now died in Mississippi prisons since late December. The most recent death occurred Tuesday night. Twenty-eight-year-old Limarion Reaves collapsed at the Kemper-Neshoba Regional Correctional Facility. Reaves was taken to a local hospital, where he died.
Most of the other deaths occurred at the Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman. Many of those happened amid outbursts of violence.
Newly elected Governor Tate Reeves has vowed to shut down parts of the dilapidated prison after touring it last week. He said Monday “We will do better. We will right the wrongs of the past, and we will do everything in our power to protect the dignity of every Mississippi life.”
I’m Kent Covington. Straight ahead: a review of the Founders Ministries documentary By What Standard?
Plus, your listener feedback.
This is The World and Everything in It.
MEGAN BASHAM: It’s Friday, the 31st of January, 2020. Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Megan Basham.
NICK EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. A special Culture Friday today, in which we’ll do things a little bit out of order. So I’ll explain.
Typically, we have our guest and then we go to Megan’s review. But today, we’re reversing the order, with the review coming first, because the review sets the table for our Culture Friday guest, and that special guest today will be Albert Mohler, the president of Southern Seminary.
BASHAM: Right. There’s a major controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention over Resolution 9. This is the resolution from last year that embraced critical race theory and intersectionality as “analytical tools [that] can aid in evaluating a variety of human experiences.”
The SBC defined critical race theory as a tool to explain how race has and continues to function in society, and intersectionality as the study of how different personal characteristics overlap and inform one’s experience.
EICHER: It is extremely controversial, and the SBC is the largest protestant denomination in the country, so it’s a major cultural topic, and this week’s review is of a documentary that is highly critical of Resolution 9.
BASHAM: Yes, the documentary asks, are critical race theory and intersectionality the kind of “hollow and deceptive philosophies which depend on human tradition” that Colossians 2 warns us about? Or are they useful secular tools by which we can explain Biblical principles? Something like Paul quoting pagan teachers to reason with the Epicureans in Acts 17?
All this is at the heart of a fraught debate taking place among Southern Baptists and those who love them.It’s also the subject of a new documentary from Founders Ministries, By What Standard?
CLIP: And so how do you repent of your individual racism? If you have been or exercised a racist attitude or action toward a person and you’re convicted of that sin and you turn away from your sin of partiality well then you’re going to make things right with that individual. How do we repent from systemic racism? There is no solution to systemic racism except for political revolution. It’s got to be a political answer. Well we’re way beyond the boundaries of Scripture now.
The film begins with the vote on a controversial resolution at the 2019 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention. Resolution Nine passed, so the SBC adopted critical race theory and intersectionality as “analytical tools [that] can aid in evaluating a variety of human experiences.”
In the film’s first moments, we see pastor and president of Founders Ministries, Tom Ascol, slump in defeat outside the convention hall.
CLIP: I got people all over the country texting me asking, what happened? Can I talk to you? “What happened? What happened? What happened—We’ve been played. We’ve been played.
From there, the film fills in some context for what critical race theory and intersectionality are, arguing all Christians should mourn their introduction into the Southern Baptist toolbox.
CLIP: The basic concept of intersectionality is that all oppression is the same. So, homophobia is the same as racism is the same as sexism is the same as Islamophobia is the same as transphobia and so on. All of these things are connected and, by the way, it’s also worth noting that if you go to the Santa Barbara Integrated School District they’ve got a handout that shows oppressors and oppressed and basically one of the things that they list is Christianity as an oppressor. So you should be aware that that’s where intersectionality does lead.
Ascol told me he and his team originally intended to produce a response to a well-known PBS documentary about feminism in the SBC. But in their last half hour of shooting, Resolution Nine came to the floor. He says it ironically illustrated the Founders’ thesis that forces within the church are using legitimate dialogue about racial division and sexual abuse to move it in a progressive direction.
As the film demonstrates, critical race theory and intersectionality touch on the most hotly contested topics in our culture. That includes white privilege, LGBT identity, and women in the pulpit. Their adoption by a denomination so traditionally minded as the SBC proves all Christians need to grapple with what the Bible says on these matters and how it asks us to respond.
CLIP: If, in fact, you can push this into the Southern Baptists, who by popular stereotype are practically troglodytes because they have held to traditional marriage and they’re homophobic and on and on and on. And by the way, by reputation as well in the general public of being racist, none of which I think is entirely accurate, certainly, but this is their reputation. If you can get that denomination to change, you’ve got everybody.
The film includes plenty of engaging interviews with theologians and academics. But less time on opinions and more time investigating what happened behind the scenes with Resolution Nine would have better served viewers.
How did a resolution that went into committee with language expressly condemning critical race theory and intersectionality come out tacitly endorsing them as a lens through which we can view some social issues? Tracking that development would have given greater insight into the methods and motives of those the Founders feel they must sound a warning about.
By What Standard? is most effective when it allows those arguing for more liberal doctrine to speak for themselves. Like here, where Beth Moore links long-established standards about women preaching to sexual abuse within the church:
CLIP: Complementarian theology became such a high core value that it inadvertently, by proof of what we have seen, look at the fruit of what happened, became elevated above the safety and well-being of many women.
It seems a pretty far bridge to argue that believing the pulpit is reserved for men—a position endorsed by countless pastors and theologians never embroiled in an abuse scandal—is responsible for abuse. So when the film cuts to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president Albert Mohler, it takes him only a line, not a lecture, to rebut.
CLIP: I had a major newspaper call and accost me with that, asking, can you deny that complementarianism is behind a lot of abuse. I said well clearly it was not motivating Harvey Weinstein.
Even those who aren’t inclined to agree with Founders or other conservative leaders in the film can benefit from viewing By What Standard? Because, as the American church at large will soon discover, this is likely only the beginning of the conversation.
NICK EICHER: Coming next on The World and Everything in It: Some of the background the documentary film doesn’t offer.
MEGAN BASHAM: Yes, I spent a lot of time on the phone, gathering up that background, and I’d like to start with Professor Keith Whitfield, who was co-chair of the resolutions committee responsible for Resolution 9.
Whitfield says the committee chose to revise it from what was originally proposed in order to provide clarity. Committee members hoped to allay concerns, which they felt dealt primarily with the application of the theories not their origination.
WHITFIELD: The challenge is you can’t actually defend it because it takes a level of nuance and you can’t hold the conversation, you can’t hold the attention to be able to help people to see what it is. So that’s the frustrating part.
Owen Strachan is a little frustrated, too. He’s director of the Center for Public Theology at Midwest Theological Seminary. Strachan believes that’s exactly why Resolution Nine shouldn’t have been brought up for a floor vote.
STRACHAN: I don’t think it’s easy to understand these issues that we’re discussing here in a full semester of discussing them. On the floor in front of thousands of people, a convention that’s thousands of people big trying to sort these out as the session’s nearly over. So I think, to be more clear, I think tons of people were confused over what was happening.
EICHER: Strachan thinks the resolution presents critical race theory too positively. But judging from some of the sermon material and video resources available from SBC churches, many church leaders are comfortable with that positive cast.
Have a listen, for example, to Matt Chandler, senior pastor of a megachurch in Dallas.
CHANDLER: What happens in that kind of upbringing, which is fine, is that there were some lenses put over my eyes in which I saw the world through those lenses, not knowing what those lenses are. I have grown up with this sort of invisible bag of privilege, this kind of invisible tool kit that I can reach in there at any given moment and have this type of privilege that a lot of other brothers and sisters don’t have, don’t possess.
But if anything illustrates how divisive discussions over Resolution Nine have become within the SBC, it might be the furor that erupted over the four-minute trailer for the By What Standard documentary.
When it debuted last July, it briefly showed a blurry image of a woman overlapped with Strachan talking about powers and principalities.
Twitter quickly identified the woman as abuse-victim advocate Rachael Denhollander. Denhollander’s husband, Jacob, then accused Founders on Twitter of insinuating his wife is part of a “shadowy vanguard of demonic forces and liberal doctrine.”
The ferocious condemnation and justification that followed ended with several SBC leaders withdrawing from the film.
Strachan’s comments came from a message he gave at Founders and weren’t related to the subject of sexual abuse, generally, or Denhollander, specifically.
BASHAM: Founders president Tom Ascol told me he didn’t intend to personally criticize Denhollander, who is a survivor of infamous sexual abuser Larry Nassar and was his first public accuser. Ascol stressed, he thought her testimony was heroic.
ASCOL: So no, it wasn’t Rachael Denhollander personally. But it was very much the position that she and that panel seem to be advocating that was contrary to what the Bible says about how to handle these kinds of issues.
Ascol says his intention was to convey how the #MeToo movement is being used to impugn the motives of those who maintain that the Bible doesn’t allow women to preach or be elders.
ASCOL: Would we do it that way again? I wouldn’t do it that way again, and nothing we did since then has come close to that kind of edginess. But the response to that trailer was revealing. People screamed about the tone and completely ignored the substance and the content.
Ascol says he apologized for the Denhollander image in the trailer. But when I called Denhollander, she said, that was no apology. In any event, she’s far less concerned with the trailer than her disagreement with messages she believes the film conveys.
DENHOLLANDER: I think there’s a lot of imbalance and misunderstanding happening when it comes to the wisdom and giftings that God has given women and how those can interplay. There’s a lot of equivocation on issues of justice and abuse and automatically perceiving those issues as being part of a “left-wing agenda or an anti-church, anti-gospel agenda. When you have that level of equivocating it just makes it impossible to have any kind of nuanced or graceful discussion.
EICHER: Well, we are hopeful that we will be able to have a nuanced and graceful discussion about it. And joining us now to help with that is Albert Mohler. He’s president of Southern Seminary and host of the daily podcast, The Briefing. Let’s jump right in and if you would, talk to us about why you’re a cautionary voice on the use of critical race theory and intersectionality.
ALBERT MOHLER, GUEST: A part of the problem in all of this is if you deal seriously with ideas, the only really dangerous ideas are the ideas that have a kernel of truth in them. So, if you take intersectionality, the idea that some people are less advantaged in society than others and that some are at the intersections of multiple disadvantage in terms of cultural power, well, of course that’s just basically true. And so, yeah, life for a transgendered person may be more culturally complicated than for even a gay white male by the doctrines of intersectionality.
And so we can understand—if I were not a Christian and I didn’t operate from a Biblical worldview, I can understand why that would be an almost inevitable idea. But Christians can’t go there because the Bible simply does not allow it simply because God speaks authoritatively to what it means to be male and female and how male and female are to relate to one another sexually.
And you talk about the issue of, say, white privilege. Well, I grew up as a white middle class kid, but a barely middle class family. And I went to—I lived in a community with many rich kids and I instantly recognized they were more advantaged than I was.
So, let’s just take that little world. Do I use, then, a Marxist system of class and economic analysis to say that equity is only if I have what they have? Well, then you take it to the next stage. The reality is that any child with two parents, a mother and a father married to each other has significant advantages over a child that does not have two parents married to each other and staying married to each other. But that does not imply that that advantage is somehow an unfair advantage. No, it’s actually faithfulness to God’s plan. And then the cultural Marxists come back and say, yeah, but that’s because of bourgeois values that the entire structure is here to protect. Well, you know what, I want this entire society to support those structures. That’s called moral sanity.
BASHAM: In reading a lot of these arguments, both sides bring up the concept of biblical sufficiency, that the Bible is all we need to equip us for faith in and service to God.
I read a piece by Owen Strachan arguing that to frame our sin problems in terms of systemic privilege or power is to lose sight of the solutions the Bible offers.
Those who see CRT as potentially useful argue that the Bible maintains its supremacy, CRT just offers a lens—that term we heard Matt Chandler use—that helps us see how to apply biblical principles.
Can you explain why biblical sufficiency has become such a focal point of the discussion?
MOHLER: Well, I think in one sense the sufficiency of Scripture always ends up being the big practical question in the application of the authority of Scripture. And so the statement I keep in mind all the time is that of Martin Luther, the great reformer, when he spoke of the holy Scriptures as “norma normans non normata.” It’s one of my favorite Latin phrases. It’s “the norm of norms that can’t be normed.” So that’s the authority of sufficiency of Scripture. Nothing can norm it. It is the norm that no other norm can norm.
And that is a problem for those who are trying to find some way of explaining the world around us because it comes down to this: So, Christians do not have a lesser understanding of wrongfulness in the world than Critical Race Theorists. We actually have a deeper understanding of sin, which is entirely dependent on Scripture. We understand sin in deeply biblical Augustinian terms and especially those of us who are of the reformation heritage, we have a deeper understanding of brokenness. But we also have no hope whatsoever in any kind of revolution that is going to come in non-Biblical, non-gospel terms.
EICHER: So some proponents of using CRT liken it to Paul referencing pagan philosophers to witness to the Epicureans. I’m not necessarily discounting that position, but I do see a bit of a problem with it. When we’re having this debate, we’re largely talking about it as something within the Church. How brothers and sisters of different ethnicities relate to one another, not how we interact with the wider world. But is it a valid Biblical model to use pagan philosophies for an in-house debate?
As a theologian, do you think the Epicurean example applies here?
MOHLER: Well, no. And we need to note that we’re talking only about the Apostle Paul at the Areopagus in Acts chapter 17 in this case, and the Apostle Paul did not say—let me step out of the Christian Biblical worldview into a stoic critique of contemporary society and apply it. That’s not what he’s saying. He did have conversation with the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers and I’ll tell you, that means missiologically that he had to understand the Epicureans and he had to understand Stoicism. And so there is no reason for intelligent Christians to find justification for not being aware of the rival philosophies around us. But being conversant is a very different thing than being dependent.
BASHAM: I’d like to dig into this idea of systemic or collective sin a little bit more.
It seems to me that this is what CRT is primarily concerned with, as opposed to focusing on individual offenses. And that seems to be a lot of what the people who object to CRT are concerned about. They feel it contradicts principles in passages like Ezekiel 18:20, “The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity.”
What’s your view on that?
MOHLER: Well, you take the category of systemic injustice or systemic structural sin, is that right or is that wrong? Well, it can be both. I mean, there is a sense in which the Bible affirms that of course there are systemic demonstrations of sin. You can have sin that is common to an entire society.
I mean, just consider the way that in the Old Testament, for instance, the Caananites are described. It’s not just individual Caananites, it’s the ideology of being Caananite—idolatry shared by the Caananites. Systemic structural evil is something we come to understand.
The problem with the understanding of structural sin or systemic sin that comes out of Critical Theory is that it is used to explain how an entire society is built upon a project of oppression and the oppressor-oppressed category becomes the only reading of history. And you could understand where this goes.
The Marxist Mandate is to undo the civilization in order to free humanity from the oppressive bounds of all—you have to understand—this means of everything that constitutes Western civilization. And, of course, we as Christians don’t believe that Western civilization is without sin because of the people that inhabit that civilization. But we can’t buy into the idea that the entire project is to oppress and is thus sinful in all of its dimensions.
BASHAM: It was interesting that while researching this, I heard both sides refer to a “chilling effect.” In that same Owen Strachan piece, he connected telling people to “check” their privilege to telling them to be silent.
On the flip side, one person in the SBC who would only speak off the record told me this debate has in some ways made the subject of racial reconciliation off limits. That if you bring up CRT in any positive way—something he likened to taking the plunder out of Egypt—people become suspicious that you’re a nefarious actor trying to undermine the church.
How do we get to a place of unity on this—or even charity in disagreement—if everyone’s afraid their motives will be misconstrued?
MOHLER: Well, I’ve been at this a long time—both as a theologian and apologist and as a Southern Baptist. And so here’s the thing: I don’t think this conversation progresses in any healthy way on the basis of anything drawn from Critical Race Theory. It also can’t progress if every time someone raises the issue of the sin of racism someone says that comes from Critical Race Theory. That can’t work.
I mean, if you forget that Critical Race Theory ever happened—lamentably it has—but there are rightful Biblical concerns about what it means to love our neighbor and to respect everyone made in the image of God that are, let’s just say, bound in scripture, revealed by the heart of God. So, it takes some time and mutual respect to talk these things through. It’s a conversation we’re going to have to have. It’s a conversation I think Southern Baptists are up to.
EICHER: Well, Al Mohler is the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and host of the daily podcast, The Briefing. Al, thanks so much for joining us for Culture Friday.
MOHLER: You’re talking about important things, as always. Nick and Megan, great to be with you.
NICK EICHER: Three days into an internship with NASA, 17-year-old Wolf Cukier did what many scientists spend a career trying to do.
While interning at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, he was poring over the data from a survey satellite when something caught his eye.
Cukier told WNBC news…
CUKIER: I noticed a dip or a transit from the TOI 1338 system, and that was the first signal of the planet.
Allow me to translate and, ah, I had help—Cukier found evidence of a previously undiscovered planet.
And with further study, NASA confirmed the teenager did indeed discover a new planet!
This newfound world is 1,300 light years away. It’s seven times the size of Earth, and it orbits two stars.
Right now, the planet’s official name is TOI 1338 b. The TOI stands for “test object of interest.”
But surely Wolf Cukier can come up with something catchier, right, young man?!
CUKIER: My brother’s idea was Wolftopia.
BASHAM: Wolftopia, now that I like!
EICHER: NASA has to call it that!
It’s The World and Everything in It.
NICK EICHER: Today is Friday, January 31st. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.
MEGAN BASHAM: And I’m Megan Basham. Next up: your listener feedback!
But before we get started we have a few corrections to make. Let’s begin with public officials. We mistakenly told you that Ken Paxton was lieutenant governor of Texas. But he’s not. He’s attorney general of Texas.
EICHER: Well, staying with Texas corrections, you also heard from one of our guests that Iran is the size of Alaska and Texas put together. Actually, we should remove Texas from the comparison. Iran is about the size of Alaska by itself.
BASHAM: We also described the recent earthquakes in Puerto Rico as “tremblors.” The word we meant to use is “temblors.”
EICHER: On to your listener feedback now. And we’ll start with a topic that generated quite a few comments and emails. It was our conversation with pastor and Southern Baptist Convention president J.D. Greear. Lauri Green was one of the listeners who appreciates pastor Greear’s position on “pronoun hospitality.”
She emailed us to share her experience during a recent conversation with a family member who identifies as transgender.
In that instant I chose to allow the conversation to continue and be pronoun hospitable, hoping and praying that seeds were being planted. It’s not easy to navigate the craziness we find in our culture today. But as believers, I am confident that the Lord will give us wisdom when we find ourselves in such circumstances.
BASHAM: Of course, not everyone agreed. Diana Griffith emailed to say she took issue with pastor Greear when he said “when in doubt, Christians should err on the side of truth.”
That is an incredible statement … [she said] … Here I was all my life thinking I as a Christian should walk in truth, not err on the side of truth.
EICHER: Well, whether you agreed with pastor Greear’s position or not, many of you emailed or posted on social media your appreciation for the pastor’s appearance on the program.
Jason Woodard tweeted:
So refreshing to hear an interviewer asking difficult questions in a respectful manner to get to the truth.
BASHAM: Well, that’s the goal. We don’t always get it, but that’s what we’re aiming for, so thank you for all of your tweets, comments, and emails. We appreciate hearing from you however you choose to send your feedback. Of course, this is a podcast, so we especially like it when we can hear from you.
EICHER: Right, and just a reminder, you can call our listener feedback line or record your comments in a voice memo using your smartphone and email them to us.
Which is exactly what listener Billy Newman did.
NEWMAN: I just wanted to thank you for the segment, the interview on January 7th with George Friedman about the Iran situation. It was just loaded with insight on what’s going on in the world. I just want to say I haven’t gotten news like that anywhere else.
Now, before we go, I just want to give a special thanks to all of you who have taken the time to rate and review The World and Everything in It on iTunes. We have a five-star rating from 2,500 of you—and counting.
BASHAM: And the reviews you leave are so encouraging to the whole team. Here’s one of my favorites from earlier this week. It’s from Steve in Conifer.
My wife and I use it every day to stay informed, and to become aware of brand new issues and insights we’ve never considered. I regularly save stories for my kids to listen to as well.
NICK EICHER: Well, it’s time to say thank you to the people who put the program together this week. Joel Belz, Paul Butler, Janie B. Cheaney, Kent Covington, Kristen Flavin, Katie Gaultney, Kim Henderson, Anna Johansen, Leigh Jones, Onize Ohikere, Mary Reichard, Jenny Lind Schmitt, Sarah Schweinsberg, Cal Thomas, Steve West, and Kyle Ziemnick.
MEGAN BASHAM: Our technical engineers Johnny Franklin and Carl Peetz stay up late to get the program to you early! J.C. Derrick is managing editor and Marvin Olasky is editor-in-chief.
And you make every bit of this possible with your encouragement and support. Thank you!
Jesus says, “In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
I hope you have a restful weekend.