Truce - History of the Christian Church

Give to help Chris make Truce In 1974, Alice Moore was a member of the school board in Kanawha County, West Virginia. The board met to hear the recommendations of the textbook committee and approve them. But Alice protested when she read a portion from the Autobiography of Malcolm X, which thanked Allah for preventing Malcolm X from being a black Christian. From there they uncovered a number of potentially offensive texts, some because of language, others because of discussions of rape. Race was likely a factor as well, though Moore denied it. Local pastors decried what they saw as secularism and humanism creeping into public schools. Parents blocked school buses, and others kept their children at home. Soon, there were fights, and dynamite was used to blow up school buildings. What started as a disagreement over books erupted into an all-out war. One that echoed in other parts of the country at the same time as families wrestled with changes in education. Sources: "The Great Textbook Wars" - award-winning documentary on the battle "The Invisible Bridge" by Rick Perlstein "Soul on Ice" by Eldrige Cleaver (archive.org) "Androcles and the Lion" by Aesop Texas Monthly article about the Gablers Video of the Gablers talking to William F Buckley on "Firing Line" The New York Times article about schools closed in WV The New York Times article about the textbook war Radio interview about the John Birch Society Discussion Questions: Had you heard of the textbook war before? What did you think of the passage from "Soul on Ice"? Should it be read by senior students headed for college? What about other students? Who should decide what gets taught in local school districts? How about nationally? How did Alice Moore and others act appropriately? How about inappropriately? The KKK and John Birch Society show up a few times this season, often opportunistically. Does their appearance automatically smear all participants as racist? What else was going on in 1974 that could have escalated the panic of the era? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Partner with us by donating at: www.trucepodcast.com/donate Something had to be done. The Great Depression meant the loss of a vast number of jobs and left families waiting on bread lines. Economists like John Meynard Keynes puzzled over what to do. President Hoover took a laissez-faire approach to the catastrophe, only to have matters get worse. Then Franklin D. Roosevelt came into office and his administration kicked The New Deal into gear. It was a program that offered diverse aid to citizens from protections for money in banks to homeowner assistance. Many Christian leaders came to hate the New Deal, especially libertarians. Their opposition to the New Deal as creeping socialism sparked the National Prayer Breakfast, some of Billy Graham's speeches, and the bonding of capitalism to Christianity and the US. So we should probably know what the New Deal was! Our guest on this episode is Justin Rosolino. He's a high school history teacher and the author of the book "Idiot Sojourning Soul". You can find pictures of Chris' 50-mile New Deal Bike Tour on the website at www.trucepodcast.com. Helpful Links: FDR's Inauguration Speech on C-SPAN Interesting YouTube video about the causes of the Great Depression Topics Discussed: What was the Social Gospel? Who was Franklin Roosevelt? What was the New Deal? The Civilian Conservation Corp The Works Progress Administration Jenny Lake - Grand Teton National Park Unemployment Discussion Questions: Why do some people dislike the New Deal? Which of the programs most impacts you? What do you think of the New Deal? Was it a form of socialism? Do you think there will ever be another New Deal in the US? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast In 1955, the Board of Regents for New York issued an optional prayer to be used in public schools. It became known as the "Regent's Prayer". Here it is: "“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country.” That short prayer was contested not only by non-religious people but also by Protestants who thought that it was too vague. What God is it talking about? Where is the mention of Jesus or the Holy Spirit, salvation, sin, grace, etc.? With help from the ACLU, parents sued and the case made it all the way to the US Supreme Court. It was known as Engle v. Vitale. It overturned prescribed prayer in schools. In this episode, Chris goes through the arguments the court and Justice Hugo Black made during this landmark decision. A year later, the Court heard Abington School District v. Schempp, which ended prescribed Bible reading in public schools. This season we're covering how American evangelicals bonded themselves with the Republican Party. There are a lot of reasons that evangelicals started to vote as a block in the late 70s and early 1980s. They range from women's liberation, changes in attitude toward taxation, and battles over gay and lesbian rights, to education. This is part of our coverage of the education section. This episode has been rewritten and recorded, updating an episode from season 3. Sources: "One Nation Under God" by Kevin Kruse Transcript of Abington School District v Schempp Census data about public and private schools Transcript and audio of Engel v Vitale Discussion Questions: Did you ever pray in school? What did you pray? Did you ever read the Bible in school? Is there an "ideal" prayer that should be read in schools? If so, what is it? What objections might parents have? Is it important for school children to learn about religions in school? Do you agree or disagree with Justice Hugo Black? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to support the Truce Podcast It seems like so many people define their faith by what they believe about Donald Trump. How can godly Christians return to the gospel to get us back on track? In this round table discussion episode, Chris is joined by Pastor Ray McDaniel of First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY and Nick Staron to prepare us for the season. Topics Discussed: What is Christianity? The importance of forgiveness and going to those who are angry with us Why it is important to cover things like the Watergate scandals of the 1970s in a Christian podcast The need for humility in our lives The gospel in 10 words or less Do you have a gospel message in 10 words or less? Find Truce on social media and let us know! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give a little to help support the Truce Podcast When did Republicans, the party of Abraham Lincoln, start courting the American South? It's a big question! For decades, Republicans were known as the party that helped black people (except, you know, for ending Reconstruction to help gain the White House). Then, with the nomination of Barry Goldwater, the tide turned. Goldwater's team promoted him as a racist when he toured the South. And... he won some ground in the traditionally Democratic region. So when it came time for Richard Nixon to run in 1968, his team decided to court the South. Not out in public like Goldwater had. Instead, they decided to operate a campaign of "benign neglect" where they would not enforce existing laws meant to protect African-Americans. Our special guest this week is Angie Maxwell, author of The Long Southern Strategy. Discussion Questions: What caused the rift in the Democratic Party that made Strom Thurmond leave (hint: it has to do with Truman)? What was the Democratic Party like before Truman? What influence did Strom Thurmond have on Nixon? Who was Barry Goldwater? How did he change the Republican Party by courting white Southerners? How might the idea of the South being "benighted" impact them as a people? Why do so many evangelicals see themselves as "benighted"? Sources: "The Long Southern Strategy" by Angie Maxwell and Todd Shields. "Reaganland" by Rick Perlstein YouTube clip of Nixon not wanting "Law and Order" to mean "racist" Nixon talking about "law and order" in a speech Nixon's campaign ad about protests and tear gas Article about Nelson Rockefeller Nixon's civil rights ad Helpful Time Magazine article "These Truths" book by Jill Lepore Bio on Strom Thurmond Article about Reconstruction "The Evangelicals" book by Frances Fitzgerald Truman's speech to the NAACP Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help make Truce! Billy Graham, the famous evangelist, was good friends with Richard Nixon. The two played golf and gave each other advice. Graham was the person who encouraged Nixon to run for president a second time. He also encouraged Nixon to regularly attend church, so Nixon started the first regular church service in the White House, only to make it another "it" place to be seen. But when Nixon's crimes were made public, Graham continued to support him, commenting only on the strong language used by the president. What does it mean for Christian leaders to stand behind a corrupt president? In this episode, Chris interviews David Bruce, a historian at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. NOTE: I thought it was especially important to outline the many crimes of the Nixon administration. Today these crimes are downplayed by bad actors wishing to rewrite history. It is important to emphasize that not only were there immoral acts of shenanigans, there were real crimes perpetrated against individuals, organizations, and the American people. Sources "The Surprising Work of God" by Garth M. Rosell An article from The Atlantic about the Pope and Mussolini "The Popes Against the Protestants" by Kevin Madigan NPR interview with Kevin Madigan "A Prophet With Honor" book by William Martin "The Invisible Bridge" by Rick Perlstein "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "The Failure and the Hope: Essays of Southern Churchmen" book of essays accessed on Google Books New York Times article about how the Watergate break-in was financed Pat Buchanan hearings during the Watergate investigation Frost/Nixon transcript Discussion Questions: Was Billy Graham being a good friend by supporting Nixon after Watergate? Should religious leaders maintain a certain amount of distance between themselves and people of power? Why do we like to see our governmental leaders as religious people? Was Nixon's church service in the Whitehouse wrong to be a gathering place of the rich and famous? How bad was the Watergate break-in? How does it change your mind about Nixon to know about the other criminal activity? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help the Truce Podcast! Harold Ockenga was a famous fundamentalist(ish) pastor from Boston. And he had a problem. Liberal Christians had the ear of the government. That meant that military chaplain positions and free radio time were going to liberals, not conservatives. Why shouldn't conservatives have access to the radio waves like theologically liberal Christians? But that would take unity among evangelicals, or, what he called neo-evangelicals. Neo-evangelicals were evangelicals who didn't separate from the world. In Ockenga's case, this meant maybe going to the movies or an opera. So he, along with other preachers like Billy Graham, founded the National Association of Evangelicals with the hope of uniting neo-evangelicals under one banner. It didn't work. The real story, though, sometimes gets lost. The was a big boom in evangelism in the 1940s as WWII wrapped up. Evangelists targeted the youth with organizations like Campus Crusade for Christ springing up left and right. This boom meant that churches swelled in the 1950s, only to begin their long slide a few decades later. In this episode, Chris speaks with Joel Carpenter, a senior research fellow at Calvin College and author of "Revive Us Again". Resources Used: "Revive Us Again" by Joel Carpenter "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "The Surprising Work of God" by Garth Rosell "Reaganland" by Rick Perlstein NPS article about the Bonus Army “After the Ivory Tower Falls” book by Will Bunch Billy Graham audio National Association of Evangelicals "The New Treason" Interviews from Harold Ockenga at Wheaton College Discussion Questions: What spurred the revivals of the 1940s? How has youth evangelism shaped American society? Why is it important to understand the role that cheap higher education played in shaping the 1960s? Why did neo-evangelicals feel that they needed access to the radio waves? Is unity important to the Christian walk? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help the Truce Podcast Thomas McIntyre stood before the US Congress to deliver a moving speech. The man was being hounded by a fringe movement known as the New Right. The movement came from the work of men like Paul Weyrich, Howard Phillips, and Richard Viguerie. Their goal was to disrupt the Republican Party. They wanted to do away with much of the federal government and program to help the poor while simultaneously cutting taxes and increasing the military. They hoped to accomplish this by controlling direct mail. Direct mail! It sounds silly, but by inundating voters and congressional offices with bulk mail they could control the story. Men like McIntyre and Senator Mark Hatfield didn't know what to do with this influx of petty politics. Someone had even gone so far as to question Hatfield's Christian salvation just because of how we was going to vote on the Panama Canal treaty. What does giving the Panama Canal back to Panama have to do with salvation? Almost nothing. Today, we're going to explore this wacky phenomenon where we call something "Christian" or "biblical" if it fits out politics not if it is addressed in the Bible. How are we being manipulated by propaganda like this? And what can we do about it? Discussion Questions: Was the United States responsible in its claiming the Panama Canal as a territory? Are there things in your life that you mix with Christianity? How have your politics gotten confused with your faith? Does the Bible have anything to say on the Panama Canal treaty? Sources: "Reaganland" book by Rick Perlstein Handy article on the history of the Panama Canal Congressional record including the speeches Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce In this special bonus episode, Truce host Chris Staron walks you through a day in the life of a podcast host. He works about 11 hours per day between this show and his full-time job driving a school bus. Imagine what he could do if he were doing this show full-time!!!! Chris has worked on Truce for 6 1/2 years and is ready to make the show his main focus. We could make that happen if every listener gave $15 per year! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce Season six is almost here! This season we're exploring the backstory of why so many evangelicals turned to the Republican Party in the 1970s and 80s. It's a huge story that involves murder, corruption, greed, taxes, school choice, racism, and a lot of big questions. Special guests include Rick Perlstein, Frances Fitzgerald, Marjorie Spruill, Jesse Eisinger, and so many more. Subscribe to Truce wherever you get your podcasts, or listen at trucepodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris keep Truce going! Season six is coming along nicely! I'm super busy trying to get it all put together before I start releasing episodes. But I want to also make everyone aware that I'm looking for more advertisers for the show. Want to participate? Visit www.trucepodcast.com/advertise to get started! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce! Joseph McCarthy was an unexceptional junior congressman from Wisconsin. He grew up brawling in the streets, playing cards, and embellishing his stories. Then, during a Lincoln Day address in 1950, Joseph McCarthy told an audience that he had a list of 205 communists working in the government. Within days, he was a household name. McCarthy started "investigating" suspected communists in the American government, focusing on the US State Department. Along the way, he brought in a young lawyer named Roy Cohn. Cohn was already known for his work sending Julius and Ethel Rosenberg to the electric chair. Now, he and McCarthy bullied and cajoled during private hearings. Being labeled a communist, or even a suspected communist could ruin a person's career. People committed suicide rather than face their scrutiny. Their reign lasted four years, ending in the televised broadcasts of the Army-McCarthy hearings in which a lawyer asked if McCarthy had any decency. That was pretty much it for McCarthy. But Roy Cohn went on to have a well-connected career, providing legal services for the mob and Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News. He also became a mentor to a young real estate mogul named Donald Trump. Famous people like Andy Warhol attended his birthday party at Studio 54. Cohn died of AIDS, something that was killing gay men rapidly in the 1980s, though he denied he ever had it. This is the story of two men allowed to prey on the fears of the American people for their own gain. One fell hard, the other found himself fighting against his own people. In this episode, Chris interviews Larry Tye, author of the book "Demagogue". He's also the author of "Satchel: The Life and Times of an American Legend" and "Bobby Kennedy: The Making of a Liberal Icon". Sources: "Demagogue" by Larry Tye Helpful article about the Rosenbergs Article about Klaus Fuchs McCarthy's speech in Wheeling, WV New York Times, February 23, 1954. Pages 16-17 “Transcript of General Zwicker's Testimony Before the McCarthy Senate Subcommittee” Video from Army-McCarthy hearings (forward to the last 20 minutes if you want to jump to the stuff I used) The guest list for Roy Cohn's birthday at Studio 54 Discussion Questions: Why do we love demagogues? Who are other demagogues in American history? The threat of communists in the government in the 1950s is sometimes downplayed. Do you think it was a real concern? McCarthy ran for Congress in an illegal way while still in the Marines. How do you feel about that? Roy Cohn sometimes went against his own people, claiming that gay people did not deserve equal rights. What might have been his motivation? Do you see any crossover between McCarthy, Cohn, and Donald Trump? Cohn died of AIDs in the 1980s when the disease was at its peak. Why might he have wanted to keep his illness a secret? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast! The Love Thy Neighborhood podcast is really well produced. But they also take deep dives into some of the things going on in modern Christianity that I can't cover on Truce. They are a good supplement to the stuff we cover on this feed. So we thought... why not share each other's show? In this bonus episode, you'll hear Chris talking with Anna Tran and Jesse Eubanks about their episode "Where the Gospel Meets Artificial Intelligence". It is a look into the ways in which AI may someday try to gain ground in the spiritual realm. Also, they do an interview with TikTok evangelist York Moore who uses that medium to share the gospel. I was especially interested in the ways in which AI chatbots are building false relationships with people, taking the place of human interactions. They cover a lot of ground! Let them know that you heard about their show from the Truce Podcast! Season six starts in just a few months, but I will be launching a bonus episode in a few weeks. Subscribe so you get every new episode as it's released. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

Give to support the Truce Podcast On March 4, 1933, FDR delivered his inaugural address. In it, he used the phrase "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". I did a little searching and this phrase is used a LOT in Christian books. So often. But it almost always refers to the fear one person has in their heart. In reality, it is a comment on collective fear. The Great Depression started in 1929 and was exacerbated by a bank run in which Americans lost faith in the value of our currency and the banking systems. That is an important distinction. FDR's speech is about collective fear. As I've contemplated the modernist/fundamentalist debate this season, I keep returning to the idea of fear, not in the US economy but in God's economy. He commands us to love the Lord, keep His commands, love our neighbors, turn the other cheek, and give to those who ask of us. Why do we forget to do this important work? Could it be because we've lost faith in God's economy? This episode features a clip from my discussion with Jacob Goldstein, former host of NPR's Planet Money podcast and the current host of Pushkin's What's Your Problem? podcast. His book is Money: The True Story of a Made-up Thing. Select Sources FDR's Inaugural Address Jacob Goldstein's Money: The True Story of a Made-Up Thing Movie: It's a Wonderful Life Discussion Questions: Why does it matter that FDR's quote "...the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" is a collective statement and not one about individual fear? What are some identifying features of God's economy? Do you trust in the way that God tells us to do things? When was the last time you prayed for someone who you don't like? Do you believe in turning the other cheek? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

Give a little to help Chris continue to make Truce! In 1945, C.S. Lewis published his excellent book "The Great Divorce". It happens to be one of my favorite books. It has many themes, the biggest of which is that there can be no hell in heaven. The two are divorced from each other (hence the title). Another is that humans are easily distracted from God's work and the gospel. This season I've been telling the backstory of Christian fundamentalism. I think many of us have been distracted from the gospel because of politics or the people around us. If you were joined by a loved one who passed away or an angel who challenged you to walk to heaven, would you? What distracts you from following Jesus? From really going for it? Special thanks to my improv troupe (Nick, Josh, and Jackie) who helped with voices. Additional vocal work came from Paul Hastings from the "Compelled" podcast and Jerry Dugan from "Beyond the Rut". Give their shows a listen and let me know what you think! Sources: The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis (though I only used some concepts) Discussion Questions: What distracts you from following God? Are you tied too strongly to things? Safety? Your family? Your job? Your identity? Your politics? What books do you read over and over again? Why? How can a person's own love of intellectualism be a distraction? How can we have compassion? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In the fall of 1814, the powers of Europe gathered together to discuss what to do with the continent after the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon had changed a lot in his time in power! He cowed the Roman Catholic Church, ended serfdom where he went, freed Jews from their ghettos, took away kingdoms, and placed new kings in charge. The Congress of Vienna was tasked with a Humpty Dumpty scenario and they couldn't put Europe back together again. The various countries also wanted to be compensated for their efforts to stop Napoleon. Couldn't they take a little piece of land? Encroach on one of the lesser kingdoms? Install their own puppet governments? In trying to undo all of the changes Napoleon made, they became little Napoleons themselves. In the same way, when we confront extremism with extremism we become exactly what we dislike. Shouldn't Christians be more focused on simple righteousness than culture wars? Select Sources: The Rites of Peace by Adam Zamoyski Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts (a great place to start if you want to learn about Napoleon) Discussion Questions: What was the Congress of Vienna? Why did the congress matter? Have you ever served God to the point where it cost you something big to do so? How have you seen the modern Church become what it opposes? Have you seen Christians or churches act in a righteous way? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donate to help Chris make Truce! The first-century Christian Church had a lot going on. Their Savior died and was resurrected, sending the Holy Spirit and leaving them with the command to take this new message to all tribes and tongues. The book of Acts records some of their travels, as they went all over the known world with this good news. But they were not the only people evangelizing. So were the gnostics. Gnosticism takes a lot of different shapes. It was a belief system that challenged Christianity, even as some tried to incorporate elements into the faith. Now consider modernist theology - what we've been talking about all season. It is a belief system that doesn't believe in the miracles or the divinity of Jesus. To evangelicals of the 1800s and 1900s, this was a real threat. Like Gnosticism before it, modernism threatened to destabilize the gospel message. What to do? In this bonus episode, Chris takes a look at 1-3 John to see what they have to say about dealing with heresy. Chris is hard at work on season 6! He'll be presenting these short episodes in the meantime to recap some of the themes of season 5. Discussion Questions: If you were alive in the mid-1800s and saw modernism rising, what would you do? Do you think modernism is a heresy? How should Christians today deal with heresy? What did the fundamentalists get right and how did they mess up when approaching heresy? Selected Source Materials: 1-3 John "The Early Church" by Henry Chadwick Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

US Senator Joseph McCarthy unleashed an era of suspicion on the American people as he went looking for communists. His trials, both public and behind closed doors, focused on the government as well as Hollywood and the Army. He claimed that he had lists of communists, but failed to produce that list. It wasn't until the Army-McCarthy hearings in the spring and summer of 1954 that his unfounded hearings were put to rest. One year later the play Inherit the Wind opened. It was supposed to be a critique of the McCarthy era set inside of a re-telling of the Scopes "monkey" trial. In doing so, it got many of the facts wrong. John Scopes never spent any time in jail. He didn't have a girlfriend, and that girlfriend was not berated on the stand. The townspeople of Dayton, TN were welcoming to both Bryan and Darrow. To explore this work of art and revisionist history I spoke with the hosts of the Seeing and Believing podcast Kevin McLenithan and Sarah Welch-Larson. Select differences between the Scopes trial and Inherit the Wind John Scopes was arrested but never spent time in jail. He was "arrested" in a soda fountain where the test trial was conceived and not in school. Scopes later claimed he never taught evolution, which is why he never took the stand in real life. The entire case was set up as a publicity stunt to bring attention to the town of Dayton, TN. They got the idea when they saw an ad placed by the ACLU. The character of Rachel did not exist in real life. The people of Dayton were welcoming to both Darrow and Bryan and Scopes was loved by many. He even spent time swimming with the prosecution between trial sessions. The moment when Bryan was on trial was held outdoors. H.L. Mencken was not some loveable curmudgeon. He was an anti-semite and a racist. Dayton largely did not vote for Bryan when he ran for president. Bryan died a few days after the trial, not while in the courtroom. Darrow did not carry a copy of the Bible and Darwin out of the courtroom. The textbook in question during the trial was clearly pro-eugenics, was sold in the soda fountain, and had been approved by the state textbook committee. The preachers of the town were kind. The odd sermon given the night of the trial never happened and the script adds a lot of strange things that are not in the Bible. Bryan wished the law to have no penalty, unlike his stand-in in the movie who hoped for a harsher punishment. Sources Inherit the Wind (1960 version) starring Spencer Tracy Summer for the Gods by Edward Larson Chris' own visit to the Dayton museum dedicated to the trial Helpful video about the Napoleon painting Discussion Questions: Where is the line between art and propaganda? Does art have an obligation to the truth? Do you see McCarthyism in Inherit the Wind? Is Inherit the Wind a fair way of discussing the Scopes trial, or a work of revisionist history? Why does it matter? What would it mean for a group that feels maligned and misunderstood to have a film misrepresent them? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce?? Donate to keep the show going! The trial was basically over. The prosecution won. John Scopes was moments away from being convicted of teaching evolution in Dayton, Tennessee. The ACLU and the prosecution had what they wanted. But Clarence Darrow did not. He wanted to make a monkey out of William Jennings Bryan, the famous "fundamentalist". But how? Darrow knew that if he turned down the chance to make a closing argument that Bryan would not be able to make one either. That meant that Bryan's carefully crafted words would never get heard. But he had one more trick up his sleeve. He would call Bryan, the lawyer for the prosecution, to the stand. Imagine that! The case was no longer about the defendant. It was about the lawyers trying to flex. Bryan took the bait. He got on the stand outdoors next to the Rhea County Courthouse in front of an audience of millions. Darrow, in a masterstroke, hit him over and over with the questions of any village atheist. Did Jonah really get swallowed by a large fish? Did the sun really stand still because Joshua prayed that it would? And Bryan... floundered on live radio. This event was made even more famous by the long-running play Inherit the Wind on broadway, which was followed up by a movie adaptation. But the play got it all wrong. Edward Larson, professor at Pepperdine University, and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book Summer for the Gods, joins Chris to uncover what really happened on that muggy summer day. Helpful Sources: "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson Rhea County Heritage and Scopes Trial Museum Worth a visit! Court Transcript of the Scopes Trial (easy to find online) "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Discussion Questions: Bryan believed in majoritarianism. What is that idea? What do you think of it? Do you think Bryan should have gotten on the stand? Why or why not? How did Bryan do on the stand in your opinion? Does this court case matter in your understanding of fundamentalism? How and when should Christians make stands for their beliefs? When should we stay quiet? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris do Truce full time! Tennessee was the first state in the United States to crack down hard on the teaching of evolution in public schools. Others had dabbled, but Tennessee went all the way. The ACLU wanted to challenge the validity of the case in the courts. In order to do that they needed an educator to teach it, get busted, and be brought to trial. At the same time, the town of Dayton, TN needed a boost. After the biggest employer closed down it faced serious economic trouble. What if the men of Dayon could manufacture a court case to draw the attention of the nation? They found a young teacher named John Scopes and convinced him to participate in their scheme. They booked Scopes, even though he probably never taught evolution. The ACLU had its case. Soon William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow hopped on board and it went from a publicity stunt to something for the history books. This is the event that some historians (wrongly) point to as the death of Christian fundamentalism in the United States until it was revived by the Moral Majority. One man fighting for the biblical idea of creation and another for godless atheism. But the real history is far more complex. Edward Larson, professor at Pepperdine University, joins us to discuss the trial and his Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Summer for the Gods". Helpful Sources: "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson Rhea County Heritage and Scopes Trial Museum Worth a visit! Court Transcript of the Scopes Trial (easy to find online) "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Discussion Questions: What events led to the Scopes trial? Why did the ACLU feel they had to try the Tennessee Law? Who should decide what is taught in schools? Teachers? Parents? Lawmakers? Or some combination? What were William Jennings Bryan's motives for joining the prosecution? What were Clarence Darrow's motives for joining the defense? Should prayer be allowed before a trial about religion? Should Christians get involved in what is taught in schools? To what degree? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Truce! Donate here. In the 1600s, an Irish Archbishop named James Ussher did a bunch of math. The Bible is full of numbers and genealogies. He sat down and calculated that, in his opinion, the Bible dated creation at 4004 BC. According to Ussher, that is when God created man. That number has really stuck around! I gathered my small group together to explore the Adams Synchronological Chart. It is a 23-foot-long timeline of human history, beginning in 4004 BC and ending in 1900. There it was! The 4004 BC number! Which brings up an interesting question, right? What did Christians really believe about evolution just before it became a linchpin battle for fundamentalists? I turned to Edward Larson for answers. He's a professor at Pepperdine University and the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Summer for the Gods". The book chronicles the Scopes "Monkey" trial that we'll be covering in the next two episodes. But it also gives us a great introductory look at what Christians believed about evolution in the build-up to the trial. It turns out that evangelical Christians and even fundamentalists were all over the place when it came to ideas of evolution. Many Christians, like William Jennings Bryan, believed in an old earth and even some forms of evolution. But they thought that it was God who caused that evolution. Charles Darwin, though, said that evolution was a matter of chance adaptations, thus cutting God out of the equation. Fundamentalists like Bryan were determined to stop the spread of Darwinian evolution for that very reason. They believed that if young people were taught that they were the result of grand mistakes then what reason did they have to treat each other with respect? To be good citizens? Helpful Sources "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin "The Birth of a Nation" on YouTube Article about James Ussher and his burial in Westminster Abbey Helpful article about Lamarck "The Evangelicals" by Francis Fitzgerald More about Henry Ford's Anti-Semitism An interesting article about "The Birth of a Nation" Discussion Questions: How did Cuvier and Lamarck differ in their ideas about evolution? Do you believe in a young or old earth? Do you believe in some evolution, macro-evolution, or no evolution at all? What is the best way to oppose an idea? When should we propose laws to combat ideas we don't like and when should we allow others to believe what they like? Do you think the fundamentalists were right to combat teaching evolution in schools? Now that you know about Bryan's failure to call out the KKK, what do you think of him? "Birth of a Nation" shaped American views about black people. Are there more modern films and series that have shaped society in similar ways? Or changed public opinion in other ways? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce! Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were wealthy young men in the early 1920s. They lived in big homes in Chicago and had world-class educations. They were both pushed hard academically, and Richard was sexually abused as a child. Both graduated early from high school and college. The two were an odd pairing. Nathan was quiet and awkward, not particularly handsome. Richard was gregarious and outgoing, good-looking... and a psychopath. Nathan loved Richard, and the two sometimes had sex with each other. Richard realized he could control Nathan by trading intimacy for criminal activity. They started with typical juvenile delinquent behavior. Soon, though, Richard wanted more. He considered himself a master criminal, someone too smart to get caught. He and Nathan were exposed to the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche wrote that the ultimate purpose of humanity was to evolve into what he called the ubermensch or superman. Leopold and Loeb thought they were that evolved human. Therefore, they should be able to plot and execute the murder of a young boy without ever getting caught. Only, they were so bad at it that it took very little time to pin it on them. Only the brilliance of Clarence Darrow, the country's most prominent defense attorney, could save their lives. In this episode, we're joined by Candace Fleming. She's the author of the book Murder Among Friends about the crime. The version of Also Sprach Zarathustra used in this episode is courtesy of the Creative Commons License and was produced by Kevin MacLeod. Sources: Murder Among Friends by Candace Fleming Helpful article on the Houston Symphony's website about Also Sprach Zarathustra Article about what Nietzsche meant by "God is dead" Full text of Also Sprach Zarathustra Helpful video about Nietzsche's work Smithsonian article about Leopold and Loeb William Jennings Bryan's closing arguments of the Scopes trial Clarence Darrow's closing arguments of the Leopold and Loeb trial Discussion Questions: Now that you know what the song Also Sprach Zarathustra is about, does it change your opinion of the piece? Do you think Nietzsche was right to worry about what would happen after Christianity took a back seat to world events? What should have been our response? With this little bit we covered about Nietzsche today, what do you think of his work? Can you see why it makes Chris nervous just to mention it in an episode? Do you see the connection between evolution and superman? Were people like Darrow and Bryan right to be concerned about young people learning Nietzsche's philosophy? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Eugenics. It's one of those words that gets thrown around these days, often by people accusing "the other side" of wrongdoing. But what is eugenics? I invited law professor Paul Lombardo, author of "Three Generations, No Imbeciles", to join me to try to answer that very question. It turns out that that question is harder to answer than you'd think. In the early 1900s, the word "eugenic" was often used to mean "pure" or to imply that a product was healthy for babies. But that word also extended into segregating certain populations from society and forced sterilizations. It is important to understand the history of eugenics because some Christians use the fear of eugenics as a lens to understand the Scopes "Monkey" trial. I think that is an accurate connection, but we really should understand it. Did William Jennings Bryan support eugenics? Can Christians support eugenics? Many did. There were even competitions that rewarded pastors for writing pro-eugenics sermons. That was especially true for liberal pastors. In this episode, we attempt to answer some tough questions. I hope you enjoy it! Helpful Sources: "Three Generations, No Imbeciles" by Paul Lombardo "Preaching Eugenics" by Christine Rosen "Summer for the Gods" by Edward Larson An article from Smithsonian Magazine about Herbert Spencer Paul's article about William Jennings Bryan's support of the WCTU and eugenics CDC article about syphilis Helpful article about the immigration act Helpful Focus on the Family article about how some Christians don't believe that the sins of the father carry over Washington Post article about the "welfare queen" of the Reagan era Discussion Questions: What is eugenics? How did the term "eugenics" differ in the early 1900s from today? Are you in favor of eugenics? Why or why not? How is eugenics tied to evolution? How is it not? Do Christians have a responsibility to play when it comes to protecting people with special needs? What can we do to help those with special needs? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Harry Emerson Fosdick had a certain reputation. He was the theological "bad boy" of modernist theology when he stood at a lectern in the 1920s and delivered his famous sermon "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?". He was in New York City. One preacher, preaching one sermon. But this one talk spread all over the country and created real upset. Could modernist theology win in the Northern Presbyterian denomination? J. Grescham Machen didn't think it should. He was a fundamentalist and wrote in response to Fosdick's sermon. But how does one keep out heresy? The fundamentalists decided to call in a big-name Christian celebrity -- William Jennings Bryan. He was on a cross-country crusade to stop the teaching of evolution in public schools. Not because he didn't believe in science. He did. The problem that Bryan saw with teaching evolution in school was the cruelty that humanity would express if they believed they were nothing more than animals. The battle between liberal and conservative Christians was a public one. William Jennings Bryan and Harry Emerson Fosdick wrote competing articles in The New York Times. Would it cause a split in the Northern Presbyterian denomination? Sources for this episode: "Fundamentalism and American Culture" by George Marsden "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Articles about Fosdick on Christianity Today and the Gospel Coalition Fosdick's sermon Machen's response Westminster Confession of Faith Discussion Questions: What do you think are the basic beliefs required to call something "Christianity"? What if someone does not believe those things but still calls themselves a Christian? Does it matter when people try to use a word to describe themselves that does not apply to them? What is to be our response when we encounter someone who spreads false doctrine? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! So far this season I've covered William Jennings Bryan, a man who enjoyed the nickname "Mr. Fundamentalist". But he wasn't really a fundamentalist. Experts point to another man as the true face of fundamentalism. That man was William Bell Riley. He was a famous preacher in his day, bouncing around the midwest until he settled in Minnesota. He founded the Northwestern schools to spread his vision of Christianity and picked debates with modernists at the University of Chicago. He formed the World's Christian Fundamentals Association to help deliver denominations from modernism. But... he lost. A bunch. In this episode we explore the life of William Bell Riley to discover why he and the fundamentalists burned brightly, only to fizzle out a few years later. Helpful Links: God's Empire by William Vance Trollinger Minnesota History article about Riley New Hampshire Confession Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald Discussion Questions: How should we react to heresy? Do you look for strong leaders like William Bell Riley or do you prefer calm leaders? Why? Do you have a creed you live by? Does your church profess one? Why or why not? How do Bible schools shape our world? Have they impacted your life or the lives of friends? Riley and his friends lost in part because they were all trying to be leaders. Do you think you could submit to the leadership of others? If so, who? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Send checks to: Truce Media LLC PO Box 3434 Jackson, WY 83001 The modernish/ fundamentalist controversy was heating up in the early 1900s. Conservatives saw this coming a long way off but could not stop modernism from taking control of seminaries and popular pulpits. It was everywhere. It all came to a head with WWI. Theological conservatives saw WWI as evidence that the world was getting worse. To them, it was a chance to fight for patriotic reasons. Modernists were also pro-war because they thought this was the "war to end all wars". There would be no more war after this and democracy would take over the world. The liberals fired the first shots in this theological battle because they thought that premillennialism encouraged people to root for the end of the world. William Jennings Bryan was Secretary of State in the US during this time and did his best to keep us out of the war. This episode features the voices of George Marsden (author of "Fundamentalism and American Culture") and Michael Kazin, professor at Georgetown University and author of "What it Took to Win". Sources: Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald A Godly Hero by Michael Kazin What it Took to Win by Michael Kazin These Truths by Jill Lepore To End All Wars by Adam Hochschild Dead Wake by Erik Larson (about The Lusitania) Woodrow Wilson's second inauguration Short article about Billy Sunday Discussion Questions: What was the purpose of WWI? What caused it? Would you have been for or against the war in the 1900s? How can pre and post-millenniallism shape a person's view of the world? Does it have to? How does social Darwinism tie into WWI and WWII? Is WWI an outcome of changing morality? How would you tell a large audience of Christians to adapt to changing morality? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

Love Truce? Donate to help Chris make the show! Walter Rauscenbush published his classic book Christianity and the Social Crisis in 1907. It went on to become a defining work of the social gospel movement. We've spent a lot of time talking about the social gospel this season. That is because it has been identified by historians as the key movement that fundamentalists rebelled against. So we really should understand it, right? In this episode, Chris takes us through highlights of this classic book in order to understand how the social gospel differed from evangelical Christianity. While it lifted up the necessity of doing good works, the social gospel often omitted salvation altogether. Contrast that to evangelical preachers like D.L. Moody who lived their lives with the sole purpose of evangelism. This division between evangelicalism and liberal theologies led to the Great Reversal when theologically conservative Christians went from participating in public acts of goodwill to distancing themselves from it. Breakdown of points made from Christianity and the Social Crisis Rauschenbush's thoughts on socialism (p152) Theories on prophets of the Old Testament creating Judaism - p3 - 5 Amos and Jeremiah denied that God ever told them to sacrifice - p6 Morality is the only thing God cares about - p6 God is interested in the morality of the nation over the individual - p11, 29 The Bible has been altered when it comes to the stories of Jesus - p62-63 Wealth is associated with the wicked in the Bible - p13 Jewish people distributed land in communistic ways - p14 John the Baptist and Jesus both wanted to restore theocracy to Israel - p53 Rauschenbush's ideas about how industry chews people up - p370 Socialism is inevitable - outside link page 153 Discussion Questions: What is Christianity? How much of Christianity can you remove before it becomes something else? Why are we so split between those of us who think of good works and those of us who think of salvation? What is the role of Christians in society? Now that you've decided on the role of Christians in society, how do you match up with your own expectations? Select Sources: Google Books version of Christianity and the Social Crisis Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden More on the ship of Theseus Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Between 1910 and 1915 a collection of 90 essays was distributed by two wealthy oil magnates. These essays attempted to nail down the basics of the Christian faith and counteract the growing modernist movement. "The Fundamentals" is often mentioned in history books about Christian fundamentalism, but it is rare for anyone to discuss the essays themselves. So I thought we should break down at least 6 of them together! I'm joined this episode by some good friends to introduce you to "The Fundamentals". This influential time capsule document takes us inside the proto-fundamentalist movement, just before it really took off. Discussion Questions: What would you include in your own list of fundamentals? Is creationism fundamental? What is the role of evolution in our modern theology? The fear of evolution wasn't just about people thinking we'd come from chimps. It also revolved around concerns of people applying evolution to other areas of life. How have you seen evolution applied to other studies? Is the Bible inerrant? What does that mean? Have you read the full Bible yourself? Why or why not? Essays we read: “My Experience With the Higher Criticism” by JJ Reeve "The Deity of Christ" by BB Warfield “The Certainty and Importance of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead” by Reuben Torrey “Science and Christian Faith” by James Orr “Evolutionism in the Pulpit” by “An Occupant of the Pew” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What kind of Bible do you have? Most of us would answer with the translation we carry. Maybe it's New Living, the King James, or the New International Version. I've heard plenty of conversations about translations in my life. But I've never heard a serious discussion about the notes in various Bibles. Continuing our long exploration of the Christian fundamentalist movement, we explore the Bible version that nudged the United States toward a particular negative theology. One that encouraged people to question the trajectory of history itself. That was one of the purposes of the Scofield Reference Bible, named for its author C.I. Scofield. The Scofield Reference Bible emphasizes the premillennial dispensationalist theology we've been talking about all season. It expects that world history is sliding into chaos. That was not the primary view in the late 1800s and early 1900s in the US. Most people thought that humanity could improve things until Jesus returned. This Bible is one of the things that changed that. Special thanks to Nick, Melanie, Hannah, Marc, and Marian for their help with this episode! Discussion Questions: What kind of Bible do you have? Why did you choose it? What agenda does your Bible have? What audience is it intended for? Who wrote your Bible notes? Flip to Genesis 1 and Revelation 1. What position does it take on creationism? The end of the world? Have you ever considered the origins of your study notes? How do you feel about us having so many different targeted Bibles? Select Sources for this Episode: The History of the Scofield Reference Bible by Arno C. Gaebelein The Evangelicals by Frances Fitgerald Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden Article on Lyman Stewart who financed this Bible A Godly Hero by Michael Kazin Isaiah 37 A Christianity Today article about the changes made to the Scofield Bible (material not used for the episode, but still interesting) The Scofield Reference Bible (1945 edition) The MacArthur Study Bible The Founders Bible The Battlefield of the Mind Bible Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

William Jennings Bryan. If we know him at all it is from the Scopes Monkey Trial at the end of his life. Or maybe we know of his 3 failed campaigns for President of the United States on the Democratic ticket. But many of us are unaware of his efforts to establish world peace. William Jennings Bryan hated war. He wasn't a pacifist - he enlisted for the Spanish-American War after all. But he saw the meaningless carnage of war and vowed to do his best to reduce the amount of bloodshed. So "The Commoner" used his position as Secretary of State under President Wilson to establish 30 peace treaties. In this mini-episode, we revisit his career and talk about the impact this man might have had if WWI hadn't slowed his progress. God-willing I'll be back soon with a full episode! Thanks for your patience! Helpful Sources: "A Godly Hero" book by Michael Kazin "A Righteous Cause" book by Robert Cherny "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitgerald "Money: The True Story of a Made Up Thing" by Jacob Goldstein "What's Your Problem?" podcast from Pushkin Industries, hosted by Jacob Goldstein Discussion Questions: William Jennings Bryan was the head of the party of Jim Crow. Do his actions to stop imperialism or war shape how you feel about him? Would a conciliation treaty policy work today? Is world peace a worthy goal today? What role do weapons play in that? How might this tie into fundamentalism? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Now that we've read In His Steps together and discussed it, let's talk about another work of fiction. Looking Backward was written by Edward Bellamy. That name may sound familiar! We talked about his cousin Frances Bellamy in the episode about the Pledge of Allegiance. Frances was a Christian socialist. Edward wrote his famous book looking forward to the year 2000. He predicted that the United States would be a socialist paradise. People would work hard, retire early, and equality would reign. None of that came true. We're talking about it today in order to understand the zeitgeist in the late 1800s. This book sold over half a million copies in its first few years of publication. It is now over a million copies. That doesn't happen without stirring something in society. As we'll see, socialism was tied to the Social Gospel. The opposition to the Social Gospel is what would go on to create the Christian fundamentalist movement. Helpful Links: What's the Difference Between Communism and Socialism? - Episode of Truce from season 3 A helpful New York Times article about Looking Backward Discussion Questions: How have fictional books you've read impacted your worldview? What do you think about Bellamy's predictions? How does the fear of socialism and communism impact evangelicalism? What real threats were facing evangelicalism in the 1800s? How about now? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support the Truce Podcast via Patreon or through the website you can do Paypal, check, or Venmo! We've been reading the book "In His Steps" together for the last few weeks. It was written by Charles Sheldon, a man whose book is often associated with the social gospel movement. While some historians struggle over the significance of this work, it's pretty plain how it fits this movement. I invited patrons of the show to listen early and then discuss their thoughts on this controversial book. What did you think about the audiobook? Should I record other books this same way? Discussion Questions: Did you enjoy "In His Steps"? Why or why not? How do you think women were portrayed in "In His Steps"? What do you think about the Home Economics movement? How did you see the social gospel in the book? Is the book evangelistic? At which points? If not, why not? Does Christian media need to be "heavy handed"? Recommended Resources: In His Steps by Charles Sheldon The Secret History of Home Economics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is part 3 of an audiobook presented on Truce. Please start at part 1! Become a patron of the show to keep more content like this coming your way! In His Steps by Charles Sheldon is a classic of Christian fiction. It is also one of the top-selling Christian books of all time. We've been running through the history of Christian fundamentalism this season. It's worth noting that fundamentalism was a reaction to liberal theology, especially modernism. Another form of liberal theology was the "Social Gospel". It was a movement led by people like Walter Rauschenbusch that emphasized the socially conscious aspects of Christianity, while simultaneously downplaying evangelism. Christian fundamentalists did not like the Social Gospel. For one thing, it had a positive view of human progress. It said that the world could get better and better and then Jesus would return. Christian fundamentalists generally think that world history trends downward. I'm presenting this original audio recording for many reasons. I think this book offers a great window into the era in which it was created (the late 1800s). It also represents the Social Gospel and a slice of the Holiness movement quite well. Finally, I think we need to hear this story in our modern context. Modern Christian churches are divided. What would happen if we dared to ask "What Would Jesus Do?" Things to track as you listen: The role of women in this society Wealthy attitudes toward the poor The genesis of financial woes in this book is sometimes economic crisis (the late 1800s was full of panics and recessions) and sometimes sin based The Holiness movement and those who object to it Is this book evangelistic? If so, how is the gospel presented? If not, what does this book leave out? The overall positive view of human progress Social movements like the pure foods movement, temperance, suffrage, anti-gambling In His Steps resides in the public domain, but this recording is copyrighted in 2022 by Truce Media LLC. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is the second part of the series. Please start with part 1. In His Steps by Charles Sheldon is a classic of Christian fiction. It is also one of the top-selling Christian books of all time. We've been running through the history of Christian fundamentalism this season. It's worth noting that fundamentalism was a reaction to liberal theology, especially modernism. Another form of liberal theology was the "Social Gospel". It was a movement led by people like Walter Rauschenbusch that emphasized the socially conscious aspects of Christianity, while simultaneously downplaying evangelism. Christian fundamentalists did not like the Social Gospel. For one thing, it had a positive view of human progress. It said that the world could get better and better and then Jesus would return. Christian fundamentalists generally think that world history trends downward. I'm presenting this original audio recording for many reasons. I think this book offers a great window into the era in which it was created (the late 1800s). It also represents the Social Gospel and a slice of the Holiness movement quite well. Finally, I think we need to hear this story in our modern context. Modern Christian churches are divided. What would happen if we dared to ask "What Would Jesus Do?" Things to track as you listen: The role of women in this society Wealthy attitudes toward the poor The genesis of financial woes in this book is sometimes economic crisis (the late 1800s was full of panics and recessions) and sometimes sin based The Holiness movement and those who object to it Is this book evangelistic? If so, how is the gospel presented? If not, what does this book leave out? The overall positive view of human progress Social movements like the pure foods movement, temperance, suffrage, anti-gambling In His Steps resides in the public domain, but this recording is copyrighted in 2022 by Truce Media LLC. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Want more Truce? Give a little bit each month and you'll gain access to a patrons-only Zoom event! We'll be getting together to discuss "In His Steps" and answer listener questions. This event is open to anyone who gives $10/month or more on Patreon. Link: https://www.patreon.com/trucepodcast Event details: Tuesday August 9, 2022 at 8pm EST/7pm CST/ 6pm MT/ 5pm PST. Zoom link will be posted on Patreon for those who give $10/month or more. If you cannot give to help the show, but still really want to participate, please get in touch with @trucepodcast on Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook and Chris will try to squeeze you in. Potential discussion topics: How "In His Steps" ties into the Holiness and Social Gospel movements What is the role of the female characters in this book? The role of wealth and poverty in the story What this book means to us Is "In His Steps" an evangelistic book? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In His Steps by Charles Sheldon is a classic of Christian fiction. It is also one of the top-selling Christian books of all time. We've been running through the history of Christian fundamentalism this season. It's worth noting that fundamentalism was a reaction to liberal theology, especially modernism. Another form of liberal theology was the "Social Gospel". It was a movement led by people like Walter Rauschenbusch that emphasized the socially conscious aspects of Christianity, while simultaneously downplaying evangelism. Christian fundamentalists did not like the Social Gospel. For one thing, it had a positive view of human progress. It said that the world could get better and better and then Jesus would return. Christian fundamentalists generally think that world history trends downward. I'm presenting this original audio recording for many reasons. I think this book offers a great window into the era in which it was created (the late 1800s). It also represents the Social Gospel and a slice of the Holiness movement quite well. Finally, I think we need to hear this story in our modern context. Modern Christian churches are divided. What would happen if we dared to ask "What Would Jesus Do?" Things to track as you listen: The role of women in this society Wealthy attitudes toward the poor The genesis of financial woes in this book is sometimes economic crisis (the late 1800s was full of panics and recessions) and sometimes sin based The Holiness movement and those who object to it Is this book evangelistic? If so, how is the gospel presented? If not, what does this book leave out? The overall positive view of human progress Social movements like the pure foods movement, temperance, suffrage, anti-gambling In His Steps resides in the public domain, but this recording is copyrighted in 2022 by Truce Media LLC. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Can a Christian be holy? Can we go a week, a day, or an hour without sinning? These are questions that modern Christians struggle with. They have their origin in John Wesley, a hymn writer, preacher, and one of the founders of Methodism. In this episode of Truce, we track how this seemingly simple concept got tied up in movements from fundamentalism to Pentecostalism. This episode is going to seem a bit "out there". But this information is important to fundamentalism. Keswick Holiness in particular created an "us and them" scenario where there are Christians who "get it" and those who don't. The divide is between "carnal" Christians and those who are really saved. This impulse makes it easier for fundamentalists to see themselves as set apart from other Christians. We're joined by Chris Evans, author of "Do Everything" which is a biography of suffragette Frances Willard. Helpful Sources and Links: D.L. Moody: A Life by Kevin Belmonte The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald John Wesley's tract on perfection Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden Church History in Plain Language by Bruce Shelley Discussion Questions: How long can a Christian go without sinning? Do you see yourself as "better" or "different" from other Christians? Why? How does that impact the way you treat them? How did the holiness movement shape Pentecostalism? Do you see history and ideas as straight lines, or as a tangle? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

After the evangelist D.L. Moody died at the end of the 1800s, he left behind a series of lieutenants, guys who carried on the work of sharing the gospel and shaping culture. It was these men who went on to set the foundation of the fundamentalist movement in the United States. James Gray, Arthur Pierson, A.J. Gordon, Charles Blanchard, and William Erdman, C.I. Scofield, and William Bell Riley. These guys went on to found schools, start radio ministries, spearhead publications, and amass large followings. They wrote the influential (if under-read) pamphlet series “The Fundamentals” and would fight the rise of Darwinism in schools and liberal theology in denominations. In this episode, we'll explore the emergence of fiefdoms in evangelicalism—ministries with little or no denominational oversight. This method of ministry was crucial in landing us where we are today. Could the evangelicals Church of today use a Magna Carta of sorts to keep ministries under accountability? Helpful Sources and Links: D.L. Moody: A Life by Kevin Belmonte The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald A helpful article on the Magna Carta https://www.britannica.com/topic/Magna-Carta Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden Short bio on Reuben Torrey Forbes article about Christianity in Ivy League Colleges Church History in Plain Language by Bruce Shelley Discussion Questions: Do you think that ministry leaders should be held accountable? Should accountability be external or is it okay to limit it to internal accountability? Are there steps that Truce can take as a show to introduce accountability without bogging Chris down with too many requirements? Do you live in a Christian “bubble”? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the bubble? Would you let your kids go to a secular school? Why or why not? It's interesting that Reuben Torrey was seen as snooty. Do you think that attitude is compatible with humble Christian service? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

DL Moody. The name may be familiar. There is a Moody Publishers, a Moody Bible Institute, Moody Radio. His name is all over evangelicalism. His remarkable life story is something worth noting. Though Moody was not a fundamentalist, some of the tactics he used to build his ministry would be employed by some of his lieutenants when they built the foundation of the movement. So we're going to spend this episode talking about this remarkable man. Born in poverty, educated to only about a 4th-grade level, he would rise to become one of the most important American evangelists. His folksy style and booming voice were winsome to the millions of people to whom he preached. In this difficult series about controversial ideas, why not take some time to discuss something that went right in the late 1800s? The ministry of Moody. I'm joined in this episode by Kevin Belmonte. He's the author of several history books including D.L. Moody: A Life. Check out his books and let me know what you think! Helpful Links and Sources Kevin Belmonte's book D.L. Moody: A Life The Evangelicals by Frances Fitzgerald A nice bio on Harry Moorhouse See the plaque where Moody was converted Discussion Questions Have you ever shared the gospel with someone like Mr. Kimball did in the shoe store? Why or why not? Is there someone you could pray for that they would be saved? Why do you think Moody was so popular in his day? Have you ever encountered Moody Radio, Publishers, or Bible Institute? The “Christian bubble” really started to take shape in the era of Moody. How has the “bubble” impacted your life? What are your views on poverty? How do people become poor and how can it be fixed? Do you think that all poor people are lazy? Why? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The 1800s were an era of big questions, many of which we answered in cruel and selfish ways. Is one race better than another? Is one religion? If so, which one? In what ways? Is one economic system better than another? Is one system of governance like a democratic republic like the US, or socialist, or monarchy, theocracy, communism, best? Some people answered these questions with a resounding "yes". But if we think our people and ways are better than anyone else's, what responsibility do we have to spread those things? Men like Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt were firm believers in social Darwinism, though their vision of it meant teaching those less "civilized" people our ways. And they were okay with the United States taking power over them. Meanwhile, there were men like William Jennings Bryan who refused to think of others in social Darwinism terms. He spent years fighting that dark philosophy, ultimately prosecuting the Scopes Monkey trial to stop the spread of social Darwinism. But the seeds of eugenics were planted. Caught in the middle were the people of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Phillippines, and other colonies of the Spanish empire. Spain was busy imprisoning Cubans in concentration camps. Their ruthless behavior toward America's neighbors caught the attention of the US Senate, which was already champing at the bit for a fight. Men in the United States were worried about their waning influence on society. Groups bellyached about how men were not men anymore thanks to cities and offices. In the minds of some, war was the answer to weak-willed men. And Spain provided that war. Our guest today is Paul T. McCartney author of “Power and Progress: American National Identity, the War of 1898, and the Rise of American Imperialism”. He teaches at Towson University. **CORRECTION - In the original version of this story I referred to the USS Maine as the HMS Maine. That was incorrect. HMS stands for "Her Majesty's Ship", which makes no sense for American ships. The current version was changed for accuracy.** Discussion Questions: Do you believe your people are somehow superior to another people group? Why? Does that sound like an attitude Jesus would have? If you are somehow superior, what is your responsibility to other people? Should the US help people who are being oppressed around the world? When should we intervene? Do you think that men are in decline? If so, what is the answer to that? Do you better relate to Teddy Roosevelt or William Jennings Bryan when it comes to war? Or are you a pacifist? How would Jesus have responded to the cruelty of Spain? What do you think about social Darwinism? Helpful Links and Sources: "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald "Church History in Plain Language" by Bruce Shelley "The War Lovers" by Evan Thomas "Power and Progress" by Paul T. McCartney "The Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin Britannica article on Darwin's Beagle voyage Britannica article about Darwin's London years and natural selection Bio of Henry Cabot Lodge Article abouhttp://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/gilded/empire/text7/tillman.pdft Alfred Thayer Mahan Proctor's Speech Tillman's Speech Bryan's Speech "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Truce. www,trucepodcast.com/donate Populism is a tricky subject. We use it these days as a slur, but populism can be a useful phenomenon. History professor and author Michael Kazin says that populism is an important tool when it comes to regulating power. In the late 1800s, railroads and banks were out of control. Industrialists like John D. Rockefeller had uninhibited control of their markets. Rockefeller believed in social Darwinism and didn't mind using dirty tactics to undermine his competition. The Populist Party sprouted out of frustrations women had with the political machines of their day. Republicans and Democrats were not yet willing to accept women and the issues they cared about. Women were slowly becoming a force within politics, but neither party had the guts to accept them. So women and others decided to form their own party. But in the election of 1896, the Populist Party was worried about a split vote. They worried that if they were to run a candidate of their own then they might split the vote. So the Populist Party backed Democratic nominee William Jennings Bryan. Bryan was a man of God. He quoted the Bible extensively, talked about the example of Jesus. But he was soundly defeated by the Republicans and William McKinley. He had only about 4% of the budget of his opponents. The story of Bryan is an interesting one because it contains the building blocks of fundamentalism. Discussion Questions: What is a populist? Can you name some populists? What are the advantages of populism? The drawbacks? How are Donald Trump, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders similar? William Jennings Bryan was one of the first presidential hopefuls from a major party to tour the country. How has this shaped American politics? Why do we like to see politicians in our home states? What do populism and fundamentalism have in common? Do you think that fundamentalism relies on strong figures as populism does? Why or why not? Helpful Resources: "A Godly Hero" and "What It Took to Win" by Michael Kazin Library of Congress collection of Chautauqua materials Bernie Sanders Clip from C-SPAN Elizabeth Warren Clip from C-SPAN Donald Trump clip from C-SPAN Article about Mary Lease "These Truths" by Jill Lepore Library of Congress collection of McKinley/Bryan campaign materials. It's worth searching the site in general for images from both of them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Great Depression. Some say that it was caused by a failure of the stock market. Well... that's not all. Jacob Goldstein, host of NPR's Planet Money podcast and author of "Money: the Truce Story of a Made-Up Thing" joins us to discuss the role the gold standard played in making the depression what it was. Here is why the gold standard made the Great Depression much worse. Simply put, the panic of 1929 caused people to run to the bank and demand their money back in the form of gold. We were on the gold standard back then and you could literally go to a bank and ask for them to get your money in gold. But banks were running out! There was only so much gold on hand because banks don't generally keep 100% of their money in the vault. And banks (for the ease of our understanding things) "create" money when they do loans. So it was possible for a bank only to have a certain percentage of their loans backed by actual gold. This created real trouble. If the banks ran out of gold, they'd go broke and have to close. So the Federal Reserve decided to raise interest rates. Raising interest rates gives people an incentive to leave their money in banks because then they get more interest. BUT it also made it harder for people to borrow money or refinance their existing loans. Which put a huge crimp on the American financial system. In order to keep gold in the banks, the Fed had to hobble the loan industry. That meant that businesses couldn't get loans to help with payroll, and people looking to start a business couldn't get the money they needed. And the economy froze. That is why the gold standard was bad for the economy. Preserving it meant sacrificing the loan industry. Helpful Sources: "Money: The True Story of a Made-Up Thing" Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There was a time not so long ago when the value of an ounce of gold cost $20.67. That was true not just in one moment or one year. It was true in the 1880s, 1890s, 1900s, 1920s... This was the gold standard. A person could take $20.67 to a federal bank and receive an ounce of gold in return. This system worked really well... for a while. But by the 1890s the constant deflation caused by the increasing value of gold meant that people with loans had to work harder and harder to pay them back. The value of gold and the value of goods had an inverse relationship, like a seesaw. One side went up and the other went down. This is the topic William Jennings Bryan chose to discuss at the 1896 Democratic Convention. And it was that speech that won him the presidential nomination that year. Imagine that! Someone so passionate about inflating the cost of goods that they are chosen to be president! His bimetallism (he wanted to add silver into the mix to devalue the specie) stance came out of his social gospel leanings and his Christian faith. This was a high point for the social gospel. As the evangelical world was about to turn to the darker premillennialist view, Bryan made an impassioned plea that we could, in fact, make this world a better place. My guest for this episode is the amazing Jacob Goldstein. He's the author of the book “Money: the True Story of a Made-Up Thing”. He's also a former co-host of the Planet Money podcast and now hosts "What's Your Problem?", a show where he interviews guests about the issues in their industries. You'll also hear from Michael Kazin, professor of history from Georgetown and author of "A Godly Hero". Helpful Links "Money: The True Story of a Made-Up Thing" by Jacob Goldstein (makes a great gift!) "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin "The Cross of Gold" speech Discussion Questions Have you ever gotten so excited at a political speech that you would gladly carry the politician around the room? What is money? Why do some of us want our money to be backed by something else? Why gold? Is there something inherent in gold that you think makes it forever valuable? Do politicians and government officials have some responsibility to consider how monetary policy impacts those in the lower classes? What does that look like? How has your life been impacted by monetary policy? How do you feel about things like the FDIC? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This season of the Truce Podcast tracks the history of Christian fundamentalism. So far we've covered the rise of para-church ministries through preachers, the creation of dispensationalism, and the rising threat of modernist theology in the late 1800s. That is a lot to digest! So in this episode, I thought it would be helpful to sit down with some of the smartest guys I know and ask them, "how do we deal with Christian fundamentalism?" Christian fundamentalism has impacted our lives in various ways. Ray McDaniel (pastor of First Baptist Church in Jackson, WY) shares that he grew up under fundamentalist teaching. Chris Staron (host of the Truce Podcast) talks about his childhood and teen years listening to fundamentalist radio. Nick Staron discusses the last few years when he has seen fundamentalism rise inside his own circle of friends. Here are some things to consider from this episode: Modernist theology can be seen as an actual threat to evangelical theology. How should we deal with threats in a godly way? Do end times teachings open doors for sharing the gospel? How much do we really know about the end times? And how should that shape the way we live today? What does it really mean to love people who are from a different denomination? Do we still need denominations today? How can we keep ministries accountable? Helpful links: The Late Great Planet Earth - hosted by Orson Welles Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

George Marsden characterized Christian fundamentalism as "militantly anti-modernist protestant evangelicalism". Right there you see that fundamentalism is a reaction against something. And that something is modernist theology. Modernism is a broad term used to describe a few different schools of liberal theology. In this episode, we discuss the Tubingen and Berlin schools. Modernist theology is often marked by the desire to discuss the "historic Jesus". This term can be a bit confusing because it is less about understanding what historic texts say about Jesus and more about discussing the non-miraculous aspects of Jesus' life and ministry. Our special guest this episode is Chris Evans, professor of Christian History and Methodist Studies at Boston University and author of "Do Everything" a biography of Francis Willard. Discussion Questions: What does it mean that fundamentalism is a reaction to modernist theology? What is modernist theology? Do you know any theologically liberal people? Do you find it difficult to both love the Lord and love your neighbor? What makes someone a Christian? Does your view include theologically conservative people? What about theologically liberal people? Where is the line for you? How vital are Jesus' miracles to your life and faith? Is there a tension in Christianity where it is culturally difficult to be theologically conservative and still want to love our neighbors? Helpful Links and Sources: "The Evangelicals" by Frances Fitzgerald An interesting article on Arminius "Church History in Plain Language" by Bruce Shelley "Who is An Evangelical?" Thomas Kidd Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters edited by Donald K. McKim p 350 Matthew 22:36-40 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The 1800s were a time of milking cows and going to the county fair. Sure... but what else? We tend to think of this century as a quiet, pastoral era when people were friendly and life was simple. But the 1800s were a crazy time! The American Civil War, the Napoleonic Wars, the Spanish-American War, conquest, the suffrage movement, the prohibition movement, massive technological changes. It's a wonder we ever made it out alive. In this episode, we explore the early life of William Jennings Bryan and the Democratic Party, the party of Jim Crow that he would soon lead. After the Civil War, it was the Democrats who created Black Codes in the South to restrict the upward mobility of African Americans. They were the party of white farmers and soon transitioned into representing labor unions and, eventually, many black people in the United States. Bryan was one of the men responsible for that transition. Helpful Links and Sources: "A Godly Hero" by Michael Kazin Truce episode about the Woman's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) Meeting notes of the 1873 Evangelical Alliance "Fundamentalism and American Culture" by George Marsden "A Righteous Cause" by Robert W. Cherny (book on William Jennings Bryan) Interesting bio on Stephen Douglas President Hays' acceptance speech Discussion Questions: What do you think of when you think of the 1800s? Was the 1800s a simpler time? What mistakes did the Republican Party make in ending Reconstruction? How should abolitionists have handled the South after the Civil War? Can a Christian lead a racist political party? Should they? What were some technological advances that came about in the 1800s? How might they have shifted the way people lived and thought back then? Are there technological changes going on now that could shift the way we think and interact with each other? Chris ends the episode by talking about how Christians should be a people of the means, not necessarily the ends. Do you think the ends ever justify the means for Christians? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices