Critical Race Theory, Christian Nationalism, and Reasoned Faith | A Bee Interview With Neil Shenvi
|
Time
Text
All right, guys.
Hey, welcome to the Babylon Bee Interview podcast.
We're very excited today.
We have a couple of guests that you guys have, so one that you have not met, Sam.
He's going to be, this is Sam Greer.
He is one of our writers, and he's going to be interviewing our guests today.
So we're very excited to have you on, man.
This is very exciting.
Glad to be here.
I'm Jarrett.
And with us today is Neil Shenvy, who is an apologist, and he has all kinds of stuff that we're going to talk about today.
So we're really excited.
Really happy to have you, Neil.
Thank you so much for joining us.
Well, thank you guys for inviting me.
Neil, I'll lead off with the first question.
We see you've got a lot of books behind you.
Have you read all those?
I have actually read about 90% of those books.
This is not for show.
This is actually my for show shelf is to the left of me.
It has like highbrow college type books.
Well, this is also highbrow, but it's more utilitarian highbrow books.
Go ahead.
I'll give you a trick.
My dad's a history professor.
I'm an adjunct English professor, but we have a lot of books and we always get asked about them.
Here's the easy answer.
If someone says, have you read all those books?
You tell them, I've read some of them twice.
Yeah.
Oh, that's good.
Yeah, that's a good answer.
I always say I've read parts of these all the way through.
Yeah, that works too.
Yeah.
I've read half of these books half as well as half of them deserve.
That they deserve.
Yeah, that's what I always say.
Eric Metaxas always says that.
He's like, oh, I've read parts of your book all the way through.
That's good.
So I said that to him.
He thought it was funny.
Good.
Anyway, so what's your favorite book on the shelf behind you?
Okay, well, that's a hard question.
This is my critical theory shelf.
Holy cow.
Two thumbs down.
So asking.
What's that?
Two thumbs down.
Well, so, okay, no, so they've been arranged.
The ones on the top, I think I actually can see that.
You can see that.
The top shelf.
Those are the anti-critical theory books.
These are the applied critical theory books.
These are the hardcore theorist books.
From our shelf.
I don't, that's like a basement level.
Yeah.
No, do not, do not open.
They never talk.
So I think probably, I actually think my favorite book probably on this shelf is Thaddeus Williams' book.
Hey, Thaddeus Williams.
You guys interviewed him.
We did.
We did have.
We were just talking about him right before we stepped in here.
Dan and I were having a conversation about Thaddeus.
So critical theory is an interesting piece to get into a little bit.
When I was an undergrad, I was an English major and we did, we took critical theory and contemporary critical theory and we'd go through Lacan and Derrida and the rest of those godless hippies.
And I'm surprised the English professors didn't get crucified, but they would just be clear that we were reading for the purpose of discernment and that there was great danger within.
Then I got a master's degree from a local secular school, Claremont Graduate University, and we read the same authors, but it would be like they'd be preaching Gramsci.
It was just, it was a radically different experience.
So critical theory, something to be aware of, something to approach with discernment, because it can be poisonous.
It can get you into a spiral.
Can you elaborate on what it's been like seeing critical theory come into the mainstream?
Now everyone talks about it.
Right, exactly.
So, well, you probably were as an English major, you probably were looking at literary critical theory.
Right.
People like Derek and so more of like the analysis of a text.
The interesting thing is that what's captured the popular imagination is something called critical social theory.
And it's interesting, I was confused for a long time.
Well, why are they both called critical theory?
The answer is they're both trying to read text, but the first half is reading literary texts, like actual books, through the lens of race, class, gender, et cetera.
The second half, critical social theory, is reading cultural texts.
So you'll look at movies, at behavior, at cultural artifacts, kinds of, you know, anything, and interpret it through the lens of race, class, gender, etc.
And so that's the fundamental connection.
But now it's very complicated.
But things like critical race theory, queer theory are all forms of critical social theory that try to analyze how this power operates within society to create social stratification.
Anyway.
So you, well, now I'd like to hear a little more.
Critical social theory, how'd you get there from theoretical chemistry?
Oh boy.
Okay.
All right.
So about, so I was writing this, the book that's on in front of you called Why Believe.
It's on the table there.
Yeah, show it off, Fianna.
Thank you.
Why Believe by Neil Shenvy?
Right.
So I became a Christian in graduate school, and I have a PhD in theoretical chemistry.
And so when I became a Christian, I immediately was interested in how can I share the gospel with my very intellectual colleagues who are often atheists or agnostics.
And so I began reading apologetics books, like classic ones like C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity, Lee Strobel's Case for Christ.
And I got further and further down the rabbit hole.
And I began writing this book because basically I'm cheap and I was handing out copies of Keller's Reason for God on the Yale campus.
And I was like, I can't afford to do this anymore.
I don't have enough money as a postdoc.
So I thought I'll write my own book and then I'll give it out for free.
And so I began writing this book.
And then a few, so 2016, I think I'd finished the first draft and I met providentially my good friend Dr. Pat Sawyer, who was instrumental in getting this book into the hands of Crossway.
And it's now published.
But around that time, we met, and he actually was getting a PhD in education and cultural studies.
And his dissertation was on critical theory and cultural foundations.
So we began just chatting, you know, what do you do?
What do you do?
And he starts explaining what he does.
And I'm thinking, this is right around the time, maybe a little after Black Lives Matter took off.
And I was seeing people in the evangelical church promoting Black Lives Matter and these ideas.
And I was getting, I was confused because I was like, well, it doesn't sound like something's off here about the stuff they're saying.
But I couldn't figure it out.
And of course, I was a scientist and not at all involved in the quote-unquote culture wars.
So I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong.
When he explained to me what he was doing as a professional academic, it just clicked.
I said, this is actually what I'm seeing in the church.
The funny thing is, at the time, he was like, there is no way that biblically grounded Christians are swallowing this poison.
He got into this field because he wanted to reach his secular progressive colleagues who were atheists with the gospel.
The furthest thing from his mind was having to counteract these ideas in the church.
And yet, so we actually went back and forth, kind of in a heated email exchange where I'm saying, no, really, there are evangelical Christians promoting these ideas.
He's like, no, there's no way.
So we came to agree that, yeah, actually, these ideas are everywhere.
And that was 2016, 2015.
And now I think we've really seen that explode.
So are you doing this, a lot of this kind of work, Neil?
Like, you're going to churches?
Are you talking to people about this stuff?
You know, I told you, I'm a niche Twitter micro-celebrity.
I'm amazed you don't know me.
Ask my kids, they'll tell you, Daddy is famous.
He has a Twitter army.
He's going to tear down.
No.
Well, 30,000 people is a lot of people.
That's a lot.
Yeah, that's a big following.
So in reality, I have written a lot on this subject, and I've given talks on it.
I'm actually working on a book right now with Dr. Pat Sawyer, which will hopefully, we're in talks with publishers and will hopefully be out next fall.
We're trying to expedite it because we realize how we, you know, we, one of our big requirements for the publisher was we have to get this out now.
We've been dawdling and taking too long and hoping we have, we can, naively, we thought, well, it's gotta, it's gotta get better at some point.
Right.
We were wrong.
You know, if we'd known, we kept thinking, well, at some point, people are just gonna just wake up and say, this is not gospel.
Right.
But it's, it's not.
And actually, people will ask me, well, have we hit the woke breaking point yet?
And I say to them, you know, I'm not a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but I'll say this.
I think we haven't.
And here's why.
All of the kids who are currently in high school in 10 years will be your pastors.
Right.
I just think about that.
These ideas are, you know, they're everywhere, but they're extremely present in high schools, middle schools, colleges.
And so, and like you said, people are absorbing these ideas like just without question.
Just the way we think about race and gender and class and sexuality.
And so that's just the water we're drinking and the air we're breathing.
And so all I'm saying is I don't think we can sit on our hands and say, oh, it'll, it'll play.
It's a fad.
It is a fad, but it's going to have horrible spiritual impact on whole churches and congregations and denominations.
Entire generations.
You get the SBC and the stuff that's going on there.
Do you know Vodi Bachman?
Have you met Vodi Bachman?
Yeah, I've done a panel with Vodi M.
Yeah, he's very cool.
So my mother-in-law also calls him Vodi Bachman, and it drives my wife and I up a wall to be able to do it.
Is it Vodi?
Vodi Bacham.
I'm an idiot.
No, no, no, no.
I called him Neil Chevney earlier, too.
So I, you know, Niall, we're so happy you're here, Mr. Mr. Shinvu.
How do you spell that?
How do you say that?
Niall.
So I've actually, I wanted to go back for a second to a comment you made about, hey, in 10 years, these guys are going to be through seminary and they're going to be young, hungry pastors, and it's all going to be, you know, they'll take down the cross, put up a black square or a rainbow or a scalpel or what have you.
It's a scary thought.
It's anti-gospel.
I think strong leaders have really helped stem the tide.
I think of Vodi Bakam.
I think of Christianity and Wokeness by Owen Strand.
It's Vadi.
Vodi.
And then I think of, like at my own church, I remember like I ended up pulling down my social media for just a brief time, like taking it off my phone because it was stressful.
I felt the pressure to do something when the black square was everywhere.
And then, but I knew it was manipulative.
And then he did this whole sermon series on the social justice movement.
We called it, you know, it had a longer title at the time rather than wokeness.
And it was all from a passage midway through Ezekiel where it says, the soul that sins shall die.
Stop asking why, you know, previous generations' sins are being visited on the children.
Each person's responsible for their own sin.
So to that rant, my question is this.
Strong leadership in terms of stemming the tide of this anti-gospel wokeness.
Who do you foresee as people that you're arm in arm with in terms of pushing back against it?
So I think that I appreciate the stuff that Vodi or Vodi, I guess, has written.
I have not read Strahan's book.
I think that one of the, I sort of reviewed his book a year ago or so.
I think one of the problems it suffers from is that he has the right intuition.
He sees the problem very clearly and he's right about it.
I think the problem is that he doesn't really do a really deep dive into the literature.
And also he tends to like, he sees the problem.
He's trying to perform open heart surgery with a hand grenade.
He's just like, everybody stop doing this.
It's crazy.
And I think the book that Pat and I are working on, we really, and so he's, I think he's very good in terms of galvanizing people who agree with him and saying, hey, this is a really bad problem.
And I agree with him.
100% is.
But I think we're trying to really reach the people in the middle, the fence sitters who are saying, because a lot of evangelicals, the reason they embrace this stuff is not because they're just trying to be progressive at all.
It's because they love people.
They love people of color.
They love women.
They hate racism.
And you have people telling them, if you really want to be anti-racist, here's how.
They're like, yes, great, wonderful.
How can I show solidarity with struggling, marginalized people?
But then it gets sucked into this pit of, and we're trying to say to you, we actually don't want to at all impugn you, call you names, say you're awful.
We share your concerns.
Racism is a real thing.
And yet we want to just really strongly pull you back to where the Bible is and caution you very clearly.
And so I think, so I know third way is like a dirty word.
We are trying to say, look, we agree there are problems out in society.
We agree there.
And some people that are frankly, we are very anti-woke in a sense.
And if you want to have two tribes, we're on the anti-woke tribe, unapologetically.
But we also think there can be extremism on our side too.
Anyone you just, you utter the word race, you're a communist.
You say anything.
Or you're a racist, yeah.
Exactly.
Or you're a Christian nationalist, which we can get to in that.
Well, that's the other side.
But in terms of my anti-woke camp, there is a danger that you get so skittish that any mention of justice, any mention about racism gets you cast out.
And so we want to admit that it can be a problem.
Let's be calm.
Let's be rational.
Let's look at these ideas as ideas.
Are they biblical?
Are they true?
And so we try to take that approach, even though, I mean, and we're unapologetically on that anti-woke side, but we want to try to bring people, because again, plenty of people are galvanizing, on both sides are galvanizing their teams.
But we want to say, hey, we want to be on Team Jesus.
That's the team.
I love that.
And again, obviously, there are lines you have to draw and say, this is just not compatible with Christianity.
But you want to pull people over that line towards the Bible, not push them farther away.
I have a graphic where I show people, if you just yell at someone and call them a woke Marxist, fascist, whatever, then if they were on the line, they're going to end up way over the line now because you just turn them off.
We want to say, hey, we're not going to call you names, but look at this stuff people are writing.
This is not compatible with what the Bible teaches.
Anyway, so that's a long way to say I'm wishy-washy.
Well, no, no, you're not.
I think you're biblical, and I think that's a really important thing to do.
And it helps me, actually, but what you're saying helps me a lot because I have a visceral reaction when I start to hear these things coming out of Christians' mouths.
It really bothers me because I know where this leads.
It leads to division.
It leads to hatred.
It leads to, and that is not the gospel.
It's not the church.
And so the other side, falling off the log on the other side is a big problem.
And you speak about this a lot.
So like the Christian nationalist thing, you have spoken about it.
Can you define what's your definition of Christian nationalism?
And how do you speak about it?
That's the problem.
So if you look at the book that was recommended to me was Whitehead and Perry's book, Taking America Back for God.
And there are sociologists who've written a very popular book.
They're written two now.
I read both of them.
The other one's called The Flag and the Cross.
But The first book was all about how Christian nationalism, they first say it's Christianity co-opted in the service of ethno-nationalism.
That's what you think about when you think about Christian nationalism.
Think about people like waving a cross flag and then like casting out immigrants and wearing clan robes.
That's what I think Christian nationalist.
I think handmaid's tale, I don't know, something like that.
So it has a very morally loaded term and they define it to mean that, like a bad, bad thing.
But then when they actually do a survey to measure, well, who's a Christian nationalist as sociologist?
They ask questions like, should the government allow prayer in schools?
And if you say yes, like strongly agree, that that moves you towards the Christian nationalist scale.
And they have six questions.
And if you look at the questions, they're all very ambiguous.
So again, should there be prayer in schools?
Well, what do you mean by that?
Do you mean should the teacher lead prayer during class?
I don't think so.
I don't want a random ecumenical person praying to the universal spirit in school.
But are you saying what?
Prayer in school could also mean can the kids pray silently in school?
Well, of course they'd better be allowed to do that.
And so the questions are a lot of them are very ambiguous.
And if you take the test sort of like, if I put on my like, you know, ultra MAGA conservative, not MAGA, it's ultra-conservative hat and read the questions one way.
I'm like, well, I could answer them in a very Christian nationalist way.
Or if I interpret them a different way, I could end up being an anti-Christian nationalist.
So they have this data here.
I'm like, well, this is kind of meaningless because what you've asked is just not well worded.
And the funny thing is that in their surveys, if you look at, they have like 40%, it's like 60% of white Americans, something like that, are supportive of Christian nationalism according to these categories they have.
That's what they find.
Well, it's interesting is that if you look at what else they found, they find that of all racial groups, white, white, black, Hispanic, and Asian, of those four groups, blacks are, according to their own data, the most supportive of Christian nationalism.
They find that something like 20% of Jews are supportive of Christian nationalism, and then like 40% of Democrats are supportive of Christian nationalism.
And this is actually, this is in their book.
They say that.
And then you're like, wait a minute.
That doesn't match.
If you're defining Christian nationalism on the one hand as separation and ethno-nationalism, which conjures up all these images of like burning crosses, on the other hand, 40% of Democrats and 20% of Jews are Christian.
So what happens is you get this, essentially, it's like this equivocation where you have the same term being used in two different ways.
One is describing Nazis and the other is describing basically Democrats and everybody, half the U.S.
So my point is this, like, if I were to define it like as I would define it, I'd say, yeah, I'm fine with going with the ethno-nationalists who want a white ethno-state Christian Protestant ethnic.
Okay, fine, fine.
We're going to throw out all the immigrants.
That's fine.
Define it that way.
And of course I oppose that.
I mean, find me if there are maybe what, a handful of people who love that, but most Americans are like everybody opposes that.
Right.
Yeah.
I hope so.
Well, yeah, I'm sure you can't say that.
Except for those, that very small group of people that doesn't, which we all say, yes, that's actually what Christian nationalists are.
Right.
Right.
That term is being, is being applied to everybody.
I mean, if you voted conservative, now you're a Christian nationalist if you're white, right?
So like, that's kind of what I find that in the conversation, it's not helpful at all because people don't know what they're talking about.
Right.
And so I love that you're defining it.
And in this conversation, in this race conversation, even at our church, that was, that was the, they're like, well, we can't be Christian nationalists.
So we have to be whatever, Christian progressive nationalists or whatever, like whatever the other opposite is.
We got to be the opposite of that.
And so, but they never really define it very well.
And so you're talking about a broader group of people or a very specific group of people that you're trying to define.
So how do you define it?
I'm sorry, go ahead.
I didn't mean to define it.
Yeah, so I'd use it.
If I had to define the term, I'd use it.
I would use it to describe people who want an ethnostate.
They want a Christian ethnostate, a white Christian ethnostate that throws out all the non-Christians or somehow makes Christianity our national religion and somehow oppresses or puts it in law.
I don't know, something like that, where I think most people are like, well, we don't want that.
But then what's being used popularly is, like you said, as this broad label to tar anybody with conservative values, including blacks, Jews, Hispanics.
Increasingly, Hispanics are more and more conservative.
So I think that it becomes a meaningless predictive.
And in the same way, you see the same game being played with words like racism or white supremacy, where I can show you the literature behind me where they've intentionally redefined words like white supremacy, whereas it used to be to refer to the Klan or neo-Nazis.
Now it refers to the system that suffuses our culture, which somehow elevates whiteness, which does not mean white skin.
It means these ideas of objectivity and individualism.
So the point is, I think you see this sort of shell game played a lot where they will take a term, they will redefine it, and then blast people on the basis of this redefined term.
People get terrified.
Well, I don't want to be called a racist.
I don't want to be called a Christian nationalist.
And then you can use it as a cudgel to get people to support your preferred policy, to read your books, whatever.
So what I always do is I say don't focus on labels, whether it's critical race theory or wokeness or Christian nationalism.
Focus on ideas.
Tell me what idea you're promoting, and we can discuss whether it's biblical or unbiblical or true or false.
Don't just tar me with a brush and call me anything, progressive, Christian nationalist, fascist.
Tell me what ideas you oppose and we can discuss those rather than dealing with labels.
It's totally a label along the lines of how you can append phobia to anything.
And now everyone's terrified to be called whatever phobic, you know, transphobic, homophobic.
It's something meant to bludgeon and terrify and cudgel people into silence or into acquiescing.
I think you're hitting the nail on the head when you say the key is to be biblical.
I alluded to it earlier, but I'll mention it again.
The biblical vision is that the balm for real racism, the cure for real societal ills, is salvation and forgiveness.
And the vision that Paul casts is when you're born again, when you repent, and if anyone is in Christ, he's a new creation, the old has passed away, the new has come, he's got a new identity, then there's neither new Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, all are one in Christ.
Listen, we've got to get real.
I think we can admit that, you know, Paul was being oppressive there by telling people to be unified.
Neil, would you like to take this opportunity to rebuke the Apostle Paul for his oppressive perpetuating of a racist system?
Yeah, probably not.
So how do we as Christians, how do we engage in the public sector?
I mean, you're doing it.
How do we engage with politics and that kind of stuff without being Christian nationalists?
Like, what do we do?
I mean, I think one thing we, so to be clear also, I do have some sympathy.
I think it's my sympathy for people that are quote-unquote post-liberal, meaning that they see the problems with classical liberalism.
I'm sympathetic towards that view.
I personally would still see myself as primarily a classical liberal, meaning that I still believe in things like free speech.
The free exchange of freedom.
Yeah, frequency of ideas, very much so.
I still think that's still the way to go.
But what I'm sympathetic to is the critique that, look, at some point, we have to do something about the fact that drag queen story hour 10 years ago would have been unthinkable and now is just not only accepted but being wildly promoted by the president of the United States.
And classical liberalism, I said this on Twitter a few, like a week ago, classical liberalism is a wonderful way to work out solutions to problems nonviolently when you agree on basic moral categories.
But once half the population no longer agrees with the categories, then now you have real trouble because one side says, hey, I don't think we should be having strippers pole dancing for toddlers.
And the other side says, why not, you bigot?
So how do you work that out in a free society?
And I'm not saying I have a solution.
I don't have a solution.
I'm just pointing out that it's a real problem, thinking that we're, oh, we can all just meet in a neutral public square.
Well, there is no neutral public square.
There's always a public square that's informed by a certain worldview.
And as fewer and fewer people have a Christian worldview, we're going to have problems playing nice together.
There's not going to be a way to play nice really.
And again, I'm not saying, well, then be nasty.
No, I'm just saying, look, there's a problem.
I don't know how to deal with it.
I'm not a political scientist.
Well, sometimes it comes down to language too, because if you were to say drag queen story hour, that would mean one thing to a particular person.
But if you were to actually say, man dressed in lingerie wants to spend an hour with your kids, they might think differently.
That was one of our headlines recently.
That was a good one.
Yeah.
Who wrote that?
Was that you?
Kyle.
Oh, okay.
Kyle's a man.
If it gets quoted here, good chance it's Kyle.
I'll weigh in on that too.
I think a solution, because you say like, man, it's, am I tempted to be black-pilled?
You know, not red-pilled, not blue-pilled.
But man, like, if the categories are being lost, is there any hope?
I think one answer, and it's not a flashy answer, but I think it's true, is prayer.
You know, in Proverbs, it says the heart of the king is like a stream of water in the hand of the Lord.
He turns it whichever way he chooses.
Prayer can work.
Paul even says, pray for your leaders with the desire and the goal being that they will, you know, repent ultimately, but it says, pray for your leaders so you can have quiet and peaceable lives.
I think continuing to push and fight for a quiet and peaceable life for a Romans 13 type of government where the government is punishing evil and rewarding good, continuing to fight for that and with free speech being a baseline for that, that's a next best hope beyond the versions of our leaders.
How do we redefine or how do we, how do we create those categories again where we can actually, that's my question to you.
Maybe you can speak into that.
How do we, as Christians, not try to impose our morality, but then say, look, these are actually basic human morals that we all need to sort of agree on.
How do we do that?
I think one thing is that we shouldn't be afraid of imposing morality because all laws impose morality.
They all do.
So we don't want to impose our morality.
Well, why not?
Because thou shalt not murder is imposing your morality on murderers.
So it's okay to say, I'm going to impose my morality.
But what I want to do is also convince people that I'm not imposing my morality.
I'm imposing the actual morality.
So we should recover these, what I guess Baptists, I heard Andrew Walker once say, their creational, what do they call it, creational categories?
And then Ryan Ericson chimed in, that's natural law.
The point is, there's a long tradition.
That's natural law, right?
But Baptists can't call it that.
So we call it something else.
But the point is, Christian thinkers have for millennia said, hey, there are categories that nature shows us are good and right.
We can know it not through knowing the Bible, just through observing nature that certain things are good, certain things are evil.
And it's not like we have to have that handed down to us in a book.
God writes his law in our hearts.
And so Christians should be of all denominations can be confident in saying, no, there's an objective moral reality that we can point to and say this is good and this is bad.
And now, well, people might reject that and disagree with us, but they're still wrong because they're rejecting what nature reveals and what nature's God has revealed in his creation.
And I think you're beginning to see people like Colin Wright is an atheist biologist who's now like an independent, I don't know what he's actually, his job is, but he's has a sub-stack called Reality's Last Stand.
And he has been at the forefront of combating transgender, gender-affirming care for children, for minors.
And he's been doing rallies with people like Matt Walsh and other conservative and even Christians.
And he says, I don't mind that because it's frankly, he's like, I will take allies where I can find them because this is, again, reality's last stand.
He's an atheist saying, look, we're abandoning reality.
We're literally mutilating children and people are clapping and applauding.
It's insane.
So the point is, I think that if he can see that, I think we should be confident.
People can see that.
People are capable of realizing, wait a minute, this is not making any sense.
And so we can, I think Christians in the public square can appeal to those.
We don't have to pull in the Bible.
We can pull the Bible in, absolutely, but we can appeal to categories that are just there in nature.
We can say, look, there are biological categories of male and female.
They're not coming from religion.
They're coming from biology.
And the same way we do pro-life activism, we say, look, the medical textbooks agree that the unborn is a human being at conception.
That's a medical embryology text.
It's not the Bible.
So we can appeal to, again, that kind of quote unquote secular knowledge to make our case.
But that said, in all these issues, like critical race theory, queer theory, Pat and I are always mostly concerned for the health of the church.
The world, frankly, were like, oh, America's so bad and corrupt, whatever.
Look, man, Christianity had to work with ancient Rome.
They were literally torturing people in the Colosseum for pleasure fun.
People being disemboweled by wild beasts.
And they were leaving out baby girls to die of exposure because they didn't like girls.
They were killing infants.
I just saw something that archaeologists can, they know, how do they identify brothels in the ancient world, like people, places where prostitutes lived?
They just find heaps of child corpses.
They find just a big pit full of babies' bones.
Oh, that was a brothel in the ancient world.
So we act like, oh, America's so bad.
Man, America is maybe it's post-Christian, but at least it had a Christian period.
Yeah.
Coming up next for Babylon B subscribers.
Your pastor said the word justice today.
He must be a Marxist.
Your pastor used the word oppression.
You know, that's, oh, he's gone.
He's gone.
Leave the church.
That's a real danger.
I mean, our Bible says in their churches going through John 17, Jesus' high priestly prayer, and the emphasis on the unity, make them one, is just we are one.