Theology in the Raw - Cancel Culture vs. Meaningful Conversations: Dr. Tim Muehlhoff

Episode Date: July 1, 2024

Dr. Tim Muehlhoff (Ph.D. in communication theory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) is Professor of Communication at Biola University and co-director of Winsome Conviction Project, and is co-author (with Sean McDowell) of End the Stalemate: Move Past Cancel Culture to Meaningful Conversations, and outstanding book that forms the basis of our conversation. In this episode, we talk about how to have fruitful conversations with people whose ideas we radically disagree with. Tim's insights are absolutely fascinating and are necessary for moving past the stalemate we seem to be at as a church when it comes to controversial issues. Get 10% off your first order of Mitopure by Timeline! https://www.Timeline.com/theology USE CODE: Theology Support Theology in the Raw through Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theologyintheraw Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Introducing TD insurance for business with customized coverage options for your business. Because of TD insurance, we understand that your business is unique. So your business insurance should be to contact the licensed TD insurance advisor to learn more. Hey friends, welcome back to another episode of theology around. My guest today is the one only Dr. Tim Muehlhoff, who has a PhD in communication theory at the university of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He's has a PhD in communication theory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He's currently the professor of communication at Biola University and co-director of winsome conviction project. And he's a co-author with Sean McDowell of the recent

book and the stalemate move past cancel culture to meaningful conversations. It's a book that I endorsed. I got an early copy of it. And as I explained in this episode, it came at a time when I really didn't have time to read another book and endorse another book, but I just absolutely could not put this book down. It has a potential of saving the church. I mean, really, like, when you talk, like, when we think about how many times Christians in churches just don't know how to dialogue around controversial topics or talk through, you know, areas of disagreement. This book is a, is a masterclass on how to do that. And so that's what this conversation is all about.

Tim is, he is my go-to when it comes to effective communication, especially across differences. This is an incredibly, incredibly important conversation for anybody who's human and also a Christian. And especially if you are in some kind of leadership discipleship, uh, ministry, church ministry, or if you're married or even plan on getting married, or if you just want to have friends and relationships that I cover everybody there, uh, this book is actually incredibly, incredibly important. So yeah, I hope you liked this conversation. Please welcome back to the show. The one and only Dr. Tim you'll have. All right, Tim, welcome back to the podcast. We have so, so, so much to talk about. I just

want to, first of all, begin by saying your book. I mean, you and Sean McDowell wrote this book and the stalemate, which let me be honest with you. I get a lot of requests to endorse books like, like you do. And it's like, gosh, you just don't have the time to do it all. When I got your request, I felt like, ah, I love these guys, but I just don't have the time. I, you know, I said, well, let, let me crack it open just to check it out. I just, I couldn't put it down that this book is, and it, it's an engaging book, but I was like, this, this is, this is so needed in the church today. And so I, I clear, I said, all right, I need to

do whatever I can to help get this book out there. So if my endorsement does any of that, I want to do it rather than me kind of summarize the book. What are some main principles that you would love somebody when they read this book that they can walk away with in terms of just dialoguing with people across all of these political theological differences, which is just, I don't want to say destroying the church, but it kind of is. I mean, it's a, it's hindering the mission of the church significantly. We don't even know how to talk to each other across differences. Yeah. Let me, and one, thank you for endorsing it. You're at the top of our list of endorsers

because we really admire what you're doing. I mean, your theology in the raw is bringing together people to have conversations we're just not having anymore. So the book is super practical. I wrote it with Sean McDowell. He's a practitioner. His YouTube channel now has over 260,000 followers and he brings on people he knows he disagrees with but does it in a really, I think, I think a really productive way. So let me, before we get to the really practical stuff, we need to have a philosophical discussion real quick. What form of communication are we going to go with? There is the modern definition, which is what we call the transmission view, which is what you see 24 seven, which is I have my beliefs, you have your beliefs, I have my convictions, you have your beliefs, I have my convictions,

you have your convictions. The transmission view is, we're going to share our convictions. My favorite statistics against your favorite statistics, my favorite experts, your favorite. That's the transmission view. We are not downplaying the importance of the transmission view, because as Christians, we have a worldview that we want to transmit, right? There are beliefs that we have. But today, Preston, I think you're seeing the futility of the transmission view because of something called my side bias, which means I'm locked in my ideological silo. I only listen to people that agree with me. I hang out with friends that support my general convictions.

I like my podcast, you like your podcast. I like my theologians, you like your theologians. And honestly, nothing's getting through is what current research is kind of saying. Let me mention one interesting study about the transmission view. A bunch of researchers at USC, just down the street, took people, put them in an MRI machine,

and read to them political statements they know that person really disagreed with. Then they mapped out the part of the brain that registers when my views are being attacked. Then, here's the cool part, Preston. They then showed them images of animals about to attack. The same part of the brain lit up. Oh my gosh.

The same part of the brain. So I wrote about this in the book. Yeah, I remember that. I'm doing mountain bike riding and a bobcat goes across the path. It looked like a German shepherd, but it had cat-like features. Preston, I was freaking out. Like, you know, my heart rate doubled. I didn't know what to, I knew not to ride away like a crazy person because the bobcat would chase me, but I'm having this bike between me and the grass

that it went into. Oh, gosh. So imagine trying to have a conversation with me. Hey, Tim, real quick, I know there's a bobcat in the grass, but what do you think about President Trump? Is he a viable candidate? I'd be like, are you crazy? Are you crazy right now?

Well, that's what the researchers are saying is when you challenge a person's deepest convictions, it's as if they're about being attacked by a wild animal. Okay, that's the transmission view. We of course support it. The apostle Paul says, knowing the fear of the Lord, we seek to persuade men. But here's the whole premise of the book. There is the ritual view that predates the transmission view by a mile. The word communication in its original language meant commune with people. So we're arguing that the ritual view primarily is what are the points of connection that you can establish? What are the bonds of commonality that you can establish before you ever get to the transmission view?

In today's argument culture, we're simply arguing, I think we start with the ritual view. What rituals do we have in common? And then we get to the transmission view. So that's the big premise of the book. And then the rest of it is really practical ways of fostering those bonds and those common rituals. So what you're saying is debating people on social media is absolutely worthless. I'm saying, the question sprinkle,

who I greatly admire, we can't start there. I think it can happen. I really think it can happen, but a lot of pre-work has to be done that maybe didn't have to happen in the 1940s. But today, via social media, I just think we all know what it's like when a person challenges our perspectives and we're like, Oh my gosh, you got to be kidding me. You believe that? And they have some cartoon avatar. You don't even know if it's a real person and you just, right. So we had Arthur Brooks on our podcast, the winsome conviction podcast. And I said to him,

listen, what, how did America get so angry? And this is what Arthur Brooks said. We don't have an anger problem. We have a contempt problem. And I thought, oh, that's really good. I go, what's the difference? He goes, anger is you and I can be mad at each other, but we're gonna protect the relationship, right? You're a family member, you're a church member,

we're gonna hang in there, even though you really do tick me off. Contempt is, I'm ending the relationship, the church would be better off without you. And, you know, there was a study done in the 2016 presidential election that 33% of respondents said, I no longer talk to a family member because of the 2016 presidential election. Welcome to content. Oh, what's the cause of all? Is this in your lifetime? Are we living in a time when this inability to communicate across differences, especially I would say secondary differences is just wrecking havoc on the church. Is it due to, I mean, social media and algorithms and siloed new sources and stuff, or is it more than that?

Well, I'm not going to blame everything on social media. And by the way, we better figure out social media because it's the new public square. Yeah. I absolutely agree with Hillary Clinton saying the new public square is social media. So we can't abandon it, but we better just do it. And I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I absolutely agree with Hillary Clinton saying the new public square is social media. So we can't abandon it, but we better have a new strategy. And we explore that in the book. And Sean, my co-author, is the king of social media.

And I think he's doing it really well, maintaining his Christian beliefs, but also engaging people. So I think I would agree with Alan Jacobs who says the internet makes us perpetually irritated with each other and it allows me to silo in really simple ways because of algorithms and I just like being part of a community that agrees with me. And the way we're talking about other people, we're demonizing them. We're giving stereotypes. Not steel man, but straw man. So literally, Arthur Brooks said,

the sign of contempt is the eye roll. So you know what I mean? Somebody starts to argue for position. I literally go like this, Preston and I go, right? Right? The words are not even out of that person's mouth and I'm like, Oh, my word. Okay. Okay. Right? And that today has created a communication climate that I think has become really difficult and how we demonize people to have these good conversations with people that we know we disagree with.

Wow. Golly. So what you, so talk to us when some conviction started is almost like a side hobby, right? I mean, you're, you're a full-time professor. You've got a lot, you know, you write books, you speak and you start this kind of like, what'd you call it? A think tank or what? How about, what? Yeah. But rather than me, you describe what winsome conviction is because it's absolutely blown up and become like a full-time job for you. Yeah. I mean, two donors called Biola five years ago, and they basically were so discouraged how Christians talk to each other and how we talk to non-Christians. So they called the president's office and said, Hey, we're thinking about giving some money for a project.

Could we meet with this Milhoff guy and Langer guy, my co-director, because they had seen us on YouTube. Do you know how quickly you get a call from the president's office when they say, we're thinking about giving money? So we met with them. They're the most amazing couples you've ever seen. We were speaking the same language, the same convictions.

So five years ago, Preston, we started the Winston Conviction Project to help Christians talk to each other, but also how can we talk to non-Christians? But let me say this in all candor, Preston, five years into it, I'm probably more discouraged than I've ever been before. COVID did a number on everybody. The past election really hurt churches, and now this next one's coming and people are predicting it's even going to be more vitriolic than the previous one. And I don't think churches are ready for it because they're all tired and worn out. Christianity Today did a survey saying to pastors, US pastors, if you could

quit today financially, how many of you had quit? 48% that I quit today. I quit today. Asked why is because in the top three answers, how congregants talk to each other was in the top three responses, why pastors are just ready to quit. So we present, there's a great cultural moment today. Let me give you another survey. I don't want to be the survey king, but another survey, we tend to think Americans don't agree on anything. This came out two years ago. 98% of Americans

would say, incivility is a threat to the country. 67% would say, we are at crisis levels of incivility. And the only question we need to ask today, will the church be a good role model or a bad role model? And I think right now, we're a bad role model. We're not a good one. For sure, we're not a good one. I would say we're a bad role model because how we talk to each other on social media is no better than how people outside the Christian community talk to each other on social media. So that is a largely social media problem, or would you say social media is simply a very blatant kind of example of just how Christians aren't able to talk to each other in general?

Or do you feel like if we get face to face, do we have much better conversations? I wouldn't say no, not necessarily. I mean, I think, no, not necessarily. I think people are having church meetings. I think para-church organizations are trying to pull people together to have face to face encounters, and it's not going particularly well. And the upcoming generation, I mean, you know, this research on deconversion is so disturbing. Pew research, Preston, for every one person who converts to Christianity for deconversion.

Wow. In America, in the West or globally? In America. Okay. In America. In America. So Preston, this is where we're at. We're at the point where even pronosticators are saying, is it possible America could fracture? And when you see the storming of the Capitol,

that's not like empty rhetoric. I mean, is it possible that our differences would be so great that the nation would fracture and the church would fracture. So I think it's a golden opportunity for us to stand up as Christians and to say, listen, we speak truth and love. What does Peter say? When insulted, do not insult, give a blessing instead. We have a chance to live that out in real time in front of the world.

But today, I don't, there are grassroots organizations going on that are really encouraging, but they just don't make it to the headlines. But there are some really cool grassroots things that are happening. So the major premise of the book is, listen, transmission is really important. I want to share my deepest convictions with you, but we got to back the truck up,

I think. And we need to start with the ritual view is, listen, where's commonality with each other? Like, even though we have differences, what is it that unites us? And let's work really, really hard to articulate what unites us. So let me just mention one thing real quick, Preston. Do you so I laughed out loud when I heard this song, you know how you do these song groupings on like Pandora, whatever. Okay, do you remember the song? Breakfast at Tiffany's? Of course. Okay. Do you remember the song breakfast at Tiffany's? Of course. Yeah. Okay. Listen to the lyrics of this great song. So I was literally laughing out loud driving in my car. So it's

a couple who's going to break up, right? They've grown distant. And they're literally calling an end to their marriage. Then he says this, Hey, breakfast at Tiffany's, you saw that. And as I recall, we both kind of liked it. At least that's one thing we got. Oh, the movie. Like, so they both liked this one movie and that's, they both liked the movie breakfast at Tiffany's. And he says, listen, I know we're, we're probably not going to make it, but listen, I liked breakfast at Tiffany's. You liked breakfast at Tiffany's. That's one thing. So I think, but, but don't minimize that. Don't minimize saying to a neighbor you barely talked to anymore, hey, by the way, I do think

I want to give you this compliment. I do want to remind us that when that storm hit, we both helped each other out. So I'm writing an essay right now called, Sometimes All You Have is Breakfast at Tiffany's. That's good. But let's do that. Let's find that today. Would you say that's one of the number one principles of how to have better conversations across differences

is established some kind of common passion. So there's a guy named Kenneth Burke. Yeah. If you study rhetoric. I was literally just talking about Kenneth Burke last night with my buddy, Greg Coles for a long time, yeah. Okay. So Burke is a genius. He really did change how we think about rhetoric. Um, and he said, okay, if I had to boil it all down,

it's the principle of identification. How can I identify with you and let's find ways to cultivate that and surface it. So this is Romans chapter 14. You get Jewish converts, you get Gentile converts, Jewish converts wanna do days and diets. Gentiles are saying, no way, I'm free. And Paul, I'm not doing your Jewish tradition. Paul steps in and says, hey, hey, let me remind you,

you're all children of God, and I do not want to have contempt, and I want you to live with each other. Right? Man, we've lost that today, Preston, is the living. But unless it's a confessional belief, right? Jesus is Lord, salvation found in Christ alone. But days and diets, in Paul's estimation, even though the Jewish converts would have said days and diets is supremely important, Paul said, no, I'm going to let you disagree on this, but don't stop the work of God because of food. Preston, we're stopping the work of God over critical race theory, preferred pronouns. We're stopping it over a mask mandates. We're stopping it over mask mandates.

We're stopping it over everything. And I think the apostle Paul would say that, did you not read my letter to the church at Rome? I said not to do that. This episode is brought to you by Mitopure by Timeline. Timeline is a Swiss-based life science company and is a global leader in urolithium-A research. I've recently been learning about urolithium-A. Urolithium-A is a powerful postbiotic that is nearly impossible to get just from your diet alone. Mitopure is the first product to offer a precise dose of urolithium- A to upgrade your mitochondrial function, increase cellular energy, and improve muscle strength and endurance.

One way to think about Mitopyr is that they are little, like Pac-Men for you, GenXers, Pac-Men in your cells, chomping up the damaged mitochondria that makes you feel old and tired and recycling it into new healthy ones. According to Timeline, taking two soft gels a day for two months results in significant improvements in your cellular energy, muscle strength, and endurance.

After four months of taking Mitopure, you'll feel yourself getting stronger, recovering faster after a workout, and experiencing less inflammation. Now, Timeline is offering a 10% off discount of your first order of myopia. If you go to timeline.com forward slash theology and use the code theology, you'll get 10% off your order.

That's timeline, t-i-m-e-l-i-n-e dot com forward slash theology to take advantage of this offer. Go check it out. When your celebration of life is prepaid in advance, it becomes a gift from you to your family later because no one should have to plan for a loss while they're experiencing one. Paying in advance protects your loved ones and gives you the peace of mind you deserve. Let us help you plan every detail with professionalism and compassion. We are your local dignity Memorial

provider. Find us at dignity Memorial.com. Yeah. I recently, you know about the exiles of Babylon conference that I host every year. Yeah. The, the church that I currently attend, which I have zero involvement for good or fail. I'm a PUC. I was sitting the pew. Never been on stage. Never. No, you know, it's one of the only churches that's big enough to host a conference that holds more than a thousand people. And so we rent out space from the church. They don't sponsor. I told them from the beginning, like, don't like we're not, we don't want you to endorse this because we don't want this conference tied to an individual church. It's probably going to create more problems than you want. So, but we can, we

just rent the space. So yeah, sure. We rent space. So the church never met, met, never mentioned it. Never mentioned the conference from the stage, like, you know, or bulletin or anything they did in the past a little bit, but this time didn't, didn't even mention it. I hear after the conference that several people, I don't know if it's 10 or a hundred or more have left that church because it rented space to me to host this conference that they saw as, you know, I guess the heretical conference, you know, you know, you know, Francis Chan, Matt Chandler, these, these heretics and Jackie L Perry. And there were some other, you know,

ones that were maybe less conservative, but without even talking, like, I don't, I literally don't even know who these people are. So that I'm thinking like, did I pass the communion plate to you at one point? Like when we're, you know, it's coming around, did I have a conversation with like, I've never had a conversation like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, well, yeah, that they would, you know, but like that wouldn't

even have a conversation with somebody who is sitting in the pews next to you. Like I don't, I just don't have a category, but that's, that's, are you seeing, you said you're you be with Winston conviction. You're becoming more discouraged. I mean, you're, you're not even taken back when I tell that story. You're like, yeah. Oh, my goodness. No, you're not even taken back when I tell that story. You're like, yeah. Oh my goodness. No, you're not even like, yeah. No. And so they leave, but they leave angry. So they leave, but they absolutely blow you up on social media before they leave. But like they just, because I'm leaving, right? I'm done. Now I get, now all the rules are off. I get to blow up the church and say everything I've ever wanted to say because I'm done. It's contempt. I'm leaving and I don't ever want to talk to you

again. So now I get to violate every New Testament principle on language. I mean, this is Paul. Put off slander, put off All these different things. And we think those rules don't apply on social media. Okay. So let's say that person was going to talk to you. Okay. And they were legitimately upset. Like they really feel like you are selling the ranch with your at styles conference. Okay. we have a whole chapter on perspective taking, right? The first thing I need to do is not just look at this person and think, well, now that's crazy. Just because I invited a person to my conference

doesn't mean I endorse what that person says, right? But that's violating almost every principle of our book because I need to sit and live in their perspective. Ah, that's good. Very good. So imagine a person says, Preston, I'm not getting on this airplane. I really feel like it's going to crash. It's going to crash. Okay, I know it's going to crash. Now, the transmission view is what? The transmission view is- Here's all the facts why it's not going to crash. Yeah. Yeah. I Google the safety record of airlines, which is ridiculous compared to driving on the freeway, right? I do that. And I present it to them. But listen, they're being attacked by a wild animal. Oh, my God.

Right now, their heart rate is... And by the way, if I had that view, if I honestly thought there's a really good chance or 50 50 this plane's going to crash Preston, would you get on that airplane? Oh, yeah. Right. So one, Oh my gosh. If there was a 10%, I'd be like, I'm not getting on that plane. Oh my gosh, if there was a 10%, I'd be like, I'm not getting on that plane. So we have a whole chapter on how do I hit pause and enter their perspective and most importantly, Preston, feel it. Feel the emotions with that outlook and that belief system. Because listen, if that dear brother or sister really does believe you're selling out the church,

then they ought to confront you. They should leave, yeah, or they should confront me. They should confront you. But so I need to step back. I just got back from Israel, Preston. A group was put together of 15 scholars and activists February 1st, and we went to Israel, Preston, a group was put together of 15 scholars and activists February 1st. And we went to Israel, which was crazy by the way, we went to Israel, but we listened

to the Palestinian perspective, the Israeli perspective, and tried to sit in both perspectives. Wow. And feel both perspectives. Boy, it was pretty weighty. But that's the first step in my estimation, Preston, is listen, you want to just dismiss your wife. You want to just dismiss her as like, this is, I don't know, this is crazy, you think this way, or a son or a church member or a neighbor or a coworker, we're advocating maybe hit pause

and then understand what it feels like to be in that position. And then emote to that person, hey, I've been thinking about your position and I just wanna acknowledge, wow, those are some deep fears. And if I had your perspective, I think I'd be doing what you're doing.

I mean, at least that's a way to open a conversation where you feel like we just don't have an opening if we go straight transmission, right? That's what we do, man. That's what Mel is hard to do. I was gonna say, that's so hard to do. I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like,

I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm like, just go back in my memory to a, when I was a 23 year old seminary student, you know, front road, John MacArthur, you know, like taking notes on my suit and tie and stuff. Like I, I, I, I, I can't actually remember what it felt like to, you know, meet somebody who graduated from Fuller seminary. And I knew that feeling of like, Oh, so, so they're, they're obviously way off on so many things, probably not a Christian, you know, like that, that kind of just like, Ooh, huge wall goes, you went to fuller. Hmm. Okay. And already I'm in the mode of I'm I'm right. You're wrong. That's my starting place. Now, how do I even navigate? Do I,

do I, do I share a meal with this person? Do I, you know, like how can I spot out the error? How do I go about like, I know that mindset when you just have this kind of like really black and white, you're wrong. I'm right. And I, you know, I remember in seminary, they said, you know, dialogue was like a bad word. Why would I dialogue with somebody that doesn't know the truth? You know, like, what's the point? Like, you know, like, so, but I, but I, but I remember what it felt like to be kind of not, I was never, I never fully drank the punch, but I sipped it.

I sipped it. Um, I remember somebody just didn't feel right. It's like, yeah, that looks bad. But deep down, I'm kind of like, is it though? Like, so I was, I was kind of like, but I was a new Christian. I was kind of like, huh? dialogue's bad. But deep down, I'm kind of like, is it though? So I was kind of like, but I was a new Christian. I was kind of like, huh, yeah, yeah. And like, yeah, those are millennials and yeah, those, those charismatics, yeah, they're probably all demon possessed and you know, like Cal, you know, the reform people are good, but you know,

they're still baptizing babies and you know, like I know what it feels like to be in that mindset. So it's just been so long. And I just was so, like, once I was kind of freed from that, I just feel like my Christian life became so much more vibrant because I was introduced to this thing called love and grace and humility. But you're in a community that supports that. Yeah. You're now in a community that says, no, of course we dialogue.

Of course we do perspective taking. And it's easy to dismiss a community, because I grew up in that community too, a fundamentalist church. So we can either just demon, both camps can demonize each other or we can stop and say, okay, but this is a family member, right? This is an office worker. This is somebody in my neighborhood. I don't want to write off the relationship. I want to end this down

me. I want to make moves. So Preston, this is why we got to start with the heart, right? The heart is mentioned 500 times in the scriptures and and Jesus says it's from the heart that you speak. So we've got to find ways of softening our heart, and we have a whole chapter dedicated to how do you before the Lord, when you know, I do not like this church member. I don't like them, and I kind of wish they weren't here anymore, but I feel the stirring of the Holy Spirit I need to address that. So let me mention a really cool website that we have designed that we need to

go and practice doing all of this but it's hard to practice with a real relationship because I could damage the relationship as I'm practicing right as we're talking to each other. So if you go to mthestailmate.com, we have an interactive website where you're going to listen to two articulate Christians. One's going to argue there's no way you can vote for President Trump. You just can't. The other one's going to say, is he rough around the edges? Yes. But if you look at his policies, you have to vote for President Trump. Now, if your listeners are listening to me to describe both and immediately just cancelled one of them set them off. That's what that's the website. That's the website because you're going to go by yourself. Here's the cool thing.

I'm by myself and I can yell at the screen if I need to. You know what I mean, Preston? Like, you're wrong. That was so stupid. But I didn't hurt a relationship. But I surfaced maybe what's in my heart. So we broke it into three days. You go at your own pace, but it's totally free, by the way.

But we really feel like we picked politics first because the presidential election is breathing down our necks. So let's start with politics. And I had a good friend of mine do it and said, bro, I was dying listening to the one guy, man. I was dying. Like I just, as soon as he started to talk, I was shaking my head and doing eye rolls. And he said,

it took him by surprise how quickly he dismissed one of the guys. And I'm in that camp too, Preston. I won't, I won't tip my hat, but one of them I immediately, and I wrote the book. And I'm sitting there going, as this dude speaking? I'm going, nope. You're die-iraling. Nope. Nope. But that's really good diagnostic. So if your listeners get a chance, it's called endthestayomate.com. The book doesn't come out in June, but the website is up and running right now. We hired a really talented web designer to do it for us, and we're really pleased.

So hey, the first day, Preston, guess what? You're not watching the video. You're not watching it. We got to deal with our heart first, right? Because if you go right to the video, nothing will have changed. So the first day are really practical questions, almost like King David, God searched my heart to know what's in there, because everything in my heart, I'm carrying right into the conversation. This is the work of Daniel Goleman, his emotional contagion

research. The feelings I have bleed into the relationship. So the way to put this in popular vernacular, you get a good vibe from me, you get a bad vibe, right? So guess what? We can actually work in our heart that a person gets a good vibe, even though we disagree, but most of us have a bad vibe because I'm looking at you, I'm not gonna be rude,

but I don't believe anything you're saying. And I think it's crazy what you believe. Goldman would say that's already bled into the conversation. You've kind of already poisoned the conversation before it ever began. And so most people today, would you say more than ever, maybe not more than ever, but uniquely today, given the culture we live in, given social media,

given the silos we live in and given social media, given the silos we live in and everything that we come into these discussions more than ever kind of entrenched with that. I, I, this viewpoint is absolutely absurd. I can't believe a human would believe that now let's have a dial. Like that we come in with all that more than ever right now. Yeah. And that's the word I'd pick up on absurd. Yes. Not just so incorrect. It's like, I watched a debate recently. I watched in my spare time. I watched debates on the Israel Palestine situation. It's it's, um, and one of the more interesting ones actually was with a two, well, one was Dave Smith on the war against Israel side. He's, he's a,

he's a libertarian. He's a comedian, but he's a libertarian thinker. And then the other side was one of them was Dennis Prager and oh, sure. Yeah, there we go. And all Prager could do is repeat over and over and over that he felt like you are living on a different planet. I can't even believe we are even having this conversation and the problem is Dave Smith and I would, I would line up with a lot of what Dave was saying, but he kind of did the same thing. He's like, yeah, I agree. I feel like I'm on a different planet too. Here's all the facts while you're wrong. And I think all those were, you know, and it just didn't even, didn't even get through to Prager because he was so convinced, not even just like, it was like, if I visited Mars, you know, like, and that's how he felt. He sat there with

his arms, just kind of like, I'm on a different planet. This is, I don't know why I'm here. Kind of like for two hours. Well, and that's the, that's starting with the transmission view. A hundred percent. Right. We started with, so this group that went to 15 scholars and activists who went to Teledy, Gaza, it's being made into a document. Oh, wow. A crew came with us. It's going to come out in the fall. We're actually going to premiere it at Biola University. So when you mentioned the devastation that's happening in Gaza,

and you mentioned numbers, let's say 35,000 people have died, mostly women, mostly elderly and children. Okay. The people on the pro-Israel side in our group immediately, immediately discounted the numbers. Yeah. Those are Hamas numbers. Here's what they said. Where are the numbers coming from? Right? They're coming from Gaza. So those numbers are so inflated. So again, Hey, we started with numbers. I will not acknowledge your facts and you won't acknowledge my facts. Guess what? We're at a stalemate. So what do you, let's, let's go back. How, let's take this as an example. How should this conversation happen to where it's more fruitful? Okay. So with this documentary, we went to, um, right outside of Gaza, we went to the

kibbutz that was attacked right away when Hamas came. We actually were there. I mean, smelling the burnt buildings. Um, it was her rep. It was her rep. Feel that. Even if you're pro-Palestinian, feel that moment and then communicate. So one of our most pro-Palestinian women standing in the kibbutz broke down and cried. Oh, wow. And a pro-Israeli man walked up and hugged her. Oh, my word. Wow.

I thought, you know what, that's the ritual view right there. Yeah. What was the connection? Listen, I didn't change my view on what's happening. I still don't accept your numbers, but guess what? We had a moment where we shed tears over that tragedy. Then we went and talked to some Palestinians who were talking about the knock on the door at midnight.

Again, saying, hey, one of your family members has died. Right? And feeling that pain maybe can create a moment where you and I can look at each other and say, hey, human to human, human to human, I'd be devastated. I would be devastated if I had relatives living in Gaza. I'd be devastated if I was a family member of the people

that are still being held hostage by Hamas. So Preston, that's what we're saying, is we got to find these moments of humanity. And in the book, we talk about how to cultivate it. There's a French word called bricolage, which is you piece together a perspective using raw materials. So all of us have narrative injuries, things that have happened in my life that have deeply hurt me, communities I've grown up in, influencers. We say to people, give me your Mount Rushmore of influencers.

If you just had four picks, whose voices do you listen to the most? And when you ask that question, Preston, it is fascinating to get their top four perspectives. And then not discount them, but see the world through the eyes of a Michel Foucault, right? Or when the guys there was Muslim, right? To see the world through the eyes of Muhammad, right? So let's start there. And that's gonna be a softening of the heart

and we need to practice. That's why you go to the website and thestailmate.com because you need the Holy Spirit to say to you, dude, you're a horrible listener. Like you're just a horrible listener. You have so much opinion right now. This is not a conversation. This is a monologue. You want to have a monologue with a person and set them straight. That's all you want to do. So what do you do? Let's just say people listening

as hard as it is, they're agreeing with what you're saying as an yes. Okay. I need to do that. What do I do when I'm trying to talk to somebody else who doesn't even try to do that? Who they are just, they know they're right. They're not trying to like humanize the situation. They're not like, is there, is that even a conversation worth having? Well, I think, I think it's worth having because this is what Peter says, right? Peter is saying in this traveling letter, when insulted church, I do not want you to insult. I don't want you to do that. Rather, I want you to bless that person. Now, at that point, Preston, people just go,

that's nuts, right? I mean, come on, a guy just insulted me and you want me to bless him? Well, we have to ask what did Peter have in mind with a blessing? I mean, it's not me just agreeing with you, and that's my blessing. I think my blessing is, even though you worded it in a way that I don't think was appropriate, I'm still going to try to find the commonality and the common ground of things that I can agree with, even though you presented it in a way

that I don't think was appropriate. So you're saying it, have you seen success stories of somebody who is trying to integrate these communication principles? They identify some common ground and the other person on the other side who is, let's just say very opinionated, knows they're right. Just wants to point out all the problems that they're they're doing everything wrong in the communication. You have another person is trying, trying to do it. Do it right. Have you seen that lower the temperature and get through the other person? Do you have like an example of story where you've seen that

happen or? Yeah. So, uh, churches bring us in when they're, when they're at the stalemate point, like, Hey, talking about it makes it worse. So we want to give this one more shot and we're bringing in you guys to help us do it. So what we do is we come to the church, but seven days before we ever get there, everybody does a seven-day devotional we've created. If you go to winsomeconviction.com, you can check resources. There's the seven-day devotional you can do in your family, church, neighborhood. But everybody has to do the seven-day devotional, which is, God, search my heart, am I teachable, why even have this conversation if I'm not going to learn anything? So, all of us go

through seven days, then we structure the conversation using this four-step model we've created that's in the book and the Stelmate, and we ask everybody to use the four-step process. And we've seen, so here's what encourages me. Is that a panacea where now everybody's talking great about race and gender? No, not at all. But we've seen a softening of the tone. And let me give you my favorite example of a church.

So they're at these tables, right? We train moderators. So they're at these tables, right? We train moderators. They expected 200 people at Preston. Almost 400 came. They doubled. We had to bring in chairs from everywhere. So everybody's sitting around tables. We've already trained moderators to help with the discussion using that four-step model, right? And then we had a sharing time after communion, okay? A woman, I'll never forget this person, so in my most discouraged moments, you need to have these stories.

A woman gets up and says this, this is my son sitting next to me. We've not talked for over a year. I asked him, almost begged him, please, let's do this one afternoon seminar together. That's all I asked. We'd just both go. And they went and had, for the very first time,

a semi-positive conversation in front of a table of people where they didn't yell at each other, snap at each other, and the son even said, Mom, I agree. I agree when you say that. I agree with that. And she got emotional. Preston, there wasn't a dry eye in the place. Do you see how that little spark? And by the way, we're not even talking about the Holy Spirit yet, right? The Spirit can take that little, right? When Paul says, give your enemies food and drink, that's giving the Spirit something to work with.

That blessing for an insult is giving the Spirit. So those are moments that keep me going, that here's a mom and a son who still have a truckload of problems, but they can now point to breakfast at Tiffany's. It all goes back to breakfast at Tiffany's because we had one positive experience. And let me just say this, Preston, we're talking about politics and race, but the book is it works for those. But this really is for the parent who has a teenage son or daughter who feels like every time we talk, it's this here, this is written for them. Like this is this is when you don't know what to do. But it also works for lesser conversations, like we're kind

of tackling the hardest. But these principles can also work for lesser, less intense conversations. A fresh voice can speak to you and open your ears and your mind to new views and new perspectives. and your mind to new views and new perspectives. The call of the wild, a crescendo of culture. Listen as a chorus of fresh voices moves you, taking you to greater heights, add your voice to the mix and let fresh answer back with perfect harmony in Pure Michigan.

Keep it fresh at Michigan.org. What advice would you give to a parent? I have a lot of parents with LGBT kids that listen to the podcast. The one parental situation that just breaks my heart and I just don't know what to do is, and it's usually with a Christian parent with a trans identified kid who needs their parent to affirm 100% of their beliefs. Otherwise they cut off the relationship. I have this conversation with parents quite frequently

saying, look, I'm willing to use my kids, say adult kid, maybe they're early 20s or something. I'm willing to use their pronouns. I'm willing to use their new name. I'm even willing to like, I I've I've going as far as I can past my own convictions, you know, to meet them where they're at and to maintain a relationship. But as long as I don't actually believe everything, if I, you know, my, my daughter's now transitioned to being my son, you know? And if I don't, if I say that, I still think you're female. Like I don't actually believe you are who you think you are, but I'm willing to use the name willing, you know, then the child that you're, you're done. You're toxic. If

you can't affirm everything about who I say I am, then you're done. Have you encountered this kind of relationship? I mean, it's, it's an, or, or, or just where I'm going to, this would apply to any relationship where one side demands full affirmation of everything you believe for there to be any relationship. Is there any hope for that kind of relationship? Well, so this is way above my pay grade, Preston, but I teach a family communication class at Biola University and we use a book called Families and Faith. The lead researcher is Benston and he would say this to parents of prodigal children who have left the belief system of the family.

He would say the number one principle he would say to these families is you speak truth and love. It's not just love and it's not just truth. It's got to be a combination of both. And no doubt the child who is the protocol is going to hate the truth part. So then he says this caveat, Preston, that this is what I'd leave your hearers with. Keep the door open and let them know regularly the door is wide open. We love you, you're always welcome here. You're always welcome here. You don't need to believe what we believe to walk in our

door and be our son, daughter, they, whatever pronoun you want. Just know our love for you is not contingent on you believing what we believe. We love you. But you know we have certain convictions, but we love you. And if you're in need, we'll be there in a heartbeat. I mean, that's what I love about Paul saying, you're enemy, right? Which in the Greek is more those who hate you than it is like an enemy we would think about like Palestinians and Israelis. Those who hate you, Paul says, still when you see they're hungry, feed them. Like that's a no-brainer. So I would only say to these parents, get the book. It's called Faith and Families. It's a longitudinal research study

done by one of the top family comm researchers, and he has a beautiful section on prodigal children. And he would just say, let them know that your love is not contingent on them changing or believing it's based on the fact you're my son or daughter and I love you. And he said, prod, protocols do come back. He has found in his studies that if that, you know, that consistent love that he finds that protocols do in many situations, he says, come back. Come back to some kind of relationship, not necessarily to the former belief system.

Yes. Some kind of, they reopen the relationship. Yeah. Well said. They reopened lines of communication. Shifting gears just slightly. You've been a professor on a college campus for how many years has been 20, 30, 19 at Biola. So, and you travel and speak a lot. You have a decent pulse, I think, especially with, you know, when some conviction and where that's taken you, does it seem like there is well, so you teach it a credit at a evangelical, I would say it's a pretty mix of a student body, right? Some would be very conservative. Some would be moderate. Some might even be more progressive, you know, or so you have a good sample to kind of the spectrum of evangelicals. Have you seen, it seems, it seems like there is almost like a resurgence of a more fundamentalist brand of conservative evangelicalism that I didn't totally anecdotally. I don't know

there's data on this and maybe I'm totally, totally off on this, but yeah, just, just kind of a resurgence of a brand of more fundamentalist conservative evangelicalism that I thought was kind of slowly dying out, but it seems like there's a resurgence. Is that, have you seen that? Am I off on that? No, but let me make two observations. One, I think you're spot on. I think we're seeing that resurgence of a almost a uncompromising uncompromising demonization of the other side, right? Like, we are absolutely right, and if you don't see eye to eye, this is liberalism coming into the church.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right? If you don't take my political, if you don't take my theological position, my interpretation of Scripture, then that is liberalism coming into the camp. Okay? And we need to reject that. But here's the good news. Preston, I think the upcoming generation is rejecting it.

They are rejecting it, saying, we're done with that. We're done with the argument culture. We know the younger generation knows the country cannot continue like this. We can't. The church cannot continue like this. So there's good and bad even within that rejection. Some are leaving the faith completely by saying, I'm done with the argument culture, it seems like the church is synonymous with the argument culture, thus I'm leaving the church, and we're seeing that in all the studies on deconversion. But there's another group of young evangelicals that are saying, we're doing it differently. Like, we're going to reach out to people we

know we disagree with, and we're going to do the second great commandment. We are going to love our neighbors as a sign of our fidelity to God. And we have a segment on our podcast called People Doing It Right. It's a great segment where there are grassroots movements happening all across the country and the church of young evangelicals saying, I'm crossing lines. I'm crossing political lines. I'm not going to demonize my gay friends.

I'm not demonizing the trans community. Now listen, I have my convictions, but I'm not going to demonize. I'm going to speak truth and love, but I'm going to start with love. So would you say that the resurgence is happening, but not among younger people, generally speaking? No, it is among younger people. Oh, without a doubt. It's the younger generations that's doing it. That's did it's becoming more fundamentalist. Oh, no, no, no, I'm sorry. Okay. So that message you talked about is coming from the top down. Yeah. Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Even Joe calls. I see a ton of them rejecting, saying, no, I'm not, I'm not doing that.

What you wouldn't be expected. I think like that. That's so, so the resurgence among a more fundamentalist brand of Christian, again, if that term even works, but it's happening among older, like what millennials, Gen Xers, boomers. Yeah. And, and you know, the power base, cause again, Christianity is there's the moderates. There's the more, what we call progressives. And there's the more conservative slash. It could even be down the line fundamentalists, right? I want to be careful with that word because by all is the home of fundamentalism. There were some good reasons to do it back in the day. There's a complex history behind all of that. But I think we have the older generation that is

utterly committed to the transmission view. We need to be louder, more convicted. We need not to compromise because truth does not compromise. And I think the younger generation is saying, but where's the love part? I get the truth part. Where's the love part? And I'm encouraged by younger evangelicals saying,

I'm reaching out to people. I'm going I'm, I'm going to give them food and drink. I'm going to do neighbor love. And that encourages me, Preston. Uh, we're seeing some really cool things happen with a younger generation. How has this affected the school? So you have a younger generation of students who are wanting a better brand of Christianity. You have, it seems like the majority of like leadership faculty at Biola would very much resonate with a, a better tone. What, what bit, what your president says, you know, firm conviction, soft edges. Is that what, you know, at least all the profs that I've interacted with there, which has been, you know, a couple of dozen, I feel

like, you know, you guys seem to be not on the exact same page of that, but like, yeah, they're like, compassion is super important and yet being convicted, you know, you guys seem to be not on the exact same page. That'd be like, yeah, like compassion is super important and yet being convicted, you know? But then you, I mean, as any institution, you have a, what I'm going to guess is a mix, a donor base, which is probably mixed some that would very much resonate with everything we're saying. And yet others that might be a little more of the other, you know, the part of the resurgence of a more fundamentalist posture. How's, I guess my question is like, how, how's Biola doing with what I'm assuming is probably a mixture of viewpoints.

And again, our faculty are diverse. We have some who would say we're compromising probably too much to speak truth and love. The love parts get not a hand and we don't speak as much truth, which by the way, that's a fair critique of some are going way too far in an accommodating stance. I see that. But let's talk about the elephant in the room real quick, Preston. I guess what I'm saying is how you have been demonized, right? How you have been attacked is not playing well with the younger generation, although the older generation are being broken into camps pretty quick, which there's a pocket of Christians who are looking at you saying Preston Sprinkle is the problem.

You're the poster boy for what it looks like in some of your stances and the conferences you put on. This is liberalism run amok right here. We need not go any farther than Preston. I think what's happened to you, is the problem. It is okay to disagree with you and there are really smart people who would articulate not using pronouns. And by the way, in the book, my co-author, who I deeply respect, would choose not to use pronouns. And I would, depending on the situation, I would in certain situations use pronouns,

but in other situations, I probably wouldn't use the pronouns. We actually explore that disagreement in the book, trying to use the very same principles. And so we actually tried to model. And guess what? At the end of the day, we still disagree with each other, but hopefully it's in a different tone. But the way people have cast you, not just disagreeing with you, but demonizing you is what the younger generation I think is saying, I'm not doing that. I'm sick of that kind of attacking happening on social media. Yeah. It's like, you know, I mean, I've wrote a book on non-violence over 10 years ago and that, you know, pissed a lot of people off, you know, but it does, it seemed like there was a trajectory of kind of like that perspective shrinking. And I think that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that's the, that it does, it seemed like there was a trajectory of kind of like that perspective

shrinking a perspective that just thinks again, you are absurd. You are this, that name calling, you know, demonization of the person straw manning, you know, like that's always been there. It just seemed like it was kind of losing ground. But then last couple of years has made a more research resurgence, but it's hard in our world. It's so hard again, not to blame everything on social media, but social media gives such a warped view of reality. There was that study done that 25, I think 25% of people have a Twitter account. They'll quote me. I think it's 25% have an account. So already we're talking about a small demographic, but something like 8% of the 25 are responsible for like 90% of all the activity, meaning all the stuff you see

on Twitter is a small sampling of what the world believes. And yeah, I've seen people cave. I would, yeah, I was going to give a, an example, but it doesn't really matter. But like people like make massive changes in policies because of five tweets from some person with a fish head avatar, whatever, and, and, you know, 98 followers, because they think that that's what we've got five, you know, complaints, whatever. And, and, you know, 98 followers, because they think that that's what we've got five, you know, complaints, whatever. Like, you know, half of them are bots. The other half, you don't know what kind of like mental illness or wrestling, you know, like, so it's so our world, even like, even when you talk about trends, if

we go on anecdotal observations, it's just like like, it's so skewed, you know? And let me just add this to this. As we put a bow on this conversation, a person could listen to you and me and be 100% right in their content, how they disagree with us. Like their content might be really good arguments, why you shouldn't do or should do this. But the New Testament says, but if it's not done in the right tone, both are of equal value in the scriptures. Tone, speak truth, content, in love. What does Peter say?

Be ready to give a reason for the hope content with all gentleness and reverence relational. Right. And Jesus says, you're going to be held accountable for every word you say and how you say it. Right? So that's the New Testament imperative. You could be right on content, but your tone does not match the New Testament standard. And so when I'm talking about certain people that attack you or me, let's, let's have the tone be right. So we can focus on the content

was I love about Sean. That is why, is why any disagreement you or I might have with Sean, which we have way more agreement and disagreement, but this is why I love, love, love when, uh, the few times Sean and I might get into a, a back and forth or whatever, just because both of us are like our good faith, the dialogue partners that are genuinely curious about the other person's position. And we might end up landing in different places on certain, I think we will both say maybe more secondary, uh, issues. Yeah. Uh, but that, that is so, it just seems like it's so rare these days, which is kind of disappointing, you know, where somebody

could be. Yeah. Firm conviction, soft edges, or even be genuinely curious about the other person's viewpoint, try to best represent it. And then still at the end of the day, say, well, now is this what you believe? Yeah. That that's exactly what I'm trying to say. And here's your reasons for that. Yes. Those are my reasons. Okay. Well, because of this, this, this, I think this viewpoint is actually better than your viewpoint. So I'm going to hold to this side like that. The church just did that. That would be, it would be fine. If it just did that, if it just did that. Yep. I'm hopeful via the Holy Spirit that we know the Spirit

can get a hold of people's hearts. We know that's the case. It's been done. We see ample evidence of it. So I hope our book gives people hope because we give some stories of where we feel like this has worked. And then it gives some really practical tools of how do you structure a conversation. And again, if you go to endthisdownmate.com, you're gonna get a real preview of the book being applied to politics. And then we'll swap it out after the election.

We'll swap it out and maybe we do gender, maybe we do race, maybe we do race, you know, things like that. Oh bro. I so, so appreciate you. And I feel like I've learned what you talk about on a scholarly level with communication stuff. I, I, I just, I see it so much on a practical anecdotal level. I'm like, here's what I'm seeing. I go talk to you. I'm like, okay. So that's actually, yeah, that has some scholarly credibility, Tim. Thank you so much. Please pass on my gratitude to Sean. The book is absolutely incredible and the stalemate. So I encourage people to pick it up. So yeah,

thanks for coming on the all's you're on again. Thanks, Preston. This show is part of the Converge Podcast Network.