The World and Everything in It: September 13, 2024

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like you. Hi, I’m Collin Garbarino. I’m the arts and culture editor at WORLD. I hope you enjoy today’s program.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Good morning! Today on Culture Friday, handicapping the presidential debate from a cultural perspective.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Cultural and ethical. Andrew Walker is standing by. He’s a professor of Christian ethics and managing editor of WORLD Opinions. He joins us for Culture Friday.

And …

AUDIO: Spiritual leadership in Washington?

… the fifth installment in the God’s Not Dead franchise. Arts and Culture Editor Collin Garbarino has a review.

And thinking about the words we carry in our pockets, George Grant has something unique to say on this month’s Word Play.

BROWN: It’s Friday, September 13th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

BROWN: Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Francine update » Louisiana residents are still picking up the pieces after Hurricane Francine slammed the Gulf Coast Wednesday with winds of 100 miles per hour.

HOPKINS: It was a little more intense than I thought it would be. You know, I didn't think it would do quite the damage that it did.

The Category 2 hurricane knocked out power to thousands of homes and businesses and dumped several inches of rain on coastal areas triggering flash floods.

Gov. Jeff Landry thanked all those that prayed for Louisiana amid the storm.

LANDRY: Today, I am just elated that those prayers worked because we, as of right now, have no reports of any storm related fatalities, and we want to keep it that way.

Francine is weakening as it pushes inland. But forecasters warned it could bring flash flooding to states like Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee and Georgia over the next few days.

Ukraine » Secretary of State Tony Blinken stopped in Poland Thursday, one day after meeting in Kyiv with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He said he heard loud and clear Zelenskyy’s plea for the U.S. to lift limits on using American-made weapons on targets deep inside of Russia.

BLINKEN:  As we go forward, we will do exactly what we have already done, which is we will adjust, we'll adapt as necessary, including with regard to the means that are at Ukraine's disposal to effectively defend against the Russian aggression.

During Blinken’s stop in his county, Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski said he’s fully on board with lifting range restrictions on those weapons.

He’s heard here through an interpreter.

SIKORSKI:  The victim of aggression has the right to defend itself, has the right to combat all means of, uh, air strikes that hit against it. I'm of the opinion that Ukraine has the right to use Western weapons to prevent war crimes.

Zelenskyy made the case that because of the range restrictions on Western-supplied weapons, the Kremlin is moving military targets deeper inside Russian borders.

U.S. sanctions Maduro allies » Following Venezuela’s highly questionable election, in which disputed President Nicolas Maduro claimed victory, the U.S. government is imposing sanctions against 16 of his allies.

Washington accuses them obstructing the vote and carrying out human rights abuses. The list of those hit with sanctions include the head of the country’s high court, leaders of state security forces and prosecutors.

The move came days after opposition leader Edmundo González was forced into exile in Spain to avoid arrest in Venezuela.

No third presidential debate/campaigning » Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have wasted no time hitting the campaign trail again this week after facing off for the first time on Tuesday night.

HARRIS: Two nights ago, Donald Trump and I had our first debate. 

The Vice President heard there campaigning Thursday in Charlotte, North Carolina. Both campaigns, of course, claimed victory in the first debate. 

HARRIS: And I believe we owe it to the voters to have another debate. 

But Trump told supporters in Arizona he’s not interested.

TRUMP: Because we’ve done two debates and because they were successful, there will be no third debate.

The Harris campaign says they have the former president running scared. But Trump’s team says Vice President Harris lost the debate and now her campaign wants a do-over.

Judge narrows Georgia case against Trump » The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference against Donald Trump and others has tossed out some of the counts in the indictment. WORLD’s Kristen Flavin has more.

KRISTEN FLAVIN: Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee is dismissing two criminal counts against Trump and another charge against other defendants. He said the prosecution, led by county District Attorney Fani Willis did not have the authority to bring charges related to alleged filing of false documents.

But the other counts, including eight against Trump, still stand.

The former president had pleaded not guilty to all counts and calls the case political persecution.

For WORLD, I’m Kristen Flavin.

Spacewalk » American tech entrepreneur Jared Isaacman and his crew just made history in outer space, completing the first private-sector space walk in history.

Isaacman exited the SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft Thursday to test the company’s new spacesuit.

ISAACMAN: Back home we all have a lot of work to do. But from here, it sure looks like a perfect world.

SpaceX engineer Sarah Gillis followed soon after. The mission’s other two crew members remained inside the capsule.

AUDIO: Five, four, three, two, one, ignition.

The crew launched into space earlier this week and orbited the Earth six times before the spacewalk. They’re expected to return to Earth this weekend.

This week’s mission is part of the Polaris Program that is meant to set the stage for the first manned spaceflight of the Starship craft.

I’m Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: Culture Friday with Andrew Walker. Plus, this month’s Word Play.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Friday the 13th of September, 2024.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

It’s time for Culture Friday, and joining us now is Andrew Walker. He’s a professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology and managing editor of WORLD Opinions.

Andrew, good to catch up. Glad you’re here. Good morning!

ANDREW WALKER: Nick and Myrna, great to be with you.

EICHER: So the other night y’all had a group of students at the Boyce College and Southern Seminary campus where you teach, all gathered to watch the presidential debate. Describe the atmosphere, Andrew. Lots of laughter? Lots of groaning? What’d you hear?

WALKER: Yeah, yeah, there was a little bit of all of that, if I were being honest. No, it was a really fun situation. Dr Mohler called an audible and announced we were going to have kind of an impromptu presidential debate watch party. He announced it in chapel on Tuesday morning, and on Tuesday night, the event occurred, and he asked me and several other faculty to join him after the event for a panel discussion. And, you know, I'm a seminary professor. I don't typically teach college students very often, and so I I'm not often aware of, like, whether they're dialed into this conversation or much at all. 

And so, I was like, you know, I'm gonna do this, but am I gonna go to Heritage Hall and there's gonna be 20 people there, and they're all the political science majors, and no one else cares? And so, I walked in, and it was literally standing room only, which I could never have anticipated, which sends the signal to me that something about Gen Z might have more political oomph to it than you know, what a lot of people might believe. And so what I was really encouraged by was the liveliness of the crowd. There were the USA chants prior to the start of the debate, necessary heckling, necessarily laughing and booing. But it was a really, it was a really, really fun, encouraging time.

EICHER: So, should we get into the particulars? I mean, there was quite a lot of time spent talking about the abortion issue, former President Trump really didn’t want to talk about it, Vice President Harris did. And therefore they did talk about it, the moderators making sure of that.

Terrible work, by the way, a masterclass on why there’s very little trust remaining in the mainstream news media.

But Andrew, on abortion what should we learn from the abortion dialogue and the time spent talking about it?

WALKER: Oh, well, there's so much to say right here. I think, first and foremost, I mean, you alluded to it. There was egregious moderating going on. At one point, former President Trump talks about how late term abortions are legal in the country, and that some children born from failed abortions are allowed to die, and he got fact checked by ABC news correspondents, and that was absolutely egregious. And then when Kamala Harris says no laws that you're describing were actually on the books, she didn't get fact checked. So there was complete, I think, partiality at the level of the moderating around this topic that was, again, very, very egregious. 

But as far as the issues are concerned and the positions staked out, I think that both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are wrong on abortion, but they're not wrong in the same degree. You know, Donald Trump is ostensibly where it sounds like most of America is where in the early stages of a pregnancy, basically people are pro choice. But he has been, I think, actually, surprisingly clear about the graphic nature of late term abortion. If you recall from the debate on Tuesday night, he actually referred to these late term abortions as executions. And that's incredibly stark language, and it necessarily puts Kamala Harris and the Democrats on the defensive, having to downplay the reality of what their policies actually do allow for, even though that they will say that they don't. 

And I think what was a really stunning revelation was when she was asked by one of the moderators, are there any restrictions on abortion that you would be okay with? And she doesn't answer the question because she knows her own running mate, Tim Walz has advocated for some of the most egregious abortion policies in the United States. And so again, both parties are seemingly wrong on this subject, or at least both parties’ standard bearers are wrong, but they're not wrong in the same measure.

EICHER: But can’t we say the late-term abortion question is a little bit of a red herring, though? That was more an issue when the Roe versus Wade legal regime was in place, showing how extreme it had gotten and that the question was beyond the reach of the democratic process. That’s no longer the case. Now it’s squarely in the democratic process at the state level. The pro-life side is losing, and it seems what we got was the wrong argument. So does that, as an ethicist, doesn’t that concern you, that the right questions aren’t making it into the debate?

WALKER: Yeah, well, no, it certainly concerns me. And I think this is where the Christian worldview needs to be brought to bear, because if you are okay with abortion at the earliest stages of a pregnancy, but you're not okay with abortion at later stages in pregnancy, you've in your mind, developed some arbitrary line in the sand. That is, again, it's an arbitrary line, because once you begin putting into principle the idea that it's permissible to take life at eight weeks in the womb, why would it then be wrong in principle, to take life at 38 weeks inside the womb? Because regardless of the age, the level of development, the degree of dependency, the child is the same child at all stages of their development. 

And so I think this is an opportunity for us to kind of press for clarity and consistency about okay, if you say you're against late term abortion because of the idea that the child feels pain, okay, well, I'll grant that at the earliest stages of a pregnancy, the child may not feel pain in the same way, but it's still the same child, and we shouldn't be creating public policies that are putting an in principle justification for taking life and taking innocent life.

BROWN: So Andrew, before the debate, you posted, and I’m gonna quote you here: “There’s a realignment happening in ways that I have not seen in my lifetime of closely following politics. I’m still trying to wrap my head around what to call it and how to identify it. But something is in the air.”

So my question is, did you see, did you hear anything from the debate that helped crystallize what you’re feeling?

WALKER: I don't know if I necessarily felt it from the debate per se, but it's just interesting to see the various constituencies that are coalescing around Donald Trump's candidacy, so the rise of the Silicon Valley Tech bro, all of a sudden, is okay with kind of violating social norms in Southern California and coming out in defense of voting for Donald Trump? And I think that is probably more than anything, a level of economic interest at stake, that these individuals understand the burdensome nature of democratic policies and regulations on their businesses. 

But I also think when you look at the constituency of the Republican Party, it's hard to find a common thread. I mean, you've got religious conservatives, you've got America first nationalists, you've got populous, you've got economic hawks, you've got foreign policy Hawks. The best thing that I can do to make sense of all of this is there's some type of America-first agenda, and there's some type of what I would call an American greatness or social cohesion agenda on the part of the right. But again, it's made up of very, very disparate factions. And I actually think right now, part of the realignment, Myrna, is that it's not predominantly a left-right division, although the left-right division is absolutely there. 

I heard one individual make the observation, and I kind of agree with this, that one of the fundamental breakdown(s) in the various constituencies are the difference between crazy versus normal individuals who kind of just want this pre-2020 America back, because it seems like there's this hinge point in the last decade where 2020, things got really nuts and people are just wanting to go back to pre-2020 days. 

And I think there's also, you know, you have kind of a libertarian spark. You have individuals like Elon Musk, who is, I think, more or less a libertarian. He is in the interest of free speech. And I think he just sees—and I think individuals like him see—a growing censorship agenda on the part of the left. And I don't think any of these individuals are trying to buy into the broader social conservative vision that you have on the political right. It's just that they're tired of the social dogmas and the social mores of kind of elite progressivism, and they're tired of it, and they recognize that there is this kind of censorship.

BROWN: Can I follow up real quick? I wonder whether there’s any connection to the fact that we seem to be having a hard time defining what an evangelical is, at least in terms of what an evangelical is supposed to stand for. What does it mean to bring evangelical values into the public square, what’s distinctive about those values?

WALKER: So, actually, I was on CNN this weekend. I did an early Sunday morning hit at 5:10 a.m., that headline hour where everyone is obviously watching. And I got asked the same question. And I got asked the question about kind of the Evangelicals for Harris initiative versus kind of traditional evangelicals who find themselves voting predominantly with the Republican Party. And I got asked why that's the case. And I said, Well, you know, I think at the end of the day, what you see is a breakdown in the party platforms. That the Republican Party is not the Christian party, and their platform is by no means inerrant. But I think when you look at the typical concerns of the conservative, and we can more or less parse those concerns with what we might call those Genesis concerns, the idea of life, the idea of being made male and female, the idea of marriage and family. There is still a little bit of a home in the Republican Party for that constituency versus a democratic constituency that has more or less declared war on the worldview of Genesis chapter one. 

So, if you're asking me, what should evangelical Christians be looking out for, is we're looking out for which party is going to actively look out for those Genesis 1 realities, advancing the cause of human nature, human purpose, human freedom, understanding the centrality that if you want to have a healthy society, you have to have people. If you want to have the continuation of society, you have to have marriages and family. And those are bedrock pillars that we can't overlook. And as much as the Democrats and their platform are wrong on this, tragically, it seems like the modern Republican Party is just playing catch up, but at a slower pace.

EICHER: Andrew Walker professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology … and managing editor of WORLD Opinions. Thanks and have a great weekend.

WALKER: Nick, Myrna, thanks so much.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Friday, September 13th. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day. Good morning. I’m Nick Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: And I’m Myrna Brown.

Coming up on The World and Everything in It, arts and culture editor Collin Garbarinio on the newest installment of a long-running Christian movie franchise.

COLLIN GARBARINO: In seven books, thriller writer Tom Clancy took his Jack Ryan character from being a lowly CIA analyst to sitting in the Oval Office. It seems Rev. Dave from the God’s Not Dead franchise might be on a similar trajectory. In God’s Not Dead: In God We Trust, the scraggly-haired pastor of St. James Church decides he’s got to run for Congress to save Christianity in America.

NEWS ANCHOR: A shocking turn of events. Six weeks prior to election day, congressional incumbent Rick West has died of an apparent heart attack. His opponent state senator Peter Kane now runs unopposed, canceling tonight’s highly anticipated debate.

The drama begins with some election turmoil. The incumbent was a conservative. His challenger Peter Kane isn’t the kind of guy that God-fearing people want in Washington.

PETER KANE: I have always said that religious superstition has no place in influencing our laws and government. So, here’s to enlightenment, reason, and reshaping our nation’s core!

Kane opposes religion in the public sphere, and if he wins the election, the balance of power in Congress will tip, sending the country irrevocably in a new direction. His political opponents panic, and start casting about for a fresh candidate to challenge him.

The person they find? Rev. Dave, once again played by David A.R. White. He’s a humble pastor with a knack for confronting atheists.

Dave is reluctant to jump into a congressional campaign, but his church’s women’s shelter recently lost its federal funding.

REV. DAVE: I am so sorry.

MONICA: We have no place to go. How could this happen?

They lost their funding because someone hosted a Bible study. Dave starts to realize that something needs to be done to protect Christians from governmental prejudice. But will he be able to mount a successful campaign, especially with his advisers imploring him to tone down the God talk?

This is the fifth installment in the God’s Not Dead franchise. Yup, that’s right. I know it’s hard to believe we’re on number five. And this film doesn’t deviate from the formula that’s worked in the past. As in other God’s Not Dead movies, this movie presents the secular powers-that-be as being out to get Christians. And the central message is that if believers stand up and push back against the darkness, God will be faithful to them.

REV. DAVE: We cannot remove God from the fabric of our country without risk of its collapse.

I found God’s Not Dead: In God We Trust mildly entertaining. If you’ve seen any of the others, you know what to expect. It’s a comfortable story that assures me that all my conservative political prejudices are justified. The production values are on par with the average Hallmark Channel film But the movie possesses a certain self-awareness that keeps the mood from slipping into melodrama. And it’s sort of amusing to see Rev. Dave drop into prayer in the middle of conversation.

LOTTIE JAY: Well, Hucakbee is an ally, but we’re not really sure how this is going to go, so—

REV. DAVE: Lord, thank you so much for this day. Give me the words you want me to say. We love you Father. In Jesus’ name, Amen.

But despite finding the movie mildly amusing, I also found its theological and political inconsistencies infuriating. Dave’s struggles hardly count as persecution when compared with the trials of Christians around the world, and the film muddles Christian priorities by claiming that if only America would turn back to God, then our country would be strong again—as if the gospel promised political success. Don’t the martyrs attest to God’s faithfulness, despite losing their lives?

The central conflict in which an atheist politician belittles Christianity will no doubt resonate with some viewers, but is it believable that a politician in Arkansas, where the story is set, would call Christianity a superstition during an election cycle? Also, why would the party machine run a pastor known for making long speeches about God, if they didn’t want him to make long speeches about God?

LOTTIE JAY: Spiritual leadership in Washington? Christian morality? This interview was supposed to pull you out of the fire. You threw yourself back in.

Even more contradictory, Dave got into the race because his women’s shelter lost its federal funding, but then later in the movie he preaches about the need for limited government and less spending. It’s an unwitting commentary on current Republican policies that demand fiscal responsibility, unless it’s for pet projects dear to the political right.

The explicit goal of this film is to get Christians to vote in November. We’re told that if believers cared enough to vote, then we could turn our country around. But this emphasis on exercising political power comes at the expense of spiritual power. Listen to this argument used to get Dave to run.

LOTTIE JAY: It’s public service, same as you’re doing now. Except, there’s nothing you can do as a pastor that can’t be undone by a politician. If you want to make a real difference, this is how it’s done.

Dave should have quoted some Scripture at her. Maybe “my kingdom is not of this world” or “the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh.” Or maybe just “get behind me Satan.” But Dave doesn’t correct her, leaving us with the impression that the church’s gospel ministry is too weak to accomplish its miraculous work without a little help from the government.

I’m Collin Garbarino.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Friday, September 13th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. WORLD Commentator George Grant now with this month’s Word Play.

GEORGE GRANT: Like most trades, printing and publishing has its own peculiar idioms, its own jargon, its own vocabulary to describe technical aspects of the bookmaking craft.

Leading, kerning, and tracking, for instance, are essential elements of typographic design. Leading describes how text is vertically spaced on the page—making sure the distance between lines is optimal for legibility. Kerning also adjusts space, but of the horizontal distance between the letters in each word. Tracking adjusts the spacing within a word since all letters are not created equal—an “I” requires less space than a “Q” or an “M.” Folio, Quarto, and Octavo indicate the size of a volume—describing how many times a printed page is folded and cut: a Folio is folded once, a Quarto four times, and an Octavo eight times.

But one of my favorite terms from bookmaking is Vade mecum. It is a Latin phrase meaning “go with me.” For centuries, it has been used in the publishing trade to describe small devotionals, hymnals, how-to manuals, travel guidebooks, or commonplace journals designed to fit in a pocket or a satchel or a purse—literally, to go with the reader anywhere and everywhere.

Sometimes the phrase has been appropriated for the title or subtitle of such works. In 1629, the English Puritan pastor, Daniel Tuval, published a discourse on virtue in education entitled, Vade Mecum: A Manuall of Essayes Morrall and Theologicall Interwoven with Observations Historicall and Politicall. Don’t you just love those long, descriptive titles of antiquarian books?

It is a fascinating compact volume, widely disseminated among Puritans and later, influential with several of America’s Founding Fathers, though sadly out of print since the middle of the 18th century. It was intended to be carried daily by pastors, teachers, and students alike, reminding them of the true purpose of knowledge and learning as the pathway to wisdom.

The phrase has fallen out of common usage but can still be encountered in on-ramp employment guides, technical reference works, and quick-start handbooks. Even so, Vade Mecum is a very useful phrase even for those of us who will never use it to describe a tiny how-to tome.

Thomas Chalmers, the great 19th century Scottish theologian and reformer often used the phrase. He said, “Let us be convinced more and more of the prodigious fertility of the Bible. How much lies hidden and unobserved, even after many perusals; and surely if it be true that a man may read it an hundred times and find something on his next reading which he missed on all his former ones.” Chalmers goes on to say, “We have to make the Bible our Vade Mecum: our book of reference, our book of trust. Therefore, let us be quick to be in the way of grace.”

Indeed, with pocket testaments, apps on our phones, and Scripture hidden in our hearts (to be made manifest in our lives), may the Bible always “go with us,” be with us, our Vade Mecum.

I’m George Grant.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Well, it’s time to say thanks to the team members who helped put the program together this week:

Mary Reichard, David Bahnsen, Anna Johansen Brown, Lindsay Mast, Bekah McCallum, Leo Briceno, Onize Oduah, Jenny Rough, Brad Littlejohn, Mary Muncy, Travis Kircher, Carlos Paez [pi-ez], Cal Thomas, Andrew Walker, Collin Garbarino, and George Grant.

And a new voice on the program this week, WORLD Opinions Contributor Candice Watters.

Thanks also to our breaking news team: Kent Covington, Lynde Langdon, Lauren Canterberry, Christina Grube, and Josh Schumacher.

And the guys who work into the wee hours so you can get an early start: Johnny Franklin and Carl Peetz.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Our producer is Harrison Watters. Our Senior producer is Kristen Flavin and Paul Butler is Executive producer, with additional production assistance from Benj Eicher.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

The Bible says “Whoever gives thought to the word will discover good, and blessed is he who trusts in the Lord.” —Proverbs 16:20

Be sure and worship Him with brothers and sisters in Christ in church on the Lord’s day. And Lord willing, we’ll meet you right back here on Monday.

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.