Christians in the Aftermath of Orlando and Hidden Conservative Professors at Secular Universities

Well, from the FBI to Hillary Clinton, we've got it covered and the increasing pressure on Christians and society today. Um It's time for the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and president of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH.

That's 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. All right, well, we didn't focus on this yesterday, but I'm going to take a little time today as there's so much uproar around America. To focus on what's happened with the FBI's recommendation not to indict.

Hillary Clinton, this is Michael Brown. You are listening to the line of fire. A lot of other things are going to get into today, but that's where we're going to start. 866-34-TRUTH. Are you frustrated?

Have you had it with the rule of law or justice in America? Or were you already pretty cynical? And no way is Hillary Clinton going to be indicted? What is really most damaging here In my opinion. What is really most damaging to Hillary Clinton is Is the list, what was it, 10 minutes?

by the FBI director. his listing of what Hillary Clinton did wrongly. the negligence and the explicit Examples he gave, That showed that she had perjured herself from what we could see. when she had testified in Benghazi hearings and said That she did not On her personal server, which again, she had no business using a personal server for government affairs. That she did not.

Send out any classified information that was classified at the time. And here you have systematic evidence that that was untrue. Uh very, very simply Very, very Okay. Basically This is completely undercutting further credibility.

Now, here's another concern I have. Do people who support her care? If others say she's lying through her teeth and she's always lied through her teeth, that's their perspective. To those who support, do they even care if she's lying or not? Or are they at the point are they just as cynical about the whole process as everybody lies?

This is just a witch hunt. Imagine if it was somebody else, not named Clinton, Not running for president during a Democratic administration, time of a Democratic administration. Think if it was somebody else. That did this? It wi their the outrage?

The saying basically My paraphrase, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, but here's why we won't recommend pressing charges is completely outlandish. And to raise again this issue of intent.

Well, she didn't intend did she intend? to do government business on a personal server.

Well, then she's guilty of that. That is criminal. A Secretary of State? That was criminal Okay, now let's let's go further. No one is saying that she intended to betray government secrets that she intended to endanger, say, CIA operatives and other nations, that she intended to make available to our worst enemies our most prized security, No, no one's saying that.

But since when is that required? for you to be guilty. If if your job say say it in the military. your job is to be a night guard. and and to watch to make sure that no terrorist or intruder breaches your barracks.

and you're you're just tired, you fall asleep. Tired. You didn't intend to let the terrorists come in to kill people, but that's what happened. And you'd be court-martialed for. If you're a commanding officer and your troops are going into battle and you happen to get really drunk the night before and your decision-making is impaired the next day, And you make a bad decision and your troops die.

You didn't intend for that to happen, but your negligence led to it. It really is outrageous and the FBI Director Comey will be testifying before the House over these very things. He said it's just partisan politics. Partisan politics In my opinion. That the recommendation was not there to indict.

That's what was partisan politics. We'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. So these were the results of the Twitter poll that I did yesterday. Again, just a cross-section of folks that would be following me on Twitter.

So it does not represent general consensus or opinion across America. It's just a very small sampling, of course, small sampling of people who happen to follow us on Twitter. primarily people who are in agreement with positions that I take and things like that, or at least leaning in that direction. We always have people hostile and differing and others who just follow out of curiosity, but the majority, just like the majority of you listening, would be with me more than against me, presumably.

So my question yesterday, how do you feel about the FBI's recommendations regarding Hillary? Her actions were careless but not criminal. That was their verdict. And for you to weigh in here, 866-34 TRUTH, 866-348-7884. Were you surprised with what the FBI recommended?

Do you agree with Donald Trump that the whole thing is just rigged? Do you think this is going to hurt Hillary Clinton, help Hillary Clinton? Does it make you more cynical as a whole of the political system? Or do you think justice was done? Yeah.

So I asked that question. How do you feel about the FBI's recommendations regarding Hillary Clinton? And uh three percent Said It was very fair. Very fair. 7%, I gave three options.

7% said the law is unclear. Ninety per cent said and outrage. And I didn't just want to say agree, disagree. I wanted to give a little more space there. and you only have four choices, so we came up with three that I thought would work.

90% said and outrage. From what I'm seeing consistently in report after report after report, that sentiment is felt and held very deeply in America. the law does not apply to everyone. I mean, isn't that the feeling that you get? The law does not apply.

to everyone. and if it had been a person of lesser stature who had been even less negligent, the consequences against them could well have been more Severe.

So, I, in my article, you can read it by going to askdrbrown.org, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org. Go there for my latest article that I wrote on this by failing to recommend the indictment of Hillary Clinton, the FBI indict itself. I come away with several points, all right? Several points here. First, This is hardly an exoneration for Hillary Clinton.

Right, the first thing. L let let's be clear, even though they're not recommending indictment, and then who knows if the Department of Justice ever would have gone along with it. And who knows whether this was the FBI acting independently or under pressure from the current administration or some pressure from the Clintons? God knows. things are often more complicated than we would like to believe.

But first it's hardly an exoneration for Hillary Clinton. Are her supporters? May try to portray it like that. If you're a Clinton supporter, you may try to spin it like that. But the fact is, even if she was not convicted here of criminal behavior, or they recommended that she be indicted, what she did was criminals, criminal negligence.

and and the the very public and and specific exposing of her recklessness will be another strike against her. In the elections. In other words, when someone spends 10 minutes saying you did this wrong, this wrong, this wrong, this wrong, this wrong. Here, I'll give you an example. uh you leave someone in charge of your your your kids where you're going away.

They're going to take care of your family and cook the food and oversee things while you're gone. And you come back and it's a complete mess. The house has been burned down because of the negligence. And it got burned down because the kids had a big party. And other kids came over and they were using illegal drugs and illegal fireworks and the and all under the supervision of these other people and on and on and on it goes.

Well, okay, they're not going to jail. But here's what they're guilty of. That that does not help Those people. All right.

So having all these things listed and basically saying, okay, Based on this report, Hillary Clinton has lied repeatedly.

Alright, there's already a Trump video out emphasizing that. Based on this report, Hillary Clinton perjured herself in the Benghazi testimony.

So, this is hardly exoneration. That's number one. Number two, just my take on this: the FBI's decision will only add to our national skepticism. making us question the system Even more. All right.

Questioning the system even more. There was an editorial on CNN.com, which of course would be left-leaning, but it was a strong editorial blasting the FBI and blasting Hillary Clinton. And it was by, let's see, it was by Brad Sexton, Buck Sexton, excuse me, previously a CIA counterterrorism. Analyst, all right? And he said the FBI's recommendation was self-contradictory and an outrage, and he found it deeply depressing.

So here's a guy that knows the system pretty well. And he found what the FBI did deeply depressing. He said Clinton's conduct with her email system was reprehensible as were her mendacious defenses of it. And he said Clinton swore on oath that uh and had a sacred duty to protect classified information, she failed. repeatedly.

So this is only going to increase our national scepticism. Look, at a time like this, when we know there are threats with radical Islam and things like that. Americans would love to be able to trust our law enforcement even more and thank God for the fine people in the FBI and the fine people in the police department and the fine people in the CIA, the fine people in our military. It's it's the holes, it's the problems, it's the weaknesses that are the concern. But we'd love to be trusting the FBI now in terms of the war against terror and things like that.

But here, many are going to just. He may have scorn towards the FBI. And then third. This will further fuel the fires of the Trump campaign. As he said, it's all rigged.

And that plays into a theme that's been effective for him in the past. It's helped rally support his way. In other words, when he's perceived as the outsider fighting against a corrupt and rigged system. that that appeals to his supporters and to many Americans. And then fourth.

This will encourage people of faith to pray all the more for sweeping reformation in the nation. From the top down and from the bottom up. There's an old saying goes back to Shakespeare: something's rotten in Denmark.

Well, Not just Denmark, something's rotten right here. And we need to address it. 348-7884 is the number to call. Let's go to Flower Mound, Texas. David, welcome to the line of fire.

Hello, Doctor Brown. Um Man, I just You know, I I uh just tuned in probably some months ago. And I just get so excited every time I start hearing the music. Uh um Send or five, or I just I just I just love every your ministry, your humility, the example. I just get so inspired.

And I just wanted to say that first.

Well, thank you, sir. Much appreciated. Um To mean Uh This, again, is an example of how stride it. and is openly corrupt, Not not just Ovala and Hillary, but this this whole progressive liberal leadership seems to be right now. And when you just review the sequence of events, that started on july ninth when the President endorsed Hillary, And then a day before, he has the private meeting with Uh his lu his uh attorney general, Lynch.

And then last week The same Attorney General has a private meeting with Bill Clinton. on his private jet on the on the tarmac? And then this weekend, the stories get floated that they're going to conclude the investigation. And then to cap it off yesterday when Comey said that She was extremely careless of the emails. that were classified as the top secret And in fact, her server, which wasn't just server, it was servers, Which I don't remember her ever saying that there were multiple servers involved.

Um and They were sent and received on multiple personal devices, which I'm pretty sure she said she only had one. And they were all cleaned and white beyond recovery. Hang on. And then he tried to make that statement of intent.

Well, if you look at the statute, Uh it um Um Yeah, the the intent was not required by by Congress in in the the primary statute. And others have pointed out, and and uh as as I've argued as well, number one, if you're negligent, if you're reckless, okay, your intent was not that people would die. You were texting while driving and you plowed into another car and killed someone. That was not your intent, but you're still guilty of negligence that led to someone's death. And in this case, Her intent was to handle emails that should have only been handled on a government server.

and under the tightest security, her intent was to handle those in an irresponsible way. That was her intent. She has no business doing that. The good thing, David, is that we know God will shake everything that can be shaken. And, you know, it's not just the progressives.

There's... corruption everywhere. May God Shake it out. Thank you for the call, sir. Give us strict to always do what's right.

It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Alright, I want to take a few more minutes and discuss.

The FBI's recommendation that Hillary Clinton not be Indicted. Again, only God knows Only God knows. Uh the pressure That Uh FBI was under or not. All right.

Uh you know, we don't we don't know. We don't know if this was 100% free. That the FBI director looked at this dispassionately. impartially With no pressure from the Obama administration whatsoever. and no pressure from any other quarter And said, you know.

I don't think the evidence calls for Indictment. But Uh That's Uh Possible, you have to to me, I may be naive, but I'm going to give every benefit of the doubt in every direction. Or to the contrary, was it a given? That there was no possibility. that there is no possibility whatsoever that they could recommend indicting Hillary Clinton.

That would put too much pressure on the Department of Justice. because there's no way the Department of Justice was going to do it. If you really think that there is a a legitimate chance over something like this. that the Department of Justice under the Obama administration would Indict. Bring criminal charges against the presumptive Democratic nominee, and pretty much guarantee a Republican victory in the White House, barring some other.

Strange turn. Uh I see no way that that would have happened.

Sorry. to be that blunt about it, that cynical about it, that's what seems apparent to me. But What if just by detailing. What if by detailing Hilary's guilt. Hillary Clinton's recklessness, extreme negligence, carelessness.

And look, This is only based on emails that were turned in. What about all those that were scrubbed? What were they about? What did they say? Come on, you know.

When you're a kid, And your mommy says, Did you eat the cookies? and and you got one in your back pocket And you got still is the remnants of the other one in your in your mouth. You know, you you're gonna You didn't do anything but search me. Mommy, look, check my pockets, check my mouth. When you did not eat the cookie.

You can go ahead, check, look at my hands, look at my teeth, look at my mouth, look at my pockets, look, look at every I don't have, look at my room. When you're clean, you invite the whole world to see. If I'm clean in the way I'm living, And someone got access to my computer. And they searched it? Great Go for it.

in terms of you're k you're not gonna find a skeleton in the closet there. If I'm unclean, oh, you know, I just need to do something on my computer. Just got to clean something up for or what right do you have to do it?

So just based on the evidence that remained. She was found guilty. But not to the point of Recommending charges. That is so utterly bogus, but the revelation of the guilt, the recklessness, the negligence tells me enough. Listen, there was no way I was voting for Hillary Clinton anyway.

Whether I vote for Donald Trump or not is a separate story. But there's no way I was voting for Hillary Clinton for a number of reasons.

So if if I needed another which I don't, if I needed another, I got it about tenfold over From the FBI verifying the extreme negligence, the fact that she was playing by other rules, the fact that as Secretary of State she acted in ways that were utterly irresponsible regarding national security. And that's just based on what was preserved. We don't we don't even know. We don't even know about what wasn't. Preserved, what was scrubbed.

866-34-TRUTH. We go to Sarah in Rockville, Maryland. Thanks for calling the line of fire. Hello again. I just want to tell you before I talk about Comey, that the the book I won, Can You Be Game Christian, went to the Vatican with my favorite priest.

Oh, seriously? What? Seriously, I wouldn't lie about that. No, no, that's so so do you know if it uh Do you know if it got read by your favorite priest? Oh, yeah.

I wonder who else read it. But I'd like to agree with you.

Now I'm going to switch to an ugly subject, and it is ugly. And I listened to the speculos today on the ACLJ and According to Black's manual, the legal briefing of the text, the text. He actually said she was completely he The very words Comey chose. It's like a man walking the plank. Yes.

She is guilty. And no, I do not believe the administration right now would, just like you said, if you thought they were going to indict her or you know, I no, of course not. But I I liked you very much, and I like hearing your music too, but I have to say, Not voting for Trump, it's also voting for Hillary. And I know you are sophisticated. You know And you're sophisticated and you know that.

I I'm praying very hard for his safety. Yeah, l listen, Sarah, I I am not In the Never Trump camp, meaning as much as I had strong reservations, I gave my warnings for the most part. when there are other Republican options. I of course had endorsed Senator Cruz, but there are others I would have gladly backed and gotten behind. And that's when I put videos out.

That's when I wrote most of my articles. And I felt burdened to do so. The whole time I did, though, I asked myself, is it possible That these words that people have had about God raising up Donald Trump are just the fact, forget prophetic words, the fact he keeps winning and he should have disqualified himself over and over. It seems so unlikely. Is that an indictment on us?

Is it, as I had written, a National Enquirer candidate for a Jerry Springer generation? Or is God at work? I had on the air yesterday, as I often do on Tuesdays later in the show, Reverend James Robinson. who's one of those who agreed to be on an advisory council. And he's doing his best.

to get Donald Trump. to hear a righteous message. And to listen to counselors, because as James Robinson said, Trump does not understand a lot of the political issues or constitutional issues well. And he said, if he won't listen, he'll shout it out to the world.

So I am hoping. I wrote an article last week where I'm actually rooting for Donald Trump. In other words, I want him to get it right. I I want Yeah, you're still on. You're still on.

you know, my first impressions of him that carnival barker stuff and the funny hair and everything. But then I watched his show and you know about you're fired and everything and I watched how he dealt with people and I was very impressed with him.

So yeah. Elvis Shit. But then I saw him. Thinking kindly, acting well toward all races, toward both genders. And so I thought, well, a lot of this is image.

I know Should he make it, meaning I'm praying for his safety. I'm praying for Comey's safety, too. I know you know what I mean here. Um He would put the right people in. I really believe that.

Yeah, I mean, look, there's so many issues, Sarah. The way that he could demean America or degrade us by foolish actions or words or image or different things. There's so many problems, but I. I'm hoping that he'll have a deeper change of heart, that he'll listen to godly counsel, And that he'll be a viable candidate. That's what I'm hoping for.

But anyway, gotta run. Thank you for the call, Sarah, and for the good word. Much appreciated. Friends. Do you listen to this broadcast regularly?

Have you helped us? Have you stood with us? We're only on the air. Through your help, Through your support. That's how God works through you.

Why not become a torchbearer? Join our team. Go to askdrbrown.org. Click on donate. Do it today.

It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. Welcome, welcome to the line of fire, 866-34TRUT. We will talk about what's happening in the society. I just want to remind you Although the President of the United States is in many ways the most powerful person in the world. Although The upcoming elections are tremendously important in many ways.

My great faith, my great focus is on the one true God, before whom even the nations of the world. are like drops in a bucket.

So let us always keep our perspective, and as people of God, Let us emphasize what matters most, knowing God. walking with him, making him known. And then As responsible believers in this world, let us make right choices in our families, let us make right choices. Politically, let us make right choices socially, morally, all these things matter. but let us not lose our perspective.

866-34-TRUTH. Let's go to Chris passing through Brooklyn, New York. It can take a while to pass through Brooklyn midday, man. But how are you doing? I'm well, thank you.

Good afternoon, doctor. You know, in trying to remain a good Christian and trying to be socially responsible and all of that, I have times where my faith is to hope. stretched uh I don't think this reli this this election is going to have anything to do With who's a better candidate. It's going to have to do with who you dislike more than the other, and you'll vote the opposite way. These people can do as much ill, as much bad as they possibly can.

because we're not voting for I don't think we choose to do a lot for anymore. We choose to do more against. It seems that we put more effort into the anti than we do into the pro. And so yeah, Hillary can do what she wants to do because those aren't go they're not going to vote for Hillary because they don't like her anyhow, or they will vote for her because they don't like Trump.

So where's midpoint in any of this? Where's God in any of this? Please answer me. Yeah, right now we have two of the most unlikable candidates in our political history. And those are the main choices.

And you'd much rather rally around someone that you really feel could help. That you really feel could make a positive difference. And we know that to a great extent, the way that you win elections is by negative campaigning. It's the kind of thing that if you're a moral, godly person, how are you going to do that? I mean, if you and I were running against each other for an office, say, you know, some position in Brooklyn, and you know, some school board thing, and we were both godly believers, well, we're not maybe in the same denomination.

We're not going to be bashing each other and mocking each other because that would be a wrong thing to do. We'd say, hey, here's where I could do a good job on this and that. But you can't do that these days because of the negativity.

So we need to step back, Chris, to answer your question. And not get caught up with it ourselves.

Now look where there's error. or sin, I'm going to address it. I'm going to expose it. And I'm always going to do it in a way where we're first examining our own hearts and our own lives. If I see corruption, I'm going to address it.

If I have concerns, I'm going to raise them. But the purpose is that we get on our faces and pray. Chris, it's been for many years, but it's becoming more and more acute. The only hope for the strong future of our nation. is radical Visitation by God.

beginning in a sleeping, complacent, compromised church, where only a small remnant is really focused on doing the will of God and obeying the Lord and living in the light of eternity. That is the that is what we must have, sir.

So the takeaway is big messages Big political mess. Big electoral mess. but a much bigger God who can intervene. Therefore, we must put our energies towards praying for awakening and working towards living out the gospel in our own personal lives. Keep your faith in him and you won't be discouraged.

Otherwise, man, it's very discouraging. Hey, gotta run. Thank you for the call.

Next time change the world. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

All right, I want to change subjects now. Having talked enough about corruption in the government and the cynicism towards the system. And the FBI's Failure to recommend indicting Hillary Clinton while exposing apparent lies. in her previous testimony and raising all kinds of questions about negligence. We're going to switch subjects here and talk about something that is in America right now in an increasing measure, which is hostility towards the Christian faith hostility towards Christian morality, hostility towards our fundamental religious freedoms.

And as we saw with the tragic massacre in Orlando, a radical Muslim. can carry out murderous acts against dozens of gays and lesbians at a gay nightclub, And Christians somehow get blamed for it. It's part of a larger. Rising tide of anti-Christian sentiment in America. And it's one of these.

Issues that we must navigate today. I'm joined on the air by Tom Gilson. He's been on the air with me before. He's the author of Critical Conversations: A Christian Parent's Guide. to discussing homosexuality with teens.

You just hear that title and you say to yourself as a parent, I think I need that book. Yeah, I would suggest that I endorsed it with encouragement for many to read the book. But Tom is an apologist, he works on college campuses, he writes regularly for the stream, stream.org. And I want to navigate some of these difficult minefields with Tom now. Hey, welcome back to the line of fire.

That's good to be back. Always to be always good to be with you, Michael. Yeah, so so Tom. Paint a larger picture for us. If you were looking back over recent years or decades, What are some of the contributing factors that have brought us to this place of greater hostility?

towards Christian faith and Christian morals in America today. Boiler. Many of them. But probably it comes down to a couple of broad movements. One of them is the sexual revolution.

It goes way back to the Sixties. And at that point, there was a turn away from. Christian morality. Probably and I've seen recently where people have said that it it can be traced back to s to careless theology even preceding that Churches. This This has deep roots.

What really turned it might have been 9. After that, Sam Harris wrote a book called The End of Faith, in which he was the first to articulate the opinion that all religions basically have the same problem. Which is that we're all safe. uh systems And because we're all faith systems, And if one of us is really bad, then we're all really bad.

Something happened then after nine one one that that religion in general got a bad name, even though duh Christianity and Islam don't believe the same thing.

So that was going on. There was a homosexual activist movement going on that you've written about. that we've got clear documentation on. back to the uh nineteen eighties at least. All these things are coming together, but There's certainly an anti-religious sentiment throughout the West that's arisen largely because of Muslim.

Activities in 911 and terrorism following. Yeah, so you have, say, an author like Sam Harris. The End of Faith, an atheist author. Uh when he sees what happens with the the 911 terrorist attacks. And then that to him is the fruit of religious fundamentalism, period.

And I could understand how a non-believer would look at this. But now, Christianity, which preaches a different message. We've been the dominant faith in America since the founding of our nation. As of a decade ago, maybe 85% of the nation professed to be Christian, and maybe a solid third were pretty serious about their faith, yet we weren't going around murdering people and blowing up buildings. People say, what about the Oklahoma City bombing?

They had nothing to do with Christianity. Timothy McVay was not a Christian. It was not Christian theology he was following. Yet when you have a theology that can lead to murderous terrorist acts like radical Islam, yeah, focus on that, but don't compare that to the teaching of Jesus, which is going to lead to laying down your life rather than taking someone else's life. There are such huge differences.

between Islam and Christianity, between our founders. Jesus taught love for enemies. He gave up his wife, as you said. Mohammed. led war parties.

He he was he was a man of violence. And um is is Islam a a religion of peace? That's that's been debated. I'm not sure we've looked at it with the right kind of care it needs to be looked at because I I've never heard anyone in public In a public position, say Islam is a religion of peace, and this is how we know it is. it it's it seems like a Western palliative Veneer put over Islam.

But you don't have to Put that kind of the veneer over Christian. Christianity. It's there. It is a religion. Of love and and peace.

And of course it is a religion that has standards. But we have a way of dealing with those things it doesn't It doesn't go the same way Islam goes. Yeah, it's very true.

So what what do we What do we do? To uh What do we do to have a conversation with the society that is hostile without retreating Moral views of what's right and wrong. In other words, if a lot of the society just decides that there are new rights and new wrongs, and we don't agree with those, how How do we have conversation? How do we hold to our views without falling into the category of being bigots in the eyes of the world? I I think the first thing that has to happen is a word that's not Going to be very popular among every Christian listener.

We've got to do some homework, Michael. We have got to understand our beliefs, we've got to understand what the Bible says. And not only what it says, but why it says it. Why it's good. 'Cause it really is good.

the moral standards that God gives us in the Bible are good and we can stand for them. With a smile. We need to know why we know that it's true. And and what I the reason I say this is because I think a lot of the rancor and discord comes from people who are kind of flailing. They've got an opinion and they don't know how to defend it.

If you know what you're talking about, you can state it calmly. Yeah.

And if someone attacks you, you can smoke. And you can say, well, Um let's keep talking. I'm I'm open to the conversation. If you're not sure of yourself, that's a lot harder to do. Christians, we've got to learn.

What we believe why we believe it and why it's good. Yeah.

And all right, let's come back to that point. Why? It's good. Yeah.

Why is our message better? Why, why? Look, if someone says just your outdated views on sexuality, your outdated views on marriage and family, you need to move on. I mean, let's say that the Bible theoretically taught that all medicine was bad and you should never use medicine.

So we're dying like flies.

Well, then, obviously, you know, that's a wrong teaching and we would have to question our belief in the Bible. But you're saying that belief in the Bible, belief in God's ways, these things are good. How do we convince the world or get the world to see that what we believe is actually good?

Well, you When it comes to marriage and morality, we have to Demonstrate it in our own relationships. And so, for those Christians who are married, there needs to be, we need to live it out, and we can. Show what it means to live. In a marriage where there's forgiveness and grace and trust and love and mutual commitment. But really, the goodness can also be shown in the effects.

When I think of kids, for example, you could ask a sociologist and they could pull out, and psychologists, they could pull out dozens, if not hundreds, of papers that would say that it's really good for kids to be raised in a family with their own mom and dad, biological or adoptive. And there's a lot of evidence for that. Or you could walk up. A 14-year-old, and you could say, um. Are your parents still married and are they getting along fairly well?

And if the answer is yes, you'd say, well, you know, are you glad it's that way? What's The child is going to say. Yeah.

Of course I'm glad it's that way. And if and if the teen says no, they're not married anymore or they're not getting along. You say, well, do you wish they were?

Well, of course they're going to say they wish they were. You know what? Kids know this. without having To read all the sociologists' papers. Marriage is good, and it's good for.

It's good for the next generation. It's good for the couple. It's good for the community. communities Because it builds. It's generative.

It supports relationships. That's just the start. Right, so God's ways. Or ways of life. And somehow we need to convey that to our society.

I got a bunch more constructive questions for my guest, Tom Gilson. His book, Critical Conversations, A Christian Parents Guide to Discussing Homosexuality with Teens, you'll find Tom to be a wise guide, full of love. Fill the compassion. full of patience, full of truth.

So this book would really help you have the conversations you need to have. It's not just for a kid who's gay or identifies as gay. It's to have with your kids as Christians. Super healthy. We'll be right back.

Hey friends, this is Michael Brown. I want to encourage you to join our support team today. Become a torchbearer, one of our regular monthly supporters that enables us to broadcast the line of fire around America and around the world. And oh, every month we sell back into you in many, many different ways. Join our team, become a torchbearer.

Go to ask Dr. Brown, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org, and click on donate. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 Truth.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Welcome back, friends, to the line of fire, 866-34Truth. Number to call. I'm speaking with my guest, Tom Gilson, his latest book, Critical Conversations.

These are conversations that Parents need to have with their kids about homosexuality and with their teens in particular.

So, Tom, we often talk, when I say we, conservative Christian leaders, about the increasing threat to our freedom of religion. In America today. I wrote an article on the stream on Monday for July 4th. Saying that on this July 4th, our religious freedoms are under assault. Wake up.

And the first example I used is SB 1146 in California. A bill that would require, to quote David French, Christian schools to disclose if they are seeking traditional religious exemptions from anti-discrimination laws and would strip public funding from any school that imposes traditional Christian rules of morality and conduct on matters of sexual orientation and gender identity. Only schools that train pastors are exempt. French says the message is clear, confirm or close.

So if you say, for example, that we require our faculty and students to sign a certain code of conduct, and that code of conduct recognizes homosexual practice as sin. Or that code of conduct affirms that biological males are males and biological females are females, that they could theoretically lose their funding, a Christian college university, which would. effectively sink them. Are are are we are we saying the sky's falling, the sky's falling when nothing's really happening? Or has there been an ominous turn?

There has been An anominous turn. I was just talking with another Christian leader a few minutes ago about this. And frankly, on July 3rd in church on Sunday, as we were talking about, pastor was preaching about religious freedom and celebrating it. I was sitting there almost holding back tears, thinking this might be the last time I hear a sermon where we're celebrating rather than just remembering religious freedom. It is turning.

There's new controls being attempted, at least. Churches in Iowa, there's significant reason to think that we are under fire. And as you said in your article, it's time for Christians to wake up. Great awakenings are famous for turning around societies and histories, and awakened means to wake up. Wake up.

We had better awaken to the reality of Jesus Christ and to the goodness of. Of Jesus Christ. But we better wake up to the next. What's going on, too?

So, how do we do that without getting kind of a ghetto defeatist? everybody's against us mentality which which does not tie in with the vibrancy and reality of the gospel. Study mission. I mentioned doing homework a while ago. Great missionary biographies.

Read um I'm not sure I like the title, but really. Yeah.

Ripkin's book. The insanity of God. In fact, I don't like the title. But it's about Christians living and currently in persecution around the world, and it's an incredibly good book. But study missions.

We're not in any new position here, we're in a position where we have an. opportunity to live Yeah. God's people in the midst of People who need to know God, and that's what missions has been about since the beginning. We should just be aware that we're in a mission field now. We always were, it's just more obvious now.

Take it seriously. Great commission. disciple, build, love. This is our opportunity. Right.

we've kind of fallen in into the trap of, well, America is largely Christian and Christian views are widely respected and we have these freedoms here and tax exemptions for our churches and there's a lot of truth to that because of which we've just looked at ourselves as like the dominant majority, which is not the healthy way to look at things in this world because it ends up where we have a fleshly confidence rather than a divine confidence. Boy, is that true? This is an opportunity for us to get to know God in a way we can. We never knew him before. I'm looking forward to what he's doing.

Going to do with some fear. I don't know what's going to happen to everybody. I don't know what's going to happen to me and my family. I don't know what's going to happen to radio shows like Lion of Fire. But I do know that God.

was able to To get along without radio. He was able to get along. Without tax exemptions. The church made it. We're going to make it, and God is going to be glorified.

We need to keep our heads up. Yeah, absolutely. That is a message we must hear. Hey, Tom, we've only got a little while left, but because these issues are constantly before us, families, parents, whenever I go out and speak, if I am asked to speak by a church on the moral cultural issues, there's inevitably a line of people wanting to talk to me, often with tears, and they want to tell me about what's happened in their family or with their kids or with their spouse, having to do with homosexuality, having to do with transgender questions. What will your book, Critical Conversations, do?

How will it fill a void for these parents? It's going to help them. them understand their convictions It's going to help them understand That's Some of the charges laid against Christians. By home. Homosexual activists are baseless, and so that what they can.

Stand with their head held. And they can They can be confident and calm in their loving inner. interactions with their loved ones so that It's just a stronger and more secure place on which to stand and to love. And also if if you feel more secure that you're on the side of truth. that your beliefs are biblically sound.

They're morally sound. They're socially sound. It gives you a whole lot more confidence, doesn't it? It does. And boy, it's so much easier to talk and to love from that perspective.

Knowing the truth is important. Living the truth is important. Obviously, Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. And he didn't say that everyone was going to agree with everything. He didn't say it was always going to be easy.

He did say that. He was giving us what it took to live in love. if we followed him. Yeah, absolutely. And that that love Will always triumph.

And if we are looking for not so much success in society. But the blessing of God to see lives changed and the kingdom of God advanced. We can experience that every day of our lives. Hey, Tom, thanks for the great work. Keep it up.

Look forward to seeing you again. Hey, let's get together again. It's always slow year when we. Do. Let's do it.

Absolutely. Tom Gilson, the book Critical Conversations, you'll find it tremendously helpful, especially if you have teenagers.

So I commend it to you. Friends, let me encourage you to stand with us and believe God with us. If you don't have a dime in your pocket, if you don't know where your next meal is coming from, you can pray. Pray that God will not only meet your need. But that God would enable us to Be a voice on the front lines that he would amplify this voice because, as my voice is amplified, it's our voice, it's your voice, and that's why we do what we do.

So, pray about standing with us if you can. Go to askdrbrown.org, click on donate. That's what keeps us doing what we're doing. My bottom line today, Jesus is the victor. His church is destined to triumph.

That must be our mindset. What about the campuses? What about the secular universities? Is there a place for conservative Christians and conservative professors on these campuses? Uh It's time for the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr.

Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and president of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 Truth. That's 866-34 Truth. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. Yesterday, I had on the air with me a fascinating guest. Very interesting background. The second time he was on the air with me. He had been raised by two lesbian moms.

He was in gay, what he would call a gay lifestyle for years, identified as bisexual. I had a wonderful Experience coming to know the Lord, Jesus. He's happily married now with family. But he taught at a secular university, taught humanities, taught classical texts. And because he was outspoken, About his views because he testified to what he knew, what he experienced in his life.

He was constantly under attack. He was constantly harassed. Charges were constantly being brought against him. And finally, Finally, He got to the point. where he said, Okay.

You know what? Forget the fact that I am working towards my tenured status here. I am going to leave. I'm going to resign and I'm going to go instead teach at a Christian university. How bad are things on the campuses today?

How extreme have things become? Is it possible Yeah. a godly conservative. And be on the college campuses. Is that possible.

In terms of many of the secular campuses, in a few minutes, we're going to speak with two professors. who have authored a book Passing on the right and conservative pro uh professors in the progressive universities It's a unique book. It's based on 153 interviews that they did. And uh Is the university more tolerant than we know? Is there a total crackdown?

Are there university thought police? How bad are things?

So we're going to talk about that. My own experience is interesting. because I never went to Bible college. I never went to seminary. I I got my bachelor's degree from Queens College in New York City.

And then I got my master's and PhD from New York University. and s all of my studies were secular. I got my master's and PhD in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures. and studied only with professors who differed with me. Every so often I'd have a religious Jewish professor, so obviously he differed with me because of my faith in Jesus, but had a more sympathetic reading of Scripture as I would have.

In other words, believed it to be God's word. Uh And at least we had in common the Hebrew scriptures. And sometimes I studied with atheists.

Sometimes I studied with Jews that were once more religious and now were irreligious. The chairman of the department at New York University was a former Jesuit priest. And the main mentor that I had through my PhD studies at NYU. in his his friendly way of saying it was a former Orthodox rabbi who went heretical.

So, I was always in this environment of being. Kind of the the the square peg trying to go into a round hole because As a conservative believer myself, I was in secular universities, but They always worked with me. I got scholarships based on my academic work. I got my PhD work done fairly. My committee, everything was fair.

What's it like, though, to be a professor? In this setting, my guests, Professor John Shields and Professor Joshua Dunn. co authors of the book passing on the right, Conservative Professors in the Progressive Universities, published by Oxford University Press.

So we know this is a serious, well-done academic work. Uh we are We're going to have an interesting conversation. I'm eager to find out what their findings are. Angel World It's fire we want, oh fire we want. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr.

Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUT. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. I had a professor call my show a few years ago.

She taught in the arts at a second university and said she was not allowed to talk about God. In her class. It was not relevant to the subject matter, and she literally was not. allowed to talk about God. That's what she said.

when I debated Professor Bart Ehrman.

Well-known New Testament scholar and even better-known agnostic professor at UNC Chapel Hill. When I debated him on the problem of suffering at Ohio State University years back, looking into more of what he did, I knew in his big survey class, New Testament survey class, where he'd have a lot of Christian kids in the class that he would really try to demolish their faith in the scriptures. What place then does a conservative professor have at a so-called progressive university? We hear that at major universities across America, very few conservatives are asked to do the commencement speeches. Is there only a place for conservative professors, say, in Christian universities and schools of faith?

My guests, Professor John Shields, Associate Professor in the Department of Government at Claremont McKenna College, and Joshua Dunn, professor of political science and director of the Center for the Study of Government and the Individual at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, have co-authored Passing on the Right Conservative Professors in the Progressive Universities.

So let me bring both Dr. Dunn and Dr. Shields on the air. Gentlemen, welcome to the broadcast. Thanks for having us.

Thanks for having us. Great.

So you can jump in accordingly because I don't know uniquely which. Specific piece of the puzzle you'd each bring, so you can jump in as you please in the dialogue here, but um. What caused you to do this study? It's major, it's groundbreaking. What got your interest?

Well, I you know, we're both conservatives. And so we had a we had a sort of sort of a natural interest in this project. And um And uh and you know we uh We uh um Uh We thought it was a very understudied and important topic, too, that political diversity was important in higher education. And um So we were drawn and interested in this intellectual minority. And um Wi say, Dr.

John, what's the general environment? in terms of conservative thought. At the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, what percentage would you say of the faculty would identify as conservative? Oh, at my institution, I'm not certain what the percentage would would be. I think it's probably comparable to the percentages that most public universities.

So you probably have more in the hard sciences and in stem the STEM fields.

So sciences and engineering there there are more, but in the social sciences there there are relatively few.

Social sciences and humanities. And and Dr. Shields, would you say that's your your assessment as well at your own school?

Well, my school is kind of funny because I work at Claremont McKenna College. uh which was founded in the uh post war years. And it was founded as a particularly by by uh Of Reagan, or Nixon Republicans who wanted to fight the Cold War. And so it's.

So, it's a much more conservative place compared to lots of liberal arts colleges. Having said that, it's it's become more liberal over time.

So I would estimate that you know about um 18% of our faculty are Republicans. That doesn't sound like a big number. But compared to other elite liberal arts colleges, it's a very high number. Because at most other elite liberal arts colleges, There are no Republicans at all. Or if they do exist, There's one or two here or there.

but they're extremely rare at those kinds of institutions. All right, so I don't know how much you've looked at this larger picture, and if you'd rather not get into this in depth, that's fine, because I do want to focus on what you found in your book, Passing on the Right, Conservative Professors in the Progressive University. But we all know. any of us that have studied history of American education, that it was initially people that wanted to be biblically literate, that the founding of our famous universities over the years, be it Harvard or a Yale or so many of the great universities, the Ivy League schools, were founded as Christian schools required certain biblical literacy, either to produce pastors or produce a biblically literate society. Maybe out of the first 250 colleges and universities in America up into the mid-1800s, perhaps 225 of them, the vast majority in any case, were founded by Christian organizations, denominations.

That's a long time ago. It's a different world. Can either of you comment on how the shift has gotten so radical? From biblical Christian foundations to becoming so secular and even hostile in certain ways.

Well, some of it goes back to the yeah, some of it goes back to the changes to the university in the late 1800s and early 1900s when you had a German model of higher education that took hold in the United States.

So there's some of that. But then also in the 1900s, the university came to be seen as a kind of left-wing institution. And so more if someone wanted to become a professor, they typically were on the left. And so that had an effect over time. And then of course you get to the 1960s and 70s and where the new left begins its kind of march through the long march to the institutions as it's called.

And so that has helped drive it recently as well. Yeah, and Professor Shield, did you want to jump in as well? Yes, I would just add that a lot of these disciplines are really forming like political science and sociology during the progressive era. And so they were shaped by that spirit, that kind of optimism that social problems could be solved in a scientific way And so that appealed, I think, to liberals and their cast of mind much more so than conservatives. Yeah, and of course it's interesting.

We have the idea today. That's often put forth, that Christianity stands in opposition to progress in knowledge and progress in science. But historically, it was quite the opposite. Great scientists, great academics were Christian, and often it was the church that was the place that gave birth to this.

So, putting this in a social context is important.

So, how did you then go about your study? You ended up doing 153 interviews. Again, it's the first of its kind, first ever book-length study on conservative scholars. How did you come up with your plan of attack? Mm-hmm.

Well, we first began by identifying known conservatives in six different disciplines in the social sciences and humanities.

So we chose we chose economics. Uh we chose political science.

Sociology, history, philosophy, and literature. And And so we we're looking so we first we identify sort of known conservatives in those areas by looking at conservative magazines and periodicals. And so we got we got an initial list of people through those sources And then what we did is we approached those people and we asked them to name names, right? We said, who do you know, right? Who's a conservative in your discipline that we might not be able to identify through sort of more public kinds of sources?

And that led us to another batch of people And then we approached them and we asked them the same question. And we repeated that process many times. This is done in other kinds of areas of the social sciences. It's called a snowball sample, right? It sort of builds as you're sort of led to sort of more individuals.

And it's ideal for studying people that are hard to identify, right?

So in fact, it's a method that's often used to study the homeless, right? If you want to study if you want to identify the homeless in New York City, this kind of method is used. It's also, as it happens, I think, a pretty good method to identify conservative professors, many of whom are closeted and don't want to be found. Hmm. posited conservative professors.

Amazing. There's a book that was written about problems in the psychiatric profession. Where there was basically an accusation of a complete liberal hijacking with an agenda. And when these. professionals, one of whom had been the head of the APA.

For some time, and both of them highly respect it. When they were trying to put this book together, Destructive Trends in Mental Health, they found people were not willing. to contribute chapters for fear. of what could happen to them. Academically.

So, Dr. Shields, we've just got about 30 seconds now. For a summary, Were the results better or worse than you were? Expecting. Mm-hmm.

Uh well, in some ways they were I think they're a little bit of both. I mean, in some ways they were worse because we identified more closeted folks than we anticipated. On the other hand, we also I also really be uh developed an appreciation for tenure. Tenure is a very important institution because it really does, I think, protect the academic and intellectual freedom of academics.

So all these closeted folks we found also tend to come out of the closet after tenure. Interesting, interesting. All right, we will be right back. My guests, Professor John Shields, Professor Joshua Dunn, their book, Passing on the Rights, Conservative Professors and the Progressive University. O God of burning, cleansing flame.

Send the fire. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks for listening in on a fascinating conversation I'm having with Professor John Shields and Professor Joshua Dunn, respectively, from the Claremont McKenna College and University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Co-authors of Passing on the Right, Conservative Professors in the Progressive Universities. I want to pick up on something that was touched on by Dr. Shields right before the break. You mentioned that there are conservative scholars, conservative professors at, quote, progressive universities.

who remain closeted. In other words, they do their academic work, but they don't come out clearly as conservatives until they have their tenure. And then they come out. How common was this?

Well, about a third of our sample closeted themselves prior to tenure. And it was particularly pronounced in certain disciplines, right?

So in fact, we didn't find any clauseted conservatives, or maybe we found one, in the field of economics. Because economics is much more balanced politically. It's a much less politicized discipline than some of the other social sciences and humanities fields that we studied. Um but it was relatively complicated. Common in some of the other fields.

So it was, I think, in political science and sociology and history. upwards of forty percent, a little more, tended to closet themselves. And it also seems to be becoming more common as well.

So for example, the really old guard, the people the academics who started teaching in the sixties and early seventies, those folks said that they really didn't tend to closet themselves prior to ten year. But more recent generations of academics, that's becoming a more popular strategy. And Professor John, what would the primary Issues be that these conservative professors are afraid to speak openly about is it just a general political conservatism that they're Republican? Is it that they hold to conservative moral values about family and sexuality? Is it kind of an all of the above or one or two particular hot button issues?

Well If you're a social conservative, you're more likely to claws it yourself.

Socially conservative positions are much. Yeah.

much more likely to generate antagonism from your colleagues than say being um uh an economic conservative. Uh so so social conservatives closeted themselves more and those were the kinds of opinions that they would more likely sil silence. But uh I you don't don't want to say that that economic conservatives uh felt free to always express their uh opinions on on issues as well. Uh we did have people who talked about how uh they felt it was dangerous that e expressing an opinion on the Obamacare. Um but uh certainly um uh so social conservatives felt the most threat.

Interesting.

So, gentlemen, was there any sense of.

Okay, if you're married for 20 years and then your spouse comes out with a secret that you never knew about, that they're really not who you thought they were, there'd be a deep sense of betrayal. Once these closeted conservatives have come out, what's the reaction been? Hmm. Well some of the colleagues did explain. Express dismay and disappointment, even perhaps a touch of anger.

felt like they'd been misled by some and because some of the closeted conservatives that we interviewed said that some of their closest friends in their departments did not know their politics. And so they really did feel uh feel like um they uh there'd been a violation of their of their of their of their friendship.

However, uh these closeted conservatives would often say, uh, after they came out, uh they were they would tell their colleagues to recall some of the things that they said about conservatives, just kind of offhanded comments. And to remind them about why they might have thought that it was necessary to not reveal their policy. Interesting.

And do you know at all what the reaction of students was? Hmm. Um w uh go ahead, Josh. Oh, well, uh so Students, uh one comment that we Frequently received from the folks we interviewed with that students were able to identify their conservative professors precisely because their politics. not a parent in the classroom.

And we don't know how w I mean, that could be misled. May perhaps there are others that aren't on the on the right that this happens to as well, that there's kinda like a false positive. But many of them said that they had students said, well, we couldn't figure out if you're conservative or liberal, so we assumed you were conservative.

So in other words, if they were not Uh say faunting the gay pride parade. button or did not have their their their office designated as a safe space for gays and lesbians, then you could just assume that they had a certain view.

So interesting that the students were more aware of it than some of the colleagues. That's fascinating. But you don't paint a wholly bleak picture in your book. Certain things were better than expected.

So let's hear about some of the positive openness that exists to some level. Sure.

Well, I think that it, you know, I think the Academy is a much more tolerant place than. Um a lot of conservatives sometimes think it is. Particularly, those conservatives outside the academy who critique it from the outside. And I certainly understand why conservatives distrust the university. There's lots of things wrong with it.

It's excessively politicized. Um but it's also the case that there's lots of stuff Spaces in academia where conservatives can find a relatively friendly environment. And in fact, they tend to gravitate to precisely those areas.

So I think one reason there are so many conservatives in economics but not sociology is because economics is just much more friendly to conservative points of view. And it's also true within certain subfields of other disciplines.

So take history, for example. Not a lot of conservatives become twentieth century American historians because That area is saturated with Controversies about race and gender in a very sort of leftist way.

So instead what they do is they gravitate toward areas like military history or ancient history or the American founding. And those areas tend to be more friendly to them.

So, on the one hand, that's a good thing, right? Because it means there are spaces for conservatives to do interesting intellectual work. On the other hand, It's really too bad that there's some areas that are much more dangerous, right? And in fact, Conservatives tend to gravitate toward the areas where they're least needed. We don't actually, I think, need more conservatives in economics.

We need more conservatives studying hot-button issues and controversial issues, and they need to be in areas that are dominated by the left, but they tend to steer clear of them. Yeah.

All right.

When we come back, I'm glad you can spend a few more minutes with me. I want to ask a couple of questions. One, what about tolerance and so-called progressive universities? And two, what you would recommend as strategies. Do we do our best to infiltrate the universities again as conservatives and bring a vibrant, robust, conservative challenge to some of the current ideologies that we do not find to be intellectually or morally or socially sound?

Or do we just kind of give up ship and do our best to raise up competing Christian universities? You know, it's interesting, you mentioned just kind of finding a place that was safe. I did all my degrees in languages, so even though I had conservative views of the Bible, I could do all my linguistics scholarship just fine. That wasn't the way I planned it, but I found, well, that's interesting. I'm respected here within that, even though they differ with my other beliefs.

All right, we'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRU.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Our earliest colleges, universities here in America were founded by Christians. for Christian education. For training of pastors and Christian leaders, and for Training of People who would go into every aspect of society, every area of service in America, but with a strong biblical foundation, things have shifted greatly, dramatically.

Be it a Harvard University, be it a Yale University. You look at the founding mottos of these schools, and it was for the glory of Christ, and it was for the knowledge of God, and that was a foundation. Up until the turn of the 20th century, even into the early 20th century, students at Yale attended chapel several times a week on a voluntary basis. Things shifted dramatically.

Some pointed to Christian Smith and others authored a book on the secular revolution beginning in the mid-1800s, changing in the educational system, changing in the mindset. We find ourselves today at a unique place And Professors John Shields and Joshua Dunn have co-authored a book, Passing on the Right, Conservative Professors in the Progressive University. They interviewed 153 professors, conservatives, and professors Shields and Dunn themselves are conservatives. And they they have some very, very interesting findings on these university campuses. It's an important subject to talk about.

It's massively important in terms of the education of the next generation. Gentlemen, when you speak of progressive universities, First, how would you define progressive? What does that mean these days? And secondly, is there true tolerance of diverse views in the progressive universities? Yeah, But for some progressive it's just an alternative to liberal, uh because Liberal became tainted after Reagan, and so they started to turn to using the word progressive because it doesn't have the connotations that that was liberal.

But then there are some who are pointing back to the progressive era and the principles of the progressive era. when describing themselves as progressive. That's a particular view about them. Uh I've I've Kind of Week history. Yeah, everything is moving.

Yeah.

Mm-hmm.

towards progress. Um And perhaps there's still some of the same confidence that Uh stop uh progressive side. And uh through the sound application of social sciences to solve problems, there'll be an increasing uh liberation of the uh uh uh of the individual, those those kinds of Yeah, so within that setting at what would be recognized as liberal slash progressive universities. Is there real tolerance? Tolerance is a big word we hear constantly.

Is there true tolerance of diverse views, be it among faculty or students in these universities, or is it kind of an Orwellian sense of tolerance?

Well, I think it's hard to just in some ways, it's hard to think about the university as a single thing. I think I like the word multiversity actually. And it's the university is a very place partly because disciplines are so powerful. And I think that you know, there are some disciplines which tend to be relatively tolerant in the social sciences and humanities and some that are not. And I also think there's a big divide in the university.

And the biggest divide in the university is not between conservatives and liberals, because conservatives are much too marginal, right, to really be a powerful faction inside the modern university. I think the biggest divide in some ways in the university is between the liberal left, that is the left that really does want an open and tolerant university. And the illiberal left, which wants to control speech and shut down people with Whom they disagree. And I think that's the biggest cleavage. And in some ways, it's gotten much bigger in the last year.

Very interesting. All right, I'm going to jump in there. Let's talk about what's gotten bigger there: the microaggressions and all of this, and then let's talk strategy. Should Christians, professors leaders, should we try to really impact universities? Hey friends, this is Michael Brown.

I want to encourage you to join our support team today. Become a torchbearer, one of our regular monthly supporters that enables us to broadcast the line of fire around America and around the world. And oh, every month we sell back into you in many, many different ways. Join our team, become a torchbearer. Go to ask Dr.

Brown, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org, and click on donate. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. I'm speaking today with Professors Joshua Dunn and John Shields, their book, Passing on the Right, Conservative Professors and the Progressive University, published by Oxford University Press. This is Christian talk radio, but we constantly deal with issues in the society. We're constantly talking about moral cultural issues. and often talking about education, so this is a highly relevant subject.

Many, many of Our listeners have followed what happened at University of Missouri. They've taken a real hit in terms of Incoming students and things like that, as I understand. And there's been a lot of backlash for the way the university handled some problems. It's difficult subjects now. But this whole thing of microaggressions, and if you say a certain thing, it's offending a certain group of people.

And you can't even challenge one another's thinking. Right before the break, Professor Shields, you've mentioned the greater divide you see in the universities is between the liberal left that wants an open exchange of views and an illiberal left that doesn't. Professor Dunn, is this something growing on other campuses as well? This extreme view where you have to watch every word you say? It is to some extent.

I'm not certain that it's growing much among faculty, though. What you've seen with many of these protests is that they've been student-driven. And you don't often see faculty participating. You have a peculiar situation there in Missouri with this one professor, Melissa Glick, who got involved. But by and large, this seems to be driven by students, and some of them are I think some of the loudest voices are getting the most attention.

I also think is that that that It's not as widespread as it appears. The university is a very big space, so you can have a few instances at places like Missouri, at Yale or at Johns Institution, Claremont McKinnon College, and it gets a lot of attention. But at many schools, I don't think that you're going to see as much of this. I think you'll probably see more of it at elite institutions. That's where it's taking hold the most.

Interesting.

Now, I had a guest on with me yesterday. Very interesting story. He was raised by two lesbian moms. He lived a life for many years as a gay man and then began to identify as bisexual. He's become a committed Christian conservative.

He's married to a woman now with a child. And he taught in California his field as the classics, the Greek and Latin classics. But he was outspoken about his views. And because of his experience, where he had lived and how he had been raised, so he was under constant harassment. One thing.

After another, and he was going to fight it out to get tenure. And he finally said, Forget it, I quit. It's not worth holding on until I get tenure. And he's now teaching humanities at a Christian university. He'll start in the fall.

Now, again, that's just his own story, and everyone's going to have their own journey and their own story to tell. But is there a way, do you recommend, is there a feasible path for more and more openly conservative professors to infiltrate colleges? When I say infiltrate, make a positive impact. Or too many doors shut if you're an open conservative, or too many doors shut. Do we abandon the secular universities, or can we still make a positive impact?

Uh I think it would Go go ahead, Josh. Oh, no, no. Go on, John. I think it would be a big mistake to abandon the university. Um Conservatives can succeed in higher education.

There are certainly horror stories. The one you just mentioned is a good example. Um Uh So that exists, right? And I think our book highlights some of those cases. But I also think that we point to many more examples of professors who succeeded.

That doesn't mean they haven't faced challenges in a university, a lot of them have. But a lot of those obstacles can be overcome. And so I think the university is a place that conservatives can succeed. I think it's important that they know that. Um And I think it would be really tragic.

if conservatives walked away from the university, because the university really needs those voices. And I don't think that it's I think Christian universities, of course, are very important. Conservative think tanks are very important. But we still need conservatives at elite institutions, particularly at PhD granting institutions, right? Because who's going to train the next generation of academics, right?

You need some people. And the good news is, it doesn't have to be a huge number, right? It's not as if the university needs to look like America, right? It doesn't have to have a perfect balance of liberals and conservatives. It just needs to have some more, right?

And even just a small increase. Right, if we could increase the percentage of conservative social scientists from six percent Uh to fifteen percent, I think that could have a big impact on the university. It could change the kind of conversations that are going on inside the universities, it could change the classrooms, it could change the culture of those institutions. And so I'm optimistic. I mean, I think we we need we should encourage conservatives in into academia.

Yeah, and you know, it's one thing. to make something into a god, you know, that you have to have tenure or you have to have your kid has to go to an Ivy League school or whatever. And in that sense, I don't believe that we bow down to the God of secular academics, but by no means do we withdraw, of course, especially when universities play such an important role in shaping the thinking of the next generation. What kind of impact can a conservative professor have on students when you have many students that come in conservative and they're in kind of an intimidating environment because the professors know so much and they're so influential and it's not politically acceptable to hold to certain views. What kind of life-giving effect?

And you see it in your own classes, I'm sure, that when you are intellectually sound and you're a good moral character, you're decent people and you hold to these conservative views, it smashes a lot of stereotypes. What effect does it have on conservative students?

Well, I think it gives them a mentor, right? I mean, one problem with universities is that these young conservatives, particularly conservative activists, Are being raised by wolves, right? There's sort of no one that they can turn to and who will model what a good, thoughtful conservative looks like.

So I think it's really important from a kind of a mentorship point of view to have some conservatives about it. And it's really important for liberals, right? Because liberals punctures their stereotypes about conservatives to have a thoughtful, conservative professor on campus, right? You just need one or two. right?

And they can really challenge them and puncture their prejudices as well. And just one last question then. Professor Dunn. Do you believe that the path is open? For for young professors who are openly conservative to actually get positions in these progressive universities.

Uh I think it is, but uh it's more open in some fields than it is in others. And so students need to be aware of that. If you want to go to graduate school and you're conservative, you're an open conservative, you need to recognize that if you're going into sociology, it's going to be more difficult for you than, say, if you're going into economics or even political science.

So you have to be aware of it. Of course, even though the path is open, it does it doesn't make it fair that it's narrower for you than for someone with conventionally leftist views. But that's the reality, and so you just need to you just need to know what you're getting into. Yeah, and folks just need to take it on. It's not just a matter of convenience.

It's also a matter of having a larger social vision.

Well, gentlemen, I appreciate you doing this work. I appreciate your role as conservative scholars and making this research available. Hopefully, it'll be eye-opening and encourage more to come out of the closet.

So, thanks so much for joining us today. Thanks for having us. All right, the book, Passing on the Right, Conservative Professors in the Progressive Universities, the authors again. John Shields and Joshua Dunn, themselves conservative professors in secular universities. All right, I've got a few more minutes on the broadcast today.

And I want to share my own thoughts about spiritual optimism even for the universities. I I don't live. with a sense of hopelessness, despite what I see with my eyes. You might call me a dreamer I would say better to call me a believer. Yeah, I I have dreams that I believe God's put in my heart.

But I'm not just hoping against hope that maybe even though we're losing 100 to 0, there's three seconds left in the game, that somehow we'll score 101 points at no, no, no. This is a grounded Founded Optimism Friends. For good reason, I hold to what I hold to. We'll be right back. Shame.

It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Hey, thank you, friends, for joining us on the broadcast, 866-348-7884.

My latest article, I did write an article last night on the FBI and Hillary Clinton. By failing to recommend the indictment of Hillary Clinton, the FBI indicted itself. You can read it by going to my website, ask Dr. Brown, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org. That's the place to read the latest article, as well as one that I wrote on July 4th about our religious freedoms really being under fire.

Time to wake up.

Well, I look at a lot of negative. My take on My take on what happened with the FBI and Hillary Clinton is is terribly negative. I don't mean hopeless, I just mean it's it's it's bad stuff. that basically it paints her as a liar. and irresponsible and reckless.

Last person I would want to, or one of the last people I'd want to vote for is President of the United States that I could not possibly vote for in good conscience. And then it exposes the FBI. Exposes the FBI for or at least Director Comey. for failure to recommend indictment. It it feeds into people's skepticism that the whole thing is rigged.

And I just posted a meme on Facebook and on Twitter. And I asked, I said, ouch. Uh is this too harsh? And it says it's it's Director Comey taking his vows, putting his hand on the Bible. I, James Comey, swear to uphold the law except when it comes to Hillary Clinton.

And I ask, is that too harsh? And most people responding so far say, no, not at all. That's what happened. Yeah, so I I I see the bad, I see the negative. And just speaking with these professors who are conservative professors.

at secular universities. You know, they wrote a whole book about conservative professors at other universities and how Uh a c a good number of them Or in the closet, or they'd stay in the closet with their views. In other words, they would not be openly conservative. Until they got tenure, then once they had tenure, they could pretty much do anything. They could say that they believe the moon revolves around a piece of Swiss cheese and it's still keep your tenure.

But think of that. And is that even a good strategy? You just... you know, years and years and years of not letting people know who you are. And then when you're finally safe, then you do it.

But putting all that aside, Can we? See universities change.

Now I'm not expecting Harvard to go back to the way it was when it was founded. What was it, 1696? When it was founded. And it was founded as the School for the Glory of Christ. That's part of the motto.

And it was Christian in every way. And yes, you'd study classics and other things like that, but biblical education, that was the heart and soul of it. And then raising up literate clergy, that was the heart and soul of it. Yale, these other schools in our nation's history. Princeton, Columbia.

So many. Um They started as blatantly Christian. And I mentioned earlier in this hour That it was maybe even as late as 1927, somewhere in the 1920s, I believe, that up until then. Yale University Uh students attended five voluntary chapel services a week. Yeah, I I mean just things you can't even imagine.

What? Yeah.

And Yale was marked by awakenings and revival movements. And the Yale chapel, Timothy Dwight, he was a strong Christian professor, president, and they had outpourings of the Spirit and great repentance during his tenure and at other times. And for most of Yale's history until the the most recent history, every president was a minister.

So I I'm not looking for that to happen. Oh, if God did that, it would be pretty big awakening, greater than anything the nation's ever seen. You wouldn't even have words to describe the greatness of that awakening. But I don't believe that everything is just going to get More and more hostile.

Now, maybe that time will come in history. I just don't believe we're there. I believe that things will bounce back. I believe that the radical views of the radical left are too destructive or not life-giving. And that many of these professors who got their ideas and their ideologies in the 60s or in the aftermath of the 60s, the counterculture revolution.

that there'll be a conservative revolution.

Now I am all for Christian schools, universities, colleges, of course, seminaries, Bible colleges. I lead fire school of ministry. We have fire schools in different parts of the world. I'm an adjunct professor, unable to be full-time at any other school, but I'm an adjunct professor at a number of seminaries in the Charlotte, North Carolina area, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Southern Evangelical Seminary, in Denver, Denver Theological Seminary, and then in Dallas, King's University. And I've taught at other schools as well, Trinity and Fuller and other schools.

I'm all for Christian seminaries, Christian Bible schools, and Christian colleges and universities. Absolutely. My heart beats to see more and more and more of those, and perhaps. If we do a good enough job, those will become the go-to schools. If there is more and more moral bankruptcy, On the secular universities, and more and more intellectual.

Close-mindedness. in terms of refusing to have a place where there can be dialogue and discussion.

Now, a Christian university by design is going to have certain standards. but hopefully it will challenge the students to think. I believe Change can come. And although I am all for Christian parents, Encouraging their Christian kids to go to Christian colleges and universities unless the kid is called. to a secular university, and it's solid and grounded enough in their faith.

I strongly recommend Christian colleges and universities. And yet, I believe those who graduate from those schools can. Become professors at universities, can become school teachers in the public schools. And that what we must do is, on the one hand, make sure that we are consolidating our own families, that we are strengthening our own foundations, that we are building up our own offspring, spiritual and natural, in the faith so they are solid. But then we are going into all the world.

And it may be that your kids go to public school. It may be they go to secular universities. I went to all secular universities. It was fine for me. Others, it was not a good environment for.

But we must not retreat from society as a whole. Having been trained and equipped, now let us go out. Let us fill the local school boards. Let us let us become the kindergarten teachers and the school principals. Let us become the district superintendents.

Let us become the librarians. Let us become people of influence, not to force our faith on others, but to have a moral integrity and to not allow radical agendas to dominate where some radical leftist book is acceptable in the libraries and the Bible is looked at with hostility. Are you with me on that? Not not time to drop out. It's not time to drop out.

Time to stand. And make a difference. Hey friends, you can make a difference. By letting others know about the line of fire broadcast, there are plenty of people that don't even know we exist. It's a big world out there.

We thank God for our wonderful, large, listening audience, but there are plenty of people that don't know we exist. Share the podcast. Encourage others to tune in on the radio. To listen online. Let us expand this ministry to touch more and more people.

Pray for us and then stand with us financially. Your gifts make a massive difference. Go to askdrbrown.org. Click on donate to be part of our team. My bottom line today: not time for retreat, not time for defeat.

Forward, march in Jesus' name.