Moving Past Cancel Culture: Tim Muehlhoff & Sean McDowell

Episode Transcript

FamilyLife Today® with Dave and Ann Wilson – Web Version Transcript

This content has been generated by an artificial intelligence language model. While we strive for accuracy and quality, please note that the information provided will most likely not be entirely error-free or up-to-date. We recommend independently verifying the content with the originally-released audio. This transcript is provided for your personal use and general information purposes only. References to conferences, resources, or other special promotions may be obsolete. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the use or interpretation of this content.

Moving Past Cancel Culture

Guests:Tim Muehlhoff and Sean McDowell

From the series:End the Stalemate (Day 2 of 3)

Air date:November 5, 2024

Sean:If somebody has contempt for me, because I’m being faithful to the message of Jesus, fine—they called Paul delusional; they called him crazy—they crucified Jesus. But if they have contempt, because I failed to love people; or I’m dying on a secondary issue, then that’s on me; and I need to repent of that.

Shelby: Welcome to FamilyLife Today, where we want to help you pursue the relationships that matter most. I’m Shelby Abbott, and your hosts are Dave and Ann Wilson. You can find us at FamilyLifeToday.com.

Ann: This is FamilyLife Today!

Dave:Alright; yesterday, I said that I’ve got two of my favorite thinkers in the studio. I don’t know if I agree with that anymore; what do you think?

Ann: What do you mean?!

Dave: They’re brilliant!

Ann: Yeah?

Dave:I underestimated—what I’m saying.

Ann: Oh, wait; am I your favorite?

Dave:Yeah, you’re my favorite; and then, I got second and third right behind you. No; we got Tim Muehlhoff and Sean McDowell back in the studio to talk about End the Stalemate. And again, I can introduce you. They’re both profs at Biola. They’re highly— do you both have doctorates?

Sean: We do.

Dave:Oh, yeah.

Tim: —in different things; yeah.

Dave:“Okay, we do,”—just throw that out there—we got two doctors on that side of table; —two non-doctors over here.

Tim: It took a long time to get these; so we had to put in a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in it.

Dave:I mean, you are incredible thinkers. And this book, End the Stalemate: Move Past Cancel Culture to Meaningful Conversations, is dynamite. You sent it to us early—the manuscript—asking us to endorse it, and that was an easy endorsement.

Ann: Well, and you ended yesterday’s episode—which if you haven’t listened, go back—because you ended it on this cliffhanger of what we’re talking about today.

Dave: Well, I mean, we’re talking about having meaningful conversations. You did such a good job about preparing your heart, having a relationship. Sean, that is so important!

Ann: —the pre-conversation.

Dave:Yes, and how important a relationship is in the conversation that you’re going to have. But then, as I wanted to say yesterday—because this happens at the dinner table; this happens in church pews; it happens everywhere; and it’s happening, right now around the country, with the election—and so conversations are happening about really important topics. If you’re trying to have a meaningful conversation with somebody you love, and there is a good relationship, but you believe their point is wrong—it’s not just a difference of opinion—and we talked yesterday about understanding their perspective.

Ann: You would say it’s not biblical, even; that’s how strong you feel it.

Dave:—maybe, even sinful, that they believe this. You believe that, in your heart of hearts: “There’s not just a difference of opinion; they are wrong. I am on the side of truth. They’re on the side of error and non-truth, and that needs to be stopped.” Again, I’m saying this is what’s going on in our brain. How do you approach that conversation?

Sean:It’s the assumption that this person is a Christian.

Dave:I would say, “Yes.”

Tim: Okay.

Dave:Yeah.And we could do: “They’re not a Christian,” as well.

Sean: Okay, Christian.

Ann: Yes, let’s do both.

Dave: Let’s say they’re a fellow believer; they’re a brother or sister in Christ.

Ann: —or a child.

Sean:In my better Spirit-filled moments: how I would like to respond is—have the thought: “There’s been a lot of times in my life, where I believed and knew I was right; got more information; and it turned out I was wrong.” Knowing that wants me to ask a lot more questions—clarify what they mean, first; hear them out—that’s step number one. I can think of a lot of times, in my life, I’ve responded back, knowing that they’re wrong—and then, they clarify—I go, “Okay, my bad. I didn’t hear you out; I didn’t understand; didn’t have all the data,” et cetera. So let’s just make sure: “We hear people out, first.”

Second thing is: “Communication has three simple pieces: you have the sender; you have the message; and you have the receiver.” Most of us think about the message we want to transmit, and we communicate in a way that makes us feel good. We don’t ask the question: “How is this message best going to be received?” So ask yourself this question: “When have I totally believed I’m right about something, and somebody communicates in a way that gets me to rethink and consider another perspective?”

Does it help when somebody says, “McDowell, you’re completely wrong; I’ve studied this; I know.” That doesn’t help—an insult doesn’t help—like you said in our last discussion, [a bad] tone doesn’t help. “How do I most help this person reconsider, if in fact, I’m right?” Jesus communicated—primarily, He told stories; and He asked questions. Between the Gospels and Acts, we have 340 questions that Jesus asked. In Paul’s letters, there’s 262.

Tim: Wow.

Sean:“So let me make sure I understand your point; walk me through your evidence for it,” “Have you considered this other perspective? How would you respond if I made this case?”

Now, there’s a point where I’ll try to be as charitable as I can be; and then, there does come a point, where you say, “Honestly, I’ve thought about this more than you have. And that’s crazy and you’re digging in heels and you’re wrong.” But we tend to start there rather than end there.

Ann: Would you ever say that, “You are wrong”; or would you say, “I don’t agree”?

Sean:Well, it depends on the relationship. If I have a certain relationship, I’ve told people/I’ve said, “I’ve studied this more than you.” In fact, I’ve had people tell me certain things on the fate of the apostles. I did my doctoral dissertation on that, and I’m just finishing up a ten-year update of it. And just, literally yesterday, someone said something, and given the relationship, I said, “I have studied this way more than you, and you’re wrong about this.” Now, I didn’t do it arrogantly; I didn’t do it to make them feel bad. I just made a point: “You’re out of your depth. This is something I know that I know,” and so I said it. But those tend to be the exceptions rather than the rule, based on a relationship that’s there.

Tim: But that’s amazing about the questions; I didn’t know that. “How many questions are in the Gospels?”

Ann: Tell me what those are.

Tim: That’s really amazing.

Ann: Jesus asks how many?

Sean:So a friend of mine, who’s still with Cru—actually, Bob Tiede has books on this Re-study the Gospels—there’s one question in Acts; there’s three hundred forty questions that Jesus asks; in Paul’s letters, there’s two hundred sixty-two questions.

Tim: Wow; this is why his name comes first on the book; this is why it’s right there.

Hey, let me just add one thing to what Sean’s saying. So let’s go to John Gottman, real quick, right? We’re all fans of Gottman. The first 30 seconds—

Dave:Well, tell our listeners a little bit about John.

Tim: Oh, John Gottman is probably one of the top relationship experts in the world. He’s not a believer—so you have to sift it—but everybody uses his research. Christian writers use it all the time. The drop-the-mic moment, from Gottman, is the first 30 seconds: sets the tone for the entire conversation.

So when you prepare your heart—now, I’m going to actually jump into this—so imagine Sean. If what Sean said—you flipped it—you started with the “You are wrong; I’ve studied this.” Well, that’s going to set it in a negative spiral. And Sean’s not advocating that; he’s saying: “Tell me what you believe,” “Clarify your terms,” “Help me understand your background.”

We do a whole chapter on surfacing a person’s perspective:

“Who are the people you listen to?”

“What books do you read?” “What Ted talks?” “What podcasts?”

“Help me understand this background; and then, emotionally, help me understand your perspective, why you think this is right.”

And then, I would just add, “Find common ground”; because the person’s perspective is not wrong—A to Z—most likely. I’d find things that I appreciate within their perspective:

“I love that you care about what the Bible says.”

“I love the fact that you study the Bible.”

“Now, listen: do I ultimately think you’re misinterpreting sections of the Bible?—I do. But I love the fact that you’re studying the Bible, and you’re rooting your perspective in the Bible.”

See, this is all starting a positive communication spiral.

Now, we can start a negative spiral, by saying, “Okay, dude, that was whacked!” What you’re saying is: “You can’t read your Bible and come up with that conclusion”; that’s what we call “calling out.” I try to shame you and shut down the conversation: “There’s no way you could read Jesus and come up with that perspective,” “Well, sorry, I read Jesus; I think He…”

[Instead], we want to “call it in”; which is, “That’s fascinating that you interpret Him that way. What books have you read?—people you’ve talked to?—podcasts you’ve listened to?” where you kind of started to think this way?” It’s like, “Oh, okay; I read this one book”; and then, that kind of opens the conversation, where it’s like, “Oh, tell me about that book. Who’s that person?” I would love it if somebody did that with me—a non-Christian or a Christian—”Well, tell me more about your perspective. Have you listened to…” I would introduce him to C.S. Lewis and different people.

That’d be a great energetic way; but at the end of the conversation—it’s what Sean’s saying: “You’re building a bridge, but you got to send something across the bridge.” So now, I do say, “Honestly, as much as I think I understand what you’re saying, I have to say I do disagree. I don’t think Paul would support that. I don’t think that’s a fair way to interpret Jesus. And I do think the Bible would go against that position. I might be wrong,”—I love including that—”I might be wrong”; because I love what you said, Sean: “There have been times I’ve been spectacularly wrong, and I’ve had to go back and say, ‘Wow, I was probably too strident on that; I probably was’”; because good Christians disagree about a lot of issues.

Sean: Amen.

Ann: But your tone is incredibly gracious.

Tim: I love what you just said: “…on a good Spirit-filled day.” When we speak at FamilyLife marriage conferences, just like you guys.

Ann: Yes.

Dave:—Weekend to Remember®.

Tim: My wife and I—we always say this—”Let me present to you Tim and Noreen on a good day.”

Ann: That’s good.

Tim: “On a good day, we do this; on a not so good day, we…” I think that’s really good to say: “There are times I feel like I’m Spirit-filled; but there’s other times, I’m just annoyed, angry, and I want to fight.”

Dave:Well, it’s interesting: I didn’t think of this until you both are just talking about this. Ann and I were speaking last summer in the Branson, Missouri, area; and we had Saturday afternoon off. We had to speak that night to football coaches from around the country about marriage; it was really a great conference. And they said, “Hey, there’s this Sight & Sound Theater in Branson that has the show, Esther; it’s phenomenal.” We go do it—we’re sitting there—it’s phenomenal. Live camels coming out.

Ann: We’ve never been to one; it’s great!

Dave:Yeah, it was phenomenal; it’s the story of Esther.

Anyway, all that to say, intermission happens. There’s nobody sitting like five seats beside me. All of a sudden, this guy sits down, right beside me during intermission, and leans/like lays on me—some stranger dude—and I’m looking at Ann. I just turned; I go, “Dude, what’s up?” He goes, “Dave Wilson!” I go, “Do I know you?” He goes, “Dude! You led me to Christ!”

Sean:Oh, my goodness.

Dave:I go, “Who are you?” He goes, “You don’t remember me? I was at your church in Michigan, 20 years ago. Man Up is what we called our men’s weekend—bad title, by the way; wouldn’t use it anymore—but that’s what we called it then.

Sean:We’ll edit that; don’t worry.

Dave:And I remember this conversation; he goes, “I’m the guy that came up to you in the lobby, and I was an atheist.” I go, “Dude, I remember that!” He goes, “I’m sitting back there, and I saw your bald head; and I go, ‘I think that’s the guy that led me to Christ.’”

Anyway, here’s the story. I’m speaking at this thing; and I say from the stage, at one point, “I’ve wrestled with skepticism my whole life. I need evidence,” and talked about my journey. He walks up to me in the lobby, and there’s nobody there. He goes, “I’m an atheist; I don’t believe any of this stuff. I’m here because a buddy brought me here, and sounds like you’ve had the same kind of journey. I don’t think any of this is true. What do you have to say to that?” He was pretty antagonistic at the moment.

I’m thinking about that conversation, and I remember I looked at him—and I didn’t know I was doing what Tim just said—and I said: “Yeah, who are you reading?” “Who are you studying?” “Where do you get your thoughts from?” And he started listening off. I go, “Yeah, I read all those guys.” I go, man, “They’re really good thinkers; they’re amazing thinkers. I think they’re wrong about some things. You want to talk about it?” We had a conversation—probably, a 20-minute conversation in a lobby, with people walking by him—and he came to Christ. As I heard you say that, I was like, “Part of the reason he wanted to talk is—I said what you just said—“Tell me about who you’re listening to.” I didn’t demean these guys—you know them all—they’re all the thinkers in the atheistic world; and he came to Christ about that.

But here’s my question—because when you were talking about all that—I thought, when you mentioned Gottman, one of the things that I love, that he talks about, is contempt. He talks about the things that’ll destroy a marriage and any relationship—criticism—but contempt he says is the biggest one—because it isn’t just, “I’m critical”; you’re thinking, “I think you’re an idiot for thinking that.” “I think my wife is nuts; she’s wrong, and she’s a bad person because of it.” Talk about that; that happens in these conversations. People feel our contempt toward them. They’re not just a wrong opinion; we think they’re nuts.

Ann: I think that’s what we’re seeing on social media platforms, too: “You are the dumbest person.”

Tim: Let me hand it off to Sean in a second. But we had on Arthur Brooks on our podcast—we do the Winsome Conviction podcast, me and Dr. Rick Langer—

Dave: You quote him in the book.

Tim: We do! He’s a Harvard researcher; and he said this, “America does not have an anger problem; we have a contempt problem.” And we said, “Okay, what’s contempt?” He said, “Anger is: ‘I can be mad at you, but I’m staying in the marriage,” “I can be mad at you, and we’re still neighbors,” “…we’re still friends.” “…we still go to the same church.” Contempt is: “This church would be better off without you,” “This country would be better off without you”; that is contempt. He said, “Contempt is killing this country.”

I think back to what Paul said, “Protect unity,” in the church at Ephesus. Churches are splitting over everything; I think that’s what’s killing us today. Let’s hang into the conversation. Let’s remember what unifies us as we go to the points of disagreement. But I think Paul—remember, in Romans 14, he’s talking to Jewish converts; he’s talking to Gentile converts, who disagree about days and diets—he says, “Listen, I’m not going to settle this one; but I do not want you to stop the work of God because of food. And second, I do not want you to have contempt towards each other.” I think we’re violating Romans 14 all over the place.

So I think it’s great, when a family member that you really disagree with, I think it’s really good—before you get to that disagreement—to affirm, “Hey, we’re family.” I remember my mom saying to me, “Blood is thicker than water; they will always be your brothers.” I think that’s great to say, “We’re family, but we do really disagree about this issue. We see it very differently—you quote the Bible; I quote the Bible—we’re just going to have to live with this disagreement, because we’re family.”

Dave:Yeah. I mean, Sean, you do this better than anybody I know. You don’t have contempt.

Ann: You navigate it so well.

Dave: You love them—you’re tender; you listen—you’re the model!

Sean:I don’t know about that. I could tell plenty of stories, probably from this week alone, of falling short.

Here’s the principle I try to live with on contempt:

There are people in our culture who have contempt for the Christian faith and Christians because of what we believe—whether that’s about Jesus, whether that’s about marriage—I have no control if someone’s going to have contempt for me. And some will—in fact, some have called this an anti-Christian age—because of the positions we hold are so intolerant and bigoted on issues of marriage and sexuality. If somebody has contempt for me, because I’m being faithful to message of Jesus, fine—they called Paul delusional; they called him crazy—they crucified Jesus. But if they have contempt, because I failed to love people; or I’m dying on a secondary issue, then that’s on me; and I need to repent of that.

It’s discouraging, and it’s distressing; and it, literally, can be depressing if I look at the way we communicate in our culture today. I try to bring back, and say, “What can I control?” “Am I being faithful?” “Am I actually loving people?” One of my principles is: “I want to be as gracious as I can be without compromising biblical truth.”

Ann: That’s good.

Sean:And exactly where that biblical truth is—that’s where some of the debate comes in—fine; but that’s my conscience before the Lord.

I found, when people have contempt for me, and I say, “You know what? I’ve shown nothing, as far as I can tell, searching my heart, but love for you. And I’ve stayed faithful to biblical commandments that I’ve been as gracious as I can be.” It hurts, but I can live with that; that’s what I would encourage Christians to do.

We also see that, within the Christian fold, contempt for other people, who have different positions. And I go: “What can I control?” “Am I being faithful?” “Am I trying to act in love?” People are going to second guess a whole bunch of things—that’s all I can control; that’s all I’m in charge of—and I think, if more people would just try to frame their conversations that way, I think we’d, at least, see some progress.

Ann: Guys, why are we seeing the contempt today more than ever?—it feels like.

Tim: I would say tribalism is a huge thing. We are siloed from each other; we don’t have commonalities as Americans anymore. When we were in Capitol Hill, we suggested to some Christian leaders: “Reach across the aisle and go have coffee together.” G.K. Chesterton, the great defender of the faith—after he would debate H.G. Wells, Rudyard Kipling, they would literally go to the pub—they would sit in the pub, and process the debate, and laugh. We actually used that illustration. I’ll never forget, when high-ranking officials said, “Have coffee? We don’t even share the same elevators.”

Ann: Wow!

Tim: Well, when you don’t share the same elevators—when there’s no commonality anymore—you demonize the other side; because you no longer know anybody from the other side, because your group watches all the same news programs. We go to a church that thinks exactly like we do; we only talk to people who think like we do, and we so demonize the other side. When you finally do meet somebody from the other side, you’re like, “Oh, you people are crazy! You’re seriously crazy, and I’m going to set you straight because of how crazy you are.”

We really do encourage: “You need to get used to hearing the other side. It doesn’t mean you agree with it.” And that’s why—again, EndTheStalemate.com is this website; you’re going to listen to two Christians—you’re going to disagree, maybe, with one of them; but get used to that. There’s another great website called AllSides.com, where you go—and it presents the left, the right, and the center—the best representatives. We just need to get used to hearing perspectives that’s outside of our tribe.

I think, Ann, because of social media, it’s so easy to be in that electronic tribe with algorithms and stuff like that. I think that’s what’s really kind of changed us a little bit is social media has kind of poured some rhetorical gasoline on the fire.

Ann: So we really don’t hear the other side.

Sean:So here’s a simple test everybody could do. This is, maybe, dangerous; but scroll through your podcasts, and just look and ask yourself: “How many support what I already believe?” “How many sides are against it?” Now, it doesn’t have to be 50/50; but if you don’t have, at least, some representative podcasts to people who see the world differently, then you’re in a silo—and everybody else is stupid—because they don’t see the world as you do.

So I think to answer your question: “There’s a relational piece.” If you don’t know somebody who sees the world differently, then it’s abstract. And so you speak about atheists, or Republicans, or Democrats, or whatever group you want to put people in as an abstract enemy; but when you know Joe, or Kim, or Barbara—or fill in the blank—it becomes personal; so there’s a relational piece.

“There’s also an intellectual piece.” If you only read books and listen to podcasts—that agree with you, and follow people on Twitter that agree with you—then, of course, you’re going to think the other side is crazy and have contempt for them for not seeing, the right way, the world is.

Dave:My first week of seminary—I don’t remember if it was Scott Rae—who you guys know—

Tim: Oh, yeah.

Dave: —or J.P. Morgan.

Sean:He’s my co-host, by the way—Scott Rae.

Tim: —the Think Biblically podcast.

Ann: I didn’t know Scott Rae was.

Sean: Yeah, I’ve known Scott for years.

Dave:They were teaching, at the International School of Theology, where I went in 1982. And one of the classes—I think it was Scott—was on writing and speaking. First day of class—I’ll never forget—he said, “Hey, don’t just read the Bible; don’t just read Christian thinkers. You want to read the best writers in the country?—read Sports Illustrated.” I go, “What?!” And somebody in our class, actually, raised their hand, and said, “No, I don’t want to read that stuff; it’s non-Christian thinking. I want to keep my mind pure.” And he goes, “Yeah, you need to know what non-Christians think; and they’re really good writers.”

Sean:Why don’t we read other sides?

Dave:Why don’t we?

Sean:I think a big reason is we’re insecure in our own position, and we’re threatened by people who see the world differently. I do this thing—this atheist roleplay, where I put on glasses in our roleplaying atheists, and I take questions; respond as an atheist could—and then, when I’m done, people get defensive; they get angry; they call me names. It’s crazy!

And the first question I typically ask is, “How did you treat your atheist guests?” And their eyes are like, “You got me.” I’ll say, “Give me individual words that describe the way you treated me.” One of the most common words is “Hostile”—comes up all the time—and “Defensive.” I say, “Well, why do we get defensive?” Well, if you don’t know what you believe, and why you believe it, we’re defensive at somebody else, who sees the world differently. So if you only listen to people who agree with your side, you probably have no depth; you probably don’t really know what you believe and why you believe it. So you just want people to reinforce your shallow convictions. But if we’re supposed to care about truth, we shouldn’t be threatened by people who see the world differently.

Ann:I think it’s good. We’ve gotten into the practice—I probably more than you, Dave, just because I’m a book reader and listener—but asking our kids—

Dave:—and I’m not—there you go.

Ann: No, no! I mean, nonfiction—I would read more—that’s bad.

Tim: First 30 seconds…

Ann: You read fiction. You don’t read as much—

Sean: So our book doesn’t count; I’m kidding.

Ann: Dave’s reading your book.

So I’ll ask our kids, like: “Hey guys, what are you reading right now?” “What are you listening to right now?” “What are you watching?” And then, “Tell me one of the things that I should listen to or watch that you have loved.” That’s always a little risky, because I may hate them. But I like that they’re willing, like, “Oh, mom, you’re going to listen to this,” or “…watch this,” or “Tell me what you think of this…” I love that. And you do that, too, Dave.

Dave:She’s trying to/she’s trying to put me back. No, I think one of the—and what you guys are saying—I love hearing differing opinions. I love hearing contrary thoughts—

Ann: You do.

Dave: —on really important issues. I want to understand and dialogue about that.

Ann: And you’ve been amazing with our kids about that.

Dave:Oh, I want to do it. I remember, as a guitar player, when they were teenagers, listening to music, I’m like, “Hey, I want to learn this song and know why you like it.”

Ann: I’m like, “This is of Satan!” And I’d throw it in the garbage. And so Dave was a really good balance for me—of watching him—say, “Tell me why you love this guy. Tell me what is it that draws you to him.” You’re really good at that.

Tim: So you’re a rarity though. In cancel culture today, Dave, you both would be a rarity.

We had a pastor on our podcast, who drew a circle around his church—a ten-mile radius—and said, “I’m going to engage every religious leader in this ten-mile radius. We’re not going to be in a cocoon anymore; we’re going to engage.” So he did; there was a mosque.

By the way, Sean just did a great series, where you went to a mosque, and he went to a Hindu temple to do perspective taking. Oh, it’s fascinating; he does a great job.

Ann: Really: Interesting.

Tim: So he had these [different worldview thinking] people and would engage them. And got more pushback of people saying, “Why would we give the platform to this person?” “Why would I fill my head with those unbiblical thoughts?”

And all I can say is, “When Paul, in Acts 17, he’s going to address the men of Athens. By the way, listen to his first 30 seconds; he chooses to say, ‘Men of Athens, I observe you’re very religious in many ways.’”

Ann: Isn’t he a master of communication?

Tim: And then, he quotes a poet; he quotes one of their poets. So I do think we need—

Dave:—which would be a secular person.

Tim: Yes, but we need to be careful; right? Again, our students, when we have them do these perspective-taking exercises, they are under our tutelage. We’re not just throwing them to the wolves: we’re teaching them skills; and then, we’re having them do it. Again, go to EndTheStalemate.com—we’re giving you skills—we’re not just launching you into this perspective.

Dave:And then, you even say in the book, you don’t do this with first-year students.

Tim: Yeah, I’m careful; I teach.

Dave:You want them—

Tim: Yes; I teach a very semi-controversial class called “Engaging in Diverse Perspectives.” Now, again, these are seniors; this is a 400-level class. My goodness—if the seniors are not ready for this/if the seniors are not ready for this—we’ve got problems.

So yeah, you raise your kids, because you have the long view; we’re slowly introducing them to topics. Then I think you really kick it in when high school comes—we’re talking about things; we’re watching news programs we don’t traditionally agree with—we’re doing it as a family, and the kids are used to listening to counter-perspective. So it’s a slow way to bring them. But I think we need to just really start thinking about our kids: “Is our family a cocoon? Are we really isolated from people that we disagree with?”

Dave:And I would say, tomorrow—because we’re going to have another day on this—”How do we have the dinner conversation?” We’ve talked pre-; we need to talk in-the-moment; and also, post-. “But walk us through the actual conversation; because when we get in it, sometimes, things happen in real time; and you don’t follow the plan. You preset up; and then, it gets ugly. So help us.”

Tim: We’d love to.

Shelby: I’m Shelby Abbott; and you’ve been listening to Dave and Ann Wilson, with Sean McDowell and Tim Muehlhoff, on FamilyLife Today. Tim and Sean have written a book called End the Stalemate. This book is really for anyone who feels really just disheartened by the current state of the public conversation that’s happening, and for someone who wants to learn how to foster meaningful and respectful conversations in a culture of division. If that sounds appealing to you, you can get your copy of Tim and Sean’s book, End the Stalemate, right now, by going online to FamilyLifeToday.com. Or you could click on the link that’s in the show notes, or feel free to give us a call at 800-358-6329 to request your copy. Again, that number is 800-F as in family, L as in life, and then the word, TODAY.

We’ve been talking about this all day today; we were talking about it yesterday, as well. Many of us are just tired of the tension and division that exists with our family members, with our friends, with social media that we’re on; even during family gatherings around the kitchen table. Yet Psalm 1:33 tells us that it’s good for believers to live in unity with one another. So the question is: “How do we do that when everybody seems to be angry all the time?”

Well, I’m excited to invite you to join us, here, at FamilyLife for a five-week video series that’s hosted by our friend—author and comedian—Amberly Neese. It’s called “Moving Toward Each Other in the Middle of a Divisive World.” In it, Amberly really guides us on how to build peace with people in our lives when our differing thoughts, and opinions, and beliefs threaten to create division. You could sign up for this free five-week video series by going online to FamilyLife.com/FindingCommonGround. You could click on a link for it in the show notes. Or again, you could head over to FamilyLife.com/FindingCommonGround.

Now, coming up tomorrow: “How do we have meaningful conversations with others who have a different opinion than us?”—especially, in family settings during things like the holidays and political times, like the time that we’re in, exactly right now. Well, we’ll talk about that with Tim Muehlhoff and Sean McDowell tomorrow on FamilyLife Today. We hope you’ll join us. On behalf of Dave Ann Wilson, I’m Shelby Abbott. We’ll see you back next time for another edition of FamilyLife Today.

FamilyLife Today is a donor-supported production of FamilyLife®, a Cru® Ministry.

Helping you pursue the relationships that matter most.

If you’ve benefited from the FamilyLife Today transcripts, would you consider donating today to help defray the costs of producing them and making them available online?

Copyright © 2024 FamilyLife. All rights reserved.

www.FamilyLife.com