What happens when Jesus Christ and Genghis Khan get dragged into the same geopolitical argument? You get one wild quote from Benjamin Netanyahu—and one even wilder episode of New Persuasive Words.

This week, Scott and Bill react to Netanyahu’s eyebrow-raising claim that history suggests goodness doesn’t really have an edge over ruthless power. In other words: nice guys…don’t finish first. Or second. Or maybe even at all.

Naturally, the guys introduce a new moral framework for our troubled times: WWGD — What Would Genghis Do? (Spoiler: it’s not “turn the other cheek.”)

It’s sharp, a little irreverent, and just self-aware enough to know that comparing Jesus and Genghis Khan might say more about us than about history itself.

Is the war with Iran actually a religious war? That’s the explosive question posed by Tucker Carlson in a viral clip that has ricocheted across the internet. In the video, Carlson suggests that beneath the geopolitical rhetoric—nuclear weapons, regional stability, national security—there may be something deeper and more dangerous at play: religious narratives about holy sites, prophecy, and the possibility of rebuilding the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Scott and Bill react to Carlson’s question and ask what it reveals about the current moment. Are religious ideas actually shaping foreign policy—or is this just another conspiracy-flavored explanation for a complicated geopolitical conflict? Along the way, they unpack the strange alliance of nationalism, theology, and online discourse that now frames debates about Iran, Israel, and America’s role in the Middle East. Is Carlson raising an uncomfortable question… or just lighting another rhetorical fire? Scott and Bill dig in.

In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Bill and Scott dig into “Rod Dreher Thinks the Enlightenment Was a Mistake,” a provocative Atlantic feature that explores how one of today’s most influential conservative thinkers is challenging the very foundations of modernity. They unpack Read the full Atlantic article here, which profiles Rod Dreher’s journey from cultural critic to a leading voice in religious conservatism and the surprising influence his ideas now have on figures like Vice President J.D. Vance.

Bill and Scott discuss Dreher’s critique of secularism, his call for a return to pre-Enlightenment Christian values, and what that philosophical shift means for American politics and public life. They also debate how Dreher’s worldview intersects with political movements that mix faith with nationalist and cultural concerns — and what it says about the fractures within conservatism today. Whether you’re intrigued by the role of faith in political identity or skeptical about the consequences of rejecting Enlightenment ideals, this conversation offers a thoughtful, critical take on one of the most talked-about ideas shaping the right.

Tune in for a deep dive into culture, belief, and the future of persuasion.

In this week’s episode, Bill and Scott unpack The Atlantic’s provocative analysis of how Charlie Kirk’s assassination has reshaped the conservative movement and exposed deep ideological fractures within the Trump-aligned right. Drawing from Yair Rosenberg’s Atlantic article, “The Second Death of Charlie Kirk,” they examine how Kirk’s absence has opened space for previously marginalized figures — including extremists and provocateurs — to vie for influence and redefine the coalition’s boundaries.

Bill and Scott explore questions at the heart of contemporary American politics:

In this week’s episode, Bill and Scott are joined by their Onbudsman Emily Acrigg to unpack one of the oddest culture-war moments yet: House Speaker Mike Johnson mansplaining religion to the Pope. We dive into a recent article from The Daily Beast detailing how Johnson responded to Pope Leo XIV’s critique of U.S. immigration policy by offering up his own theological interpretation of Scripture — arguing that borders, assimilation, and strict civil authority are actually biblical. Was this a sincere religious argument, a political power play, or just an overreach? We break down what Johnson actually said (and the longer 1,300-word follow-up he posted on X), how the Pope’s comments on Matthew 25 about welcoming the stranger sparked this back-and-forth, and what this clash tells us about religion’s role in public policy.

This week, Bill and Scott take on Ross Douthat’s conversation with Ryan Burge and ask whether the story we’ve been telling about America’s religious collapse is actually wrong—or at least wildly incomplete. If the “nones” are leveling off, what replaces the old secularization narrative? Is Christianity really dying, or just losing its cultural monopoly? And what does it say about us that astrology, psychedelics, and UFOs are filling the spiritual vacuum? Bill and Scott spar over the data, the myths we tell about belief, and what this weird religious moment reveals about the future of faith and American life.

Is “fascism” finally the right word for American politics—or is it still a category mistake? In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Bill and Scott take on a provocative Atlantic essay that argues the U.S. has crossed a line. Longtime liberal skeptic Jonathan Rauch now says the evidence is undeniable: Trump, MAGA, and the use of state power—especially through agencies like ICE—fit the historical pattern of fascism. Bill and Scott debate whether this diagnosis clarifies our moment or dangerously inflates the rhetoric. What actually counts as fascism? Are we witnessing authoritarian drift, full-blown fascism, or something uniquely American? And does naming it sharpen moral clarity—or accelerate political paralysis? A fast-moving, unsparing conversation about power, language, fear, and what’s really happening to the American experiment.

In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Scott and Bill tackle one of the most provocative conversations of the moment: Ezra Klein’s interview with Texas State Representative James Talarico about reclaiming Christianity for the left and what that really means for the faith and for politics. Klein brings Talarico — a seminary student and rising national voice — onto his show to explore how his Christian faith animates his politics and his critique of both the “rage economy” and Christian nationalism.

At the heart of the discussion is a fundamental question: How does Talarico define Christianity — and is that definition substantively theological, or simply a window into progressive public ethics? According to Talarico, the core of the Christian life is grounded in Jesus’ two great commandments — to love God and love neighbor — and this, he argues, should shape how we approach every civic issue, from health care to economic justice.

The hosts also explore how Talarico’s faith-driven politics compares to traditional Christian doctrinal anchors and whether his version of Christianity stands as a distinct theological vision or rather a moral framing for left-of-center politics. This episode will be essential listening for anyone curious about faith in public life, the limits of religious language in pluralist politics, and whether Christianity can be persuasive without being partisan.

In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Bill and Scott respond to a recent post by Neo-Baptist theologian Dave Fitch, taking up his critique of Protestant power, ecclesiology, and the legacy of the 16th-century Reformers. While appreciating Fitch’s concern for faithfulness, witness, and the dangers of Constantinian Christianity, Bill and Scott argue that his reading of Luther, Calvin, and the broader Reformation tradition collapses important distinctions—and ends up shadowboxing with a caricature.

They explore how the Reformers understood authority, vocation, and the limits of political power, pushing back against the claim that magisterial Protestantism simply baptized coercion or state control. Drawing on theology, history, and contemporary church debates, the conversation probes whether Neo-Baptist critiques mistake tragic compromise for theological intent—and whether the Reformers’ insights might actually offer better resources for resisting domination than Fitch allows.

Along the way, Bill and Scott reflect on the ongoing temptation to narrate church history as a morality play, the risks of flattening complex traditions into cautionary tales, and what it means to retrieve the Reformation without turning it into either a golden age or a villain. The episode closes with a larger question: does the future of the church require abandoning the Reformers—or reading them more carefully?

This week on New Persuasive Words, Bill and Scott unpack one of the most tumultuous stretches in recent U.S. political news. First, they dive into the Trump administration’s bold military operation in Venezuela — including airstrikes and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro — an unprecedented intervention that has sparked fierce debate over sovereignty, international law, and America’s role abroad. Back on home soil, they turn to the shocking fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renée Nicole Good in Minneapolis by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent. The incident — occurring amid expanded federal immigration enforcement — quickly polarized the nation. The Trump administration defended the agent’s actions as self-defense, while local officials and protesters called for accountability, questioning federal narratives and transparency.