Some animals were not created to be eaten. Buzzards, cats and dogs etc were not considered food.

I have used this verse when contending with Mormans. They believe that the Melchizedek priesthood needed to be restored to the world by the laying on if hands of the apostles Peter, James and John upon Joseph Smith. Using Genesis 14, Psalm 110 and Hebrews 7: 23-24, I point out that it is only Jesus Christ who us a priest after the order of Melchizedek and no other, because his priesthood is "unchangeable", that is, it cannot change hands. Therefore Joseph Smith could never receive it to be "restored" to the earth.

The Bible is Satan's book, his greatest lie.

Absolutely, regarding the baptism discussion. I'm of the understanding that any believer can baptize. It's God's work, not the pastor. I love public baptisms, and I love a dad baptizing his kid in the family bathtub. Heaven rejoices either way! Great episode, gentlemen.

A potential for the "laying on of hands" issue: in the OT, especially concerning the sacrifices, the priest (elder) laid his hand on the animal in order to signify that it was acting as a representative or replacement for the person offering the sacrifice. Perhaps, this was a version of that. It could be saying that the apostle is delegating the Deacon as an official representative?

Thank you guys! Really enjoyed this sesdion❤

Ya nailed it! I look at it like this: we are called to be peacemakers. We should be pacifist until we have zero other choice than death or serious harm. But, I think as men, particularly, we need to be capable/prepared for violence, but only for use in the direst of circumstances. All of what I just typed is probably wrong, as Jesus told his followers to lay down their weapons. I'm just hoping that was circumstantial as they were trying to prevent his capture and resulting death.

BOOO,😟 no dad joke!!!

Trevor was NOT an fan of my drive by. 😐

Congratulations on making it to episode 21. Also, best cold-open ever.

Caleb, don't name your next kid Theophilus. When he gets to school, the other kids are going to tease him, saying, "you're "the awfulness" player on the team." "You're "the awfullest" looking kid in our class." ...... Shaun Bennett

I got it off Insight for Living, Charles Swindoll.

As a Razorback fan, I can relate to the sooie-cide joke. That's hilarious!😂

no you wont

No child is born a Christian. They are indoctrinated by their caregiver. Starving 3rd world people are coerced into christianity by missionaries. Food and water for subjectivity. Or the classic - you fucked up your life so bad that the church is the only place you can loiter for the rest of your days. Religion bans certain books, it advocates for the removal of human rights from segments of the population. It's disgusting. It's embarrassing to watch grown ups talk about their ghost daddy all the time. Get a grip. Grow up and face facts. You've been had. By either yourselves or someone else.

rushdoony and christian reconstructionism (Wikipedia)

Huge huge problem with it. Religion has no foundation but a unfounded claim of eternal truth as every religion. This leads to a situation that it does not need to justify itself but puts itself even above any law. A leadership could justify anything by this (racism, homophbic, nationalistic etc behaviour) Not even inside their own religion there is one clear one vision of the religion. So no checks and balances. With a secular state the gouvermant has always justify it's action But in addition it can base it's action by science and logic = the foundation has a foundation that is for everyone the same. Christian nationalism on the opposite will always be tyrannical and believers could become so idiologs that destroy their own indepence if one thinks it is in the "vain" of a believe"

This is a topic I’ve thought a lot about, and i believe it’s been misunderstood and poorly defined. These are my thoughts regarding Christian Nationalism and why I as an evangelical oppose it. We often find a contradiction in terms when Christian Nationalism is defined. Those on the left will define it in a way to slander politically active Catholics and Evangelicals, yet rarely apply their definition to politically active Progressive Churches. Those on the right rarely challenge the imposed definition from the left. Before we surrender language to those who use the term Christian Nationalism inconsistently, a reassessment is in order. Thomas Jefferson was not merely a deist, he attended weekly services and devoted years of his life compiling the moral teachings of Christ in a chronological volume. This speaks immensely regarding the influence Christianity had even among our Deists founding fathers. In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson wrote: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”. Jefferson, the “wall of separation” president, claimed that our rights come from God, and that governments are Instituted, not to grant rights, rather to secure those rights which come from the Creator. Not only do governments lack the authority to grant rights, but their power is limited by those whose rights they secure! Under communism rights come from the state, and any moral authority which challenges the will of the State must be reined in. This can be done by framing its doctrines as hate, banning religious materials, or through regulation. The true Christian Nationalist is likened to China’s three-self patriotic movement. While terms like Sinicization of Christianity are not used in the west, it does not mean attempts aren’t being made to Nationalize Christianity. The 2024 revision of the United Methodist Church’s Social Principles no longer focuses on the core tenants of the faith, instead they now mirror the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The doctrines that define the faith have been replaced with climate change, environmental racism, food justice, colonialism, euthanasia, reproductive health, restorative justice, migration, and gender identity. In December 2023 the Chinese Communist Party released their new five year plan for the Sinicization of Christianity. The following is a translated statement from that document: “19. Reinterpret the concept of social services from the perspective of the Sinicization of Christianity, and actively participate in social service work in the fields of medical and health care, helping the disabled and the poor, post-disaster relief, epidemic prevention and control, and environmental protection in accordance with the law, and establish a good image.” Like in the People’s Republic of China we are seeing the development of two radically different Churches in America. A Church which mirrors the goals of the State, and a Church committed to the long standing doctrines of the faith. The later is under siege in both countries! The former is where you will find the Christian Nationalist. The end goal of the Christian Nationalist is to remake Christianity in the image of the State, to nationalize it. Thus any higher authority which challenges the States end goals must be controlled or eliminated.

ESV NASB for me

I would really like to hear you three do a recap on predestination. Today was interesting but I didn't get how you work faith into math, English and other academics. Please explain.

I think it’s a little misleading to say “the oldest manuscripts don’t have the longer ending of Mark”. It would be more accurate to say two manuscripts of unknown origin and little to no use by the church in history prior to 1881 do not contain it, although one of them has the space. All other manuscripts have it. It is also witnessed by early church fathers. Additionally, Mark 16:9-20 contains vital doctrinal readings on baptism, the resurrection, gifts and the authority and power of Christ. Casting doubt on these verses dramatically affects said doctrines.

This wasn't much help on actually understanding translations and the KJV is translated from the Textus Receptus, not the Majority Text. The best advise was that they all liked the NLT.

Hey, just to clarify a couple of items for those who don't know: 1) The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus (TR), not the Majority Text (though It's in the family of the MT). 2) A common misconception is that MT proponents think we should go with a translation of what a simple majority of Greek manuscripts say without regard to the "oldest texts", but that's not technically correct. What they DO believe is that the majority of manuscripts preserve what was originally written from manuscripts that are even OLDER than the two manuscripts the Critical Text primarily depend on. So MT advocates actually agree that we should depend on the oldest manuscripts, but disagree that the oldest EXTANT (currently available) manuscripts are as reliable as what was preserved in the majority from even older non-extant documents.

Fascinating

Time to break out the necronomicon.

Great job explaining a very complicated issue. I think you've hit it on the head. Bible Project did a very in-depth discussion on this topic.

Caleb's jokes get 2 thumbs up, but maybe more like 9 1/2 fingers up. I rounded up with the thumbs.

Personally I like NLT for listening in the car and then KJV for study purposes. The words for linking remain the same largely in different scriptures. Luckily we have the spirit of truth😁

Not a fully formed thought here, but regarding justification, I'm almost 100% confident we don't need the OT to understand the BASICS of the gospel for our salvation initially. But, I think it's indispensable for our sanctification going forward. There's so much to learn in the OT, so much points to Jesus. I love Tim Mackey's tagline that the Bible is a Unified Story that Points To Jesus.

Thumbnail is off. Thumbnail says 13.

I'm getting payed in the word you bring for me!!!

I use NIV, CSB, NRSV. ESV is ok.

Im a KJ guy but not KJ only. I do use NASB sometimes that give me clarification on some tough passages or words. Then when i read the KJ i will substitue the NASB word in thought for the tough word. Make sense? Geneva Bible is older than KJ and is almost exactly the same wording. GB was brought to the New World by most Puritans

My thinking has always been that the congregation should use the same translation as the Pastor so we're all on the same page at least during church services but choose your own at home. Or let the congregation choose one thanslstion for church service. Consistency is needed.

Big G and I enjoyed this podcast today. She likes KJV because it sounds Shakespearean. 😂 Zach, I agree, we should have an ESV 2.0. 🤜🏻🤛🏻 One of my favorite parts of this last year's Challenge 4 class was going around the room after reading our devo passage & comparing different word choices and the implications for a reader who only looks at that translation. Sometimes, we would go find the Hebrew or Greek word for some additional etymology to draw out meaning & nuance. I love seniors! I learn so much alongside them!!

From time to time, I like to cross reference to the CJB. It's not an everyday reader version since it leaves some Hebrew untranslated (including proper names), but I love the way some of the wording works out.

I'm in agreement... but... needing help with something. What can you say to those who read scripture... not just this scripture but also the other 'women teaching over men' and etc. scriptures... and conclude that we're to honor the principles... but the practices are not particularly relevant. (it was spoken to briefly in this episode in regards to the 1Cor. passage - but not when someone reads most of the bible in this regard). In other words - how do we determine when to take a scripture as a literal practice or just a principle... in all its teachings.... not just this one. I've a close person in my direct life who reads scripture as a book of principles to follow... not necessarily practices and it's a hard view for me to know how to respond to. The 'principles' way of looking at scripture is quite 'gray' I'm finding. And its a direction many seem to be going. I'd be so grateful if you could speak to this on a future episode.

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. The passage clearly says that her head needs to be covered when she prays or prophesies. So to say she needs to have her head covered during a church service does violence to the text, and I would say that the context of the rest of the text argues for only a married woman to cover her head when She prays or prophesies,

Before listening to the entire thing . Which I will this passage of scripture has confused the heck outta me he goes back and forth and makes it seem like it matters then the hairs a covering if it’s not disheveled. I donno I gave up on it .

I was thirty before I learned that Real Men… R eject passivity A ccept responsibility L ead courageously I nvest eternally!! I have tried to apply to my life and pass on to our sons. Learning the four faces of true masculinity is beneficial and then learning that everything God created Satan has counterfeited and that is where the world get their definition of manliness. Caleb was wearing the pink shirt to the guardianship hearing too feminine??😂Gentlemen, Enjoying the podcast!!

"Jesus is my boyfriend" songs are so cringy. Love the show, boys. They make being a worship leader very difficult at times.

I sent my carrier pigeon and it never came back to me.

I agree with @andygoodson2399. Discipling kids as they approach adulthood is needed. Parents disciple and shine light on areas needing growth as well as areas where there can be a celebration of God's good work. However, that still leaves a shadow that is easily pushed back upon. Other, wise people in their lives shine beams of light of discipleship from new angles and help to direct light on the areas still hidden in the shadows.

Now you've started something. We want a 'bad dad joke' at the end of every episode.

❤

Zach has amazing structure to his morning. 🤜🏻🤛🏻

Regarding Andrew's question regarding variations in spiritual gifts: I think 1Cor 12 plays out a pretty good reasoning regarding various parts of the body of Christ and their purposes.

Nicely done, boys. The recurring theme of Discipleship is of utmost importance. I'm glad you're addressing it. You keep bringing up your parents. As parents, it seems like we can disciple our kids to a certain place, then (like I'm sure you and I both did as teenagers/young adults) we don't give our parents the proper respect and we go through that "my parents are so dumb" stage. It's in those stages that we need someone other than our parents to go to. I would wager that, like you said, your parents did an amazing job. There's just times in our lives where we do a poor job of listening to them. At that point, I guess it's down to "It takes a village". I'm so glad you have your "village".

Awesome!

Are you saying that God predestined us and simetaneously chose who will go home to Him?