The Uncensored Unprofessor

What happened in the Mid-East that motivated the second Catholic Crusade? Why did a monk, Bernard of Clairvaux, preach the Crusade? What happened to the armies of King Conrad and King Louis VII along the way over and down to Constantinople and Cappadocia? How did the centuries-old suspicion between Orthodox and Catholic Christians play out during the second Crusade? I examine and answer all those questions in this episode. I also offer an extended reflection on Jesus' famous words, "turn the other cheek." What did he really mean in his first-century context? I also offer an extended thought-piece on why I do not believe either the Bible or Jesus himself were against the godly use of violence and/or war. Oh, and I wonder, what is the etymology of whore? Is it possible that the Arabic word houris—sexified concubines waiting in the afterlife—played into the history of the word whore? Come laugh and think with me about our faith in Christ.

Truth is? I hadn't planned on producing this episode. But way back when I was working on my PhD I learned that one has to go where the historical record takes one. So in this episode I narrate details about the Jerusalem Kingdom (the 600 square mile empire) that arose after the First Crusade. Led by different orders of Knights, the Jerusalem Kingdom became the locale for the fantastic accumulation and management of wealth all over Europe. How did that happen? What was so amazing about the Knights Hospitaller? Why did the Knights Templar explode in growth and influence? I also address an important question, why didn't the Medieval Christians practice corporate pacifism? Concerning that very question what specific factors and decisions were thrust upon them all? In the show's cultural reflection I talk about the legacy of Pope Francis and explain why I believe another Pope like Francis will follow in his wake. Come laugh and think with me.

They started heading southeast in 1096. Three full years later, June of 1099, the Crusaders arrived at the walls of Jerusalem, multiple armies led by multiple personages. And, other than wanting to rescue the Holy Land from Muslims, they weren't even on the same page. So then, what happened when they finally sieged the walls of Jerusalem? On a related theme, what percentage of Crusaders actually were present out of the many armies that left Germania, France, and Italy? And because I find their ardor, zeal, passion, and commitment utterly fascinating, I muse about what must it have been like to share such purpose. In this sixth episode on the Crusades I also explain why there is such a divergence between Muslims who view violent warfare as a holy calling and Muslims who view jihad as a spiritual-existential effort. In the show's brief opening I reflect on the meaning of Easter and talk about a recent survey on pastors and the depths of their Christian worldviews. Come think and laugh with me!

European folk, besieged in the East and invaded in the South, believed their civilization was at stake. They heard all about the Muslim invasions in the Balkans and the Muslim destruction of Christian Egypt. So the truth is there were many battles prior to the Crusades and in this episode I unpack three of those: one in Syria, one in Constantinople, and one in Southern Spain. What particular things ocurred in those battles to swing the outcome? What did the Muslims want? What did they especially want from out of Constantinople? What particular things (weather even) greatly impacted these battles? How did each respective side theologically interpret the outcome of the battles? In the show's opening I reflect on how the Gospel works inside both persons and cultures. Against shallow (popular) piety I argue the Gospel does not come to destroy the person, or the culture. And in fact? The Gospel does not come to make each respective person or culture more American. Come laugh and think with me.

Welcome to the most-difficult-to-produce episode I've ever put out! Why? Because I am talking about Islam following the way Mohammed and the Koran talk(ed) about Islam. The West suffers from a kind of historical amnesia about both the Crusades and Islam; almost like there is a willful ignorance at work. But what did Mohammed himself offer to Muslims who go to war? With what kind of pious language did he describe jihad to the glory of Allah? To help frame the disconnect today I also explain the current perspective on religion versus how religion was always practiced, everywhere. And, to my surprise (I felt so naive) I note the reigning Protestant meme-perspective on the Crusades. To open the show I offer reflections both on today's Evangelical piety and the process of becoming who we are, as persons. We emphasize the "I'm at a crossroads!" decisions, but it is the little, daily, mundane decisions that truly shape who we are.

In my first two episodes I laid out geographically-oriented motivations for Crusading. This week we explore the religious motives of Crusaders. What were they offered by the papacy in return for joining a crusade? Was every Crusader on a journey of religious gain? Were Crusaders motivated either by their own poverty or a desire to evangelize pagans? Who was more likely to join a crusade, younger or elder brothers? Why? To develop our understanding of Medieval Catholic piety I explain and explore the Catholic practice of granting indulgences. I also warn us of running history through a sieve of chronological snobbery. Moreover, I address, yet again, the Postmodern interpretation of the Crusades and explain why that take is really just a cudgel to shame and silence Christians. In the show's opening theological reflection I ask, "what is faith?" To answer that I unpack the perspective of famed (by tormented) Russian author, Fyodor Dostoevsky, who famously once wrote, "beauty will save the world." I find both his insights about human nature and the nature of faith to be both helpful and true.

What stirred up the Crusades? Last week we saw that it was the spread of Islam, and Muslim invasions of Christian lands. In this second episode I explain how Muslim violations of holy Christian sites and locales (and monks and women) was further grist, greater motivation, for Holy Roman Empire Catholics to ride far East and Crusade. But first? What is the dominant and curated narrative, today, about the Crusades? What did I witness at an Idaho (of all places) Christian university that tipped me off to the existence of a power-grabbing and curated narrative? I also explain what kinds of artifacts the Medieval Christians found sacred and worth preservation. What had the Muslims done to Christians for three centuries prior to the start of the Crusades? Also, along the way I comment on the Progressive turn against Elon Musk and then reflect on what Jesus said about how many people will be saved. Come laugh and think with me about a much neglected story in Christian history.

There are several curated narratives pertaining to the Crusades. Those narratives dominate not only our understanding of the Medieval Crusades but understandings of the Middle East today. But, what really happened? What initially, and really, motivated Holy Roman Empire Catholics to travel over 1200 miles eastward at the price of great sacrifice? To try to answer those questions we examine some of the history of Muslim expansion. I'll note how long before the Crusades it was that Muslims variously attacked and sacked Rome, Iberia (today's Spain & Portugal), and Jerusalem. Because we believe Jesus is Lord over culture and politics I also discuss President Trump's attempts to disassemble the GBM (Grinding Bureaucratic Machine). Along the way I tell some jokes, offer a tiny bit of health advice, and reflect on the horrors at work inside of contemporary Syria. Come laugh and think with me.

Perhaps more than other people, Christians are susceptible to having their emotions manipulated. After all, love of neighbor is an express way to show love of God. But that beautiful attribute can be abused, primed, and played. What's happened? Well, we used to encourage compassion: feeling for the other such that one is moved to action. Today the emphasis is upon empathy: deeply sharing the feelings of the other person. I don't think it started out this way, but empathy has been so emphasized that today it can become not only exhausting but sinful. I explain the hows and whys of that possibility. Today our culture wants us to be mired in empathy and that can transpire to the point of being sinful. In my opening reflection I note different kind of Christian spiritualities: Baptisty, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, spiritual warfare, logos oriented, and affective types. I've learned from them all, but I explain what is dominating my own worldview right now. And then, in my cultural remarks I talk about pastors who shamed their congregations in various progressive ways. Have those same pastors either repented or apologized now that our culture is swinging happily back toward common sense?

The Bible is most aware of the problem of anxiety vortexes. But whereas too many believers today get sucked into those vortices the Bible counsels sober-mindedness. In this episode we unpack just what is sober-mindedness and offer some steps for how to achieve emotional sobriety. If you've ever watched professional golf you'll have realized that the pros intentionally seek to remain calm, sober-minded. Why is that? In the NFL Patrick Mahomes is a superb example of sober-mindedness, if not also athletic excellence. Let's examine some biblical cues so we can move toward emotional health. In the episode's cultural reflection I unpack further how unprecedented are the Trump administration's efforts to assess and trim the Federal bureaucracy. America's founders, when they established the grounds for our nation, never foresaw the explosive and unconstrained growth of what has become the fourth branch of government: the bureaucracy. Come laugh and think with me.

We get enculturated: the anxiety of someone (anyone!) should trump the norms, behaviors, hopes, and values of everyone. "Anxiety trumps all!", we are incessantly taught. So what to do? How to respond? When to respond? I offer several strategies for dealing with hyper-anxious groups and persons, strategies oriented in the notion of differentiation. What is differentiation? How can you practice that as you persue your own peace and stability? What is a Christian's first calling when confronted with an anxious person? Also, in the show's first fifteen minutes I reflect on what Elon Musk and DOGE are doing, what their stated procedural mandates are, and how historically unprecedented are their efforts. Specifically, what has DOGE been up to that is historically unprecedented? Come laugh and think with me.

Families and churches are swept through with anxiety, and they get split, shredded. If we don't see it everywhere we feel the power of anxiety everywhere. Why does anxiety disassemble entire communities? Why is it that the entire community gets pulled down to the level of its least mature members? In this first episode in a new series we talk about the mechanisms that force anxiety down everyone's throats. Why has our country been pulled down into a Peter Pan syndrome? Why is it that company workers are not allowed to name the big Pink Elephant everyone knows is in the room? Why does anxiety seek a "shoot the messenger" strategy? And why oh why is it that when we all gather to help anxious persons it only seems to reinforce, in their minds, that they are after all the most oppressed? In the episode's opening segment I work through the recent curtain-pulls regarding Church culture and the effects of USAID money. How and why have churches worked against their own members' best interests? What happened to the Roman Catholic church that caused it to turn to the government for billions of dollars? The camel has its nose in the tent, let's see what that smells like.

After a four-month series on Jesus' harsh sayings what are my final takeaways? I work through why Jesus was a first-century shock-jock, how in light of Jesus love can be tough, Jesus' axiology, why He was a man's man, how amazing it was that Jesus was not snared by the anxiety of those around him, and why—when it comes to my faith—I am "Curious Eddie." I also unpack what the progressive Gospel says today about Christianity and how the notion of a "Cosmic Christ" is more of a nod to religious pluralism than it is harmonious with the Gospels. In the show's cultural reflection I both explain why I resist Christian-ese bumper stickers and describe the utterly historical, massive, cultural shift that is underway since the presidential election. What does that cultural shift say about the Church, say to the Church, and what opportunity is now facing the Church? Come laugh and think with me. 

"Jesus was just a common Jew who wanted the best for everyone." "Jesus was a liberal first-century rabbi." Those memes have captured much of the public's imagination about Jesus. But they both are 180 degrees off the mark, especially when we read what Jesus said about himself. He said, "I am Lord of the Sabbath," and "I am greater than the Temple". And certainly those don't square with the Jesus-the-liberalizing-rabbi meme. In this episode we explore what Jesus' self-speak indicates about how he perceived himself. I also offer an extended reflection on thinking about thinking. What is the best argument for the existence of mind? Instead of probing how inert matter produced consciousness, what counter (older) argument has more explanatory power? I also muse aloud about how, for the first time in my adult life, I do not feel like the Federal government is against us. What do I mean? 

"If they will not welcome you shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them," Jesus said as he gave the Twelve missional instructions. That just seems so abrupt! And it wouldn't have been recorded as part of the Gospel if it were recorded for us by someone from the 21st century; it's just too embattled. So why did Jesus say that? What did it mean? Not mean? In this week's episode we unpack the what-what of Jesus' stern sayings for the Twelve as he sent them into battle. I also ask, what does this passage mean for us today? What can we learn? In the show's opening I reflect on the massive historical shift we just witnessed. And then I ask, what does this mean for today's Church? What does it mean for Christian universities? Come, let us reason together for such a time as this.

It was brutal when in Luke 12:51 Jesus said, "Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, I came to bring division!" That embattled utterance falls inside a three-chapter-or-so pericope of urgent proclamations from Jesus. Why did he say such harsh things? How should we understand that he said he came to bring fire? In this week's episode I both frame the great invasion that Jesus led and contrast that with the inclusive-Jesus of contemporary Christianity. Then I offer practical-pastoral application of all that for an Evangelical culture. In the show's cultural reflection I remark on Mark Zuckerberg's recent strategic changes at Facebook. Additionally, I comment on why the Biden Whitehouse is working hard to prevent a smooth transition of power into the next four years. Come laugh and think with me.

"Unless you hate your parents and siblings, and even your own life, you cannot be my disciple," Luke 14:26. What a harsh statement! We have to hate our parents? Our sisters? Children? Why was that utterance even more severe in the first century than it is today? Was Jesus being literal? How does that square with "love your enemies"? We're to love enemies but hate our own family? That seems upside down, absurd even. We first explore this brutal statement in its literary and historical context. Then we show what it can mean in our own world today. At the show's beginning I reflect, again, on consciousness and mind. Do computers think? Do they remember? Experience? What has caused us to view computers with such awe? And, why do so many hope for an A.I. utopian future? All of that is unpacked in this rich episode. Give the Lord your mind and come and think with me!

Hindus who've never read four Gospel sentences and Wiccans all know he said it, "love your enemies." But since we know Jesus was not trying either to lay down a new ethical code or teach pacifism, what was his point? What did his words mean in a first century business framework of amicitia? What did Jesus' words mean in light of the Old Testament teaching on enemies? Just how should one pray for one's enemies? How have these specific words of Jesus reshaped western civilization? In the show's opening I also reflect on how Daniel Dennett, a leading evolutionary philosopher, explains away consciousness and mind. Moreover, I lament the global Church's leadership vacuum; what do we do in light of the dearth of leaders? 

This is a Happy New Years, more light-hearted, episode for my listeners. There are two extended reflections: what are mind and consciousness in light of the prevailing evolutionary narrative? And, what hopes do I have for the newly configured Trumpian DOGE? But along the way I also variously interweave reflections on New Years resolutions, Trump's inauguration, 11 animal kinds that pair and mate for life, the top 15 worst nations for persecution of Christianity, what motivates me (negatively and positively) as a podcaster, and what do I think about a professor's legacy? Come and start your New Years thinking from out of Christian commitments.

It's Christmas time so it's time for a more light-hearted episode! In this potpourri I work through: my favorite and least-favorite Christmas music, my favorite and least-favorite Christmas food, my best-ever Christmas present, Jesus' first-century audience and their worldview, the snare that the Democrats laid for themselves and then walked into, what I think about the college football playoffs and who I'm rooting for, the massive cultural shift we are witnessing and how it came about, the many businesses that are forsaking DEI in their HR offices, and describe what is happening to DEI on college campuses. I also variously explain what a Confessing Church is, tell a Christmas joke, and narrate the recent assassination of a Russian general and what that was all about, or what might happen in and through that. And there's even more. Come laugh and think and reflect and pray with me! 

Dismayed in prison and puzzled by Jesus' military restraint, John the Baptist sent an envoy of disciples to ask Jesus, "are you the One or should we look for another?" Jesus answers their question, and then some! (And by his answer we learn still more about the way Jesus thought about himself.) Then Jesus added, "Truly, I say, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the Kingdom of heaven is greater than he." In my opinion, that's a weird thing to say. Why would Jesus say it? By saying such a thing what was Jesus indicating? What were the other things he said that help us build an answer to why Jesus said we (you and me) can be greater than his own cousin, Baptist John? In this episode I also talk about exegetical method—how to go about studying a biblical text—and reflect still further (for the third consecutive show) on transhumanism. Come think and pray and laugh with me.

"If you had the faith of a mustard seed you could say to that mountain, 'be cast into the sea,' and it would be done for you," Jesus said three different times in the Gospels. Across my life that is one of the more terrifying phrases Jesus ever uttered, and that's why I take more time than in most of my shows to address the particularities. In the literary and historical context what did Jesus mean? What was he addressing? What was he saying about himself inside of those contexts? Why did he say such loud things? I also address the common pastoral take-away from these passages: our having enough faith. How much faith is enough? What is faith? What usually happens among Christians with application of this "faith to move mountains" phrase? In the show's cultural reflection I talk, again, about transhumanism. This time about how transhumanism is making inroads into culture and why some unspeakable eventualities lay on the threshold of history for us.

In a recent Tik Tok video, Russell Brand, a believer now for eight months, asked a probing question, "are we saved by faith or grace?" I thought, "man, that's a great question!" So, on a lark, I decided to answer his 1:22 second question with a 4 minute 45 second answer. Christians should not be afraid to ask any questions about their faith, and I'm glad brother Brand asked a solid query. 

In the same sermon wherein he told us, "love your enemies," Jesus said, "do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine." Why would a loving Jesus teach us to call someone a pig? In this episode I work through the Old Testament, First Century Jewish, and Jesus-ian layers of this strange onion of a saying. There are several practical for-the-now applications of Jesus' meaning here. More, it shows us something about whom Jesus really was. At the show's opening I work through the burgeoning transhumanism movement. What is it about? What does it want? Who comprises the transhume crowd? What are their philosophical commitments? Is it theological or more narrowly spiritual? Come laugh and think with me.

Having worked at County, State, and Federal levels, David Mansdoerfer knows what it is like to work for change in bureaucratic arenas. From 2017 to 2019 he even worked in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), during president Trump's first term. In this interview I ask him the following kinds of questions: did pastors help get out the 2024 vote?, how did the COVID governmental overreach impact voters during the recent presidential election?, why is Washington DC notorious for bureaucratic bloat?, across your years of political activism what kinds of arguments against such engagement do you commonly hear?, do you value people who disagree talking together?, what kind of challenges will RJK Jr face inside of HHS?, will Trump govern differently for having been out of DC for 4 years?, and how can RFK Jr and Trump effect change inside of the DC quagmire? David speaks from years of experience, and from out of his Christian worldview.

When I was in junior high and I would hear or read Matthew 7:23, "On that day I will say to you, 'I never knew you'", I would be terrified! I just knew I could never be perfect enough, or do enough good deeds, or perform a miracle so as to dodge Jesus' wrath. In this episode I peel back several layers of the onion: a) the Old Testament context for what Jesus says, b) the rabbinic background to what Jesus says, c) the literary context, and d) the theological avenues that are both at hand and not at hand with this profound warning. I also offer four contemporary applications of what Jesus was saying via his stern admonition. At the show's beginning I reflect on why it is that Christians, living inside their Christianity, have children, and value children. Conversely, why are millions (billions?) around the world forsaking the bearing of children? Let's look at life through the lens of Christ Jesus, God in the flesh.

In Mark 4 Jesus tells a story about sowing seed in different kinds of soil. Then he concludes, "I talk this way so that they may not perceive or repent or be forgiven." What on earth?! Doesn't Jesus want everyone to repent? Why would he say he's speaking in riddles precisely so that some will not be saved? In this show I work through the different angles—the playfulness of Aramaic language, the precedent established by Isaiah, the contrasts given us by Matthew and Luke on this same parable—which scholars say are at work in Jesus' strange saying here. In my conclusion I work through whether and how Jesus saying here might be about the Elect and Unelect; why does that Reformed lens not apply? To begin the show I reflect on our national presidential election and the things that have already changed in light of a pending Trump presidency. Download this show, turn your brain on, and let's think together about life in light of the layered and beautiful person, Yeshua Nadzaret!

To my own surprise the Orange Sunkist won a big red wave. What does this mean for the Church? The nation's majority said, "enough." (Enough what?) And with Felonious Orange taking the popular vote will we finally stop hearing about how the Electoral college is unnecessary? In this immediately-following-the-election episode I work through my "Day 1" wish list, my "First 100 Days" wish list. What does this victory mean for Progressive politics and the mainstream media? What's it mean for the Ukraine war? And wow, what happened to 20 million voters from the last presidential election cycle? But for the show's last half I reflect on what this election means for Church mission. How have the last 4+ years lazer-focused our missional thrust? Come laugh (and sing) and think with me about our lives in Christ.

On the eve of America's election, what is at stake? I clarify and explain my answer to that now-historic question. Also, I explain what it means to vote on the basis of biblical values. Along the way I sing multiple versions of a popular children's song from the 1800s. . . hey, let's have fun while we ponder together! Near the show's ending I quote a diplomat to the USA who understands what is at issue for this election. And because so many Christians wonder about it, I explain why national borders are essential for the Common Good. Oh, and why is it that some 30 million Christians are not voting this time around? I offer some plausible reasons. Come laugh and think with me.

I am a theologian, so why am I of all people voting for Donald Trump? Shouldn't I know better than to vote for, as the progressives call him, Orange Hitler? After all, not only is Donald Naranja not my Lord and Savior, he's not even an Evangelical Christian. So, why? Interrupting my current series, I explain the Christian-worldview-reasons together with the historical-wisdom-reasons for voting how I am. Why is it that I (almostly entirely) know whom I'm going to vote for even before I see the names on the ballot? What are my core committments and how do they influence my vote? The Church is called to be salt and light, even when it comes to our participation in elections. At the show's beginning, from the book of Revelation, I offer a reflection on the power of prayer and why God honors our prayers. Come, let us reason together about a Christian participation in elections.

"If your right eye or right hand causes you to sin? Cut it off! Better to be dismembered in this life than to enter Gehenna with all your body parts," Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount. But, in order to understand that billboard-loud statement we need to understand what Jesus is doing in his hill-side-y sermon. Was he issuing a new, once-and-for-all, covering-everything-for-all-times, new ethical code? Some say, "yes". And I work through that position, and its interpretive faults (and the ugly fruit it bears). Was he teaching us how we could earn our way into heaven? Was he, in the Sermon on the Mount, ending the Torah? Truth is, we cannot understand many of the outlandish things Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount unless we understand what his mission and purpose were. Come think with me about the genius of Jesus of Nazareth! In the show's opening I talk about why it feels like I'm living in a wilderness. 

This is as important an episode as I have ever recorded. Jesus used "salty" imagery in three different Gospel stories. In this fourth episode on Jesus' tough sayings we explore what he meant by that useage, what first-century Jewish rabbis meant when they used salty imagery, and how being salt spills over into the political realm. On the cultural-assessment front we take the biblical and theological investigation and framing of the show's first half and apply it to American life here in pre-election 2024. Why should believers, no why should the Church, get involved in politics? What does culture tell the Church to keep her out of politics? What are some just-this-past week examples of how political policies wound our neighbor?

"There are different kinds of eunuchs," Jesus flashed back at them, "and some have so chosen for the sake of the kingdom of heaven." This followed the disciples' own astonished response to Jesus' teaching on the exclusive nature of marriage. So Jesus took their emotional blurt and turned it on them. What does "eunuchs for the kingdom" mean? What's it not mean? What was the first-century cultural context for such a saying? What are some contemporary applications? I work through those kinds of contexts and questions, and still more, in this third episode on Jesus' tough sayings. In the show's beginning I discuss both the future of A.I. and an injurious piece of legislation on the electoral docket here in Spudland. Together, let's fix our minds (phronéma) for the sake of Christ.

Jesus said harsh things. Sometimes they were tough because they were riddled even for Jesus' own listeners, other times they were tough because they were just so demanding! This episode? "I came for the sick, sinners." What did that mean in its social context? What did it mean in its literary context? What does it mean over against massively-widespread teaching in the church today? And then, what does all that mean with regard to Christian mission? At the show's beginning I review the newly released, in-theater, movie, "Am I a Racist?" We also dig into whether Matt Walsh and the production company were being ethical.

The first episode in a new series, this cast o' the pod is about John 6:53, "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." What did Jesus mean by that? What does the chapter's context establish for us? What does the book of John establish for us? Was Jesus promoting cannibalism? What does Jesus say a few verses later that shines important light on his scandalous remark? Is Jesus teaching on the Lord's Supper here? Also in this episode, because the Lordship of Christ is not reserved for private matters, I briefly reflect on the Trump-Harris ABC tv interview.

Twenty-first century folk define flesh as being about the body. So the human body, in popular Christian thought, gets paired against the spirit. But that's not at all what the apostle Paul meant by flesh (sarx) in the book of Romans. He was being nuanced, technical even. He wanted to establish a comparison that remains critical even for believers today. In many ways, we are what we think about. In this shotgun of a theology-and-culture episode I also explain why governmental systemic machines hate populism. What we are seeing here in the United States—with our media's tarnishing, branding, and scolding of populism—is occurring around the world. To prove the point I describe recent elections in Italy, Germany, France, and Venezuela. Earlier, at the show's beginning, I offer three long-established definitions of theology and what I like about each one. Come think and laugh with me.

Following a 16-part series it's time for a happy-break! In this Theology-and-Culture shotgun I work through the following: a famous racist's plagiarism, a quote by the Chinese ancient Laozi, why I love Spudlandia culture (and why you won't want to move here!) (and why KS is angry at the I.D.!), how an embrace of divine determinism theology makes evil less evil, CNN's Dana Bash and her lengthy-28-whole-minutes!-long-piercing interview of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, and a final reflection on St. Paul and the Old Testament law. This light hearted episode will make you think, laugh, and ponder what it means to follow Jesus Christ in the 21st Century.

Protestants focus, almost exclusively, on Salvation. (Who's against salvation? Not me! Praise God for salvation!) But that pressure-driven focus causes Protestants to look at every Bible passage or story as a matter of soteriology (salvation, pertaining to salvation). So we end up making the Bible say things it wasn't trying to say. And to that point? Election. Protestants think that election is always about salvation in eternity, or not. But that's not what election is in the Bible. I unpack the Bible logic about election, its wiring, its sweeping vision. Because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture I reflect, in the show's beginning, on Church involvement in culture. Come think and laugh with me!

A classic prooftext for Divine Determinism is Romans 9. Especially verse 13, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated," is a pet verse for those who favor Divine Determinism. Across the last 500 years that verse has particularly been cited as an example of predestination: God chooses some for salvation and some for damnation. But is that what Paul was teaching in this passage? Was he saying God sent Jacob to heaven and Esau to hell? I spend the entire podcast unpacking the context, reasoning, and argument of the apostle Paul. He says several "insider baseball" remarks that make little sense to we twenty-first century westerners. Instead, Paul is going down a path that is rather foreign to us. Come join me as we plow through this significant chapter in Romans!

Significant to a notion of Divine Determinism is the Exodus. In chapters 7-12 we watch an ongoing interaction between Egypt's Pharaoh and Yahweh (via Moses and Aaron). What does that running exchange reveal to us? What does it reveal to us about freedom from slavery? About freedom of religious expression? About human agency? About how God deals with we, His creations? This is important because the pattern of Exodus is repeated elsewhere through the Bible, not least of which in the book of Romans. And then, because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture, I examine and explain simulacra. We are surrounded, bombarded even, with simulacra. And that's more true in an election year than ever! Are reality tv shows real? Are piped-in video sermons authentic? Come think and laugh with me!

The Reformed's Westminster Shorter Catechism, point #1, "What is the chief end of man? The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever." That's a solid claim! I don't disagree, except it doesn't explain a deeper-still question, why did God create? What motivated Him? Was there a need in God to be glorified? Did God have a lack He needed to fill? Or does God express Himself through a kind of prodigal (wasteful, overspilling) love? I work through the traditional Protestant emphasis on the motivation of God and then suggest a better, more biblical, more Jesus-y answer. And then, because the majestic Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture, I explain why I have been having numerous and regular dystopian nightmares where I awake in a fit of terror as demons lead me off into captivity. Come laugh and think with me!

God created the universe, and planet earth, with an inherent quality of free-play. Free-play is where energies, gravity, animals, weather and more all have their ability to move and be and impact reality. Given that, is life a matter of chance? Still more, is life a matter of unruly randomness? Both the Reformed and the Arminians have a high emphasis on the sovereignty of God; too often that is taken so that God is a kind of secrete puppet-master. But that doesn't jive with the existence of free-play. So how do we go about making sense of all those apparently competing elements? That's the aim of this show. I roll out a high view of God's sovereignty in light of the existence of free-play, chance, and even randomness. Let's laugh together as we think about complex matters!

Across my last five or so episodes I've put enormous weight on human agency in understanding a biblical theology. This cast O' the pod, following Reformed vs. Arminian constructions and the priority of prevenient grace, emphasizes both the 'that' and the 'why' of God's revelation (the Gospel) being the premise of salvation. We cannot save ourselves; cannot be compassionate enough; cannot be intelligent enough; cannot make ourselves live forever; cannot resurrect ourselves. God—alone—is the premise, the life giver, the source of salvation. In the show's opening I work through Jesus' warning to the Laodiceans: the hot water they had piped-in from some 6 miles way was now tepid, just like them. They were pretending to be Christian. What is a possible contemporary parallel? Come laugh and think with me.

The Reformed doctrine of Total Depravity rather necessitates their doctrine of Common Grace, or better, common graces. When I was in seminary I realized that most other Christians talked about life in terms of grace, whereas my tradition spoke about life in terms of God's Spirit. What are the benefits of each? What are important biblical frames for each? Against what was the Reformed doctrine of Grace reacting in the 16th century? Me? Because I reject the premises of Reformed theology I have other theological avenues by which to process life. Life is so magical! So personal! Why? Because of the omnipresence of God's Holy Spirit. But in the episode's opening I variously discuss: praying for the wounded, the care of my teeth (and a couple recent dental visits), rubbing respectable Christians the wrong way, Christianity and politics, and the amazing experience of watching philosphy books take incarnate form and springing to life. Come laugh and think with me!

The P of TULIP is Perseverance of the Saints. And so the question rises, "can you lose your salvation?" Just asking that question will get you kicked out of many in-home bible studies! Nevertheless, the Reformed and the Arminian Protestants answer this in ways that we note and unpack. And then me? The UU? Who takes Trinity (and so personhood, and agency, and mission, and love) as my theological foundation, what do I say? What bible verses inform my thinking? What theological commitments inform my thinking? At the show's opening I make a couple cultural reflections (because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of cuulture) on judging evil vs. doing evil. Which of those two is worse? I also a question provocative for contemporary Christianity, was Jesus tame? Come think and laugh with me!

Is the grace of God resistible? Can the Holy Spirit's efforts be frustrated? When does the new birth (regeneration, justification) happen in time? In their historical context, why do Protestants, both Reformed and Arminians, so resist having works be involved in salvation? Those questions are all plowed-through in this eighth episode in this series. Once having set up the R'n'A dispute, and their respective answers (and mutual critiques), I offer other categories for framing salvation and grace and works. Do I believe works are saving? No, of course not. Do I think that rules works out of our missional calling? That is another question entirely. Then, because the Lordship of Christ does not halt at the boundary of culture, I variously discuss the Declaration of Independence and the way it grounds our human rights, the chaotic state of higher education, "normophobia", and how it is that today's religious impulse is manifesting itself. Come laugh and think with me for such a time as this!

Probably like me you hear it all the time, "everything happens for a reason." More than likely? Those who say that do not realize they are espousing Reformed theology, or drawing on Reformed sensibilities. But really, does the Bible teach that everything happens for a reason? And if so, doesn't that make God the author of evil, and so make him a moral monster? My essential problem with Reformed and Arminian theological framing is that they are not God-enough, not Trinitarian enough, not biblical enough. How so? Because the Lordship of Jesus does not stop at the boundary of culture I examine why American culture loves war so much. How do our international brothers and sisters perceive us in light of that love of war? What drives our nearly century-old love of war? This is difficult but important to think through.

The New Testament, from the Gospels to Revelation, proclaim Jesus to be the "lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." But how do the Reformed and the Arminians process the effective nature of Jesus' atoning death? I explore the logic of each divergent camp's theology. What does John Piper teach? What did John Calvin teach? What interesting thing do the Arminians teach about Christ's atonement and infants? Also, because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture, I unpack still more about what is going on between men and women. There are measurable demographic studies that show important trends at work both in the United States and in Europe. Come laugh and think with me!

The Reformed and Arminians agree that God predestined the elect, but they don't agree together who the elect are. They also don't agree on what God decreed about the reprobate (unbelievers). Frankly, they don't agree on several important things: God's power and whether He can (or does) limit himself; the levels of mystery at work in life; or the theological emphases that should guide the Christian perception of life. In this fifth episode I address, compare, and contrast all of those most consequential elements. And because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture, a two-fold cultural reflection comprises the show's first segment: what is happening at my alma mater, Fuller Theological Seminary? And what is our reigning culture pressing down upon women? Why are young women, particularly, so unhappy? Why is our nation's birth-rate plunging? Why—are you kidding me?!—are young men attending church at greater ratios than young women? 

Predestination: it's a big topic of controversy. The Reformed and Arminians each emphasize predestination in varied ways. Why did God predestine? Whom did God predestine? I also explore the very common sentiment, "but, I only want to believe what the Bible says!" That sentiment has historic (and, gulp!, philosophic) roots that those who assert it do not realize. Still more, that "bible and me" sentiment only makes for worse problems. Then, in the cultural-reflection, I remark on the character of the recent Trump conviction. What does history clarify about such trials? What would it feel like if Joe Biden were tried in bright-red Rexburg, Eastern Idaho? But maybe most important of all? I unpack why the Trump conviction matters to the Church. Come think and laugh with me. 

The Reformed and Arminians (R'n'A) seldom agree. But they do agree on the doctrine of total depravity. In this episode I work through what that means, respectively, to the R'n'A. What did Sproul say about it? What did Wesley assert? Then I ask questions about what it means to be human: a) do we still, after the fall, exist as the image of God? b) does the doctrine of salvation eliminate or build on the doctrine of creation? c) where do I (do I?) agree with the doctrine of total depravity? In the cultural reflection I work through still more of how SCOTUS has, across 60+ years, enforced their rulings in favor of compulsory feminism. What was it like, for me, to take compulsory sexual-training HR sessions? Who is against equality of the sexes? Not me! But unlike Lord Zeitgeist, I am not in favor of treating both male and female as non-existent and accidental qualities.