Podcasts about Disagreement

Send us a textA small disagreement can upend an entire community when gossip spreads and pride takes the wheel. We dive into Philippians 4 to trace how a private rift between two respected leaders began to fracture an otherwise faithful church—and how Paul guides them, and us, back to peace. Instead of picking sides or shaming from a distance, Paul models gracious confrontation: he names the issue without spectacle, appeals to both women equally, and calls them to meet on their shared ground “in the Lord.” He even honors their gospel work, reminding everyone that these are not enemies to defeat but sisters to restore.From there, we pull out practical principles for real-world peacemaking. Disagreements are inevitable; division is optional. You'll hear why mature believers still clash, how conflicts between a few can harm many, and why the church should raise up peacemakers who step in to cool tempers and untangle issues rather than become spectators or partisans. We talk about the dangers of letting preferences eclipse doctrine, the cost to a church's witness when fights go public, and the courage it takes to invite a wise third party to help two sides hear each other.Perspective changes everything. Paul anchors his counsel in eternity—“whose names are in the book of life”—to pull our eyes above the fray. When our future is drenched in grace, our present can be too. We end with a vivid, modern story of everyday grace on a city bus to prove that small acts of kindness can rebuild trust and create community anywhere. If grace can transform a daily commute, it can heal a church family. Listen, reflect, and share your next peacemaking step with us.If this conversation helped you, follow the show, leave a review, and share this episode with a friend who could use a nudge toward reconciliation.Support the showStephen's latest book, The Disciples Prayer, is available now. https://www.wisdomonline.org/store/view/the-disciples-prayer-hardback

Send us a textA small disagreement can upend an entire community when gossip spreads and pride takes the wheel. We dive into Philippians 4 to trace how a private rift between two respected leaders began to fracture an otherwise faithful church—and how Paul guides them, and us, back to peace. Instead of picking sides or shaming from a distance, Paul models gracious confrontation: he names the issue without spectacle, appeals to both women equally, and calls them to meet on their shared ground “in the Lord.” He even honors their gospel work, reminding everyone that these are not enemies to defeat but sisters to restore.From there, we pull out practical principles for real-world peacemaking. Disagreements are inevitable; division is optional. You'll hear why mature believers still clash, how conflicts between a few can harm many, and why the church should raise up peacemakers who step in to cool tempers and untangle issues rather than become spectators or partisans. We talk about the dangers of letting preferences eclipse doctrine, the cost to a church's witness when fights go public, and the courage it takes to invite a wise third party to help two sides hear each other.Perspective changes everything. Paul anchors his counsel in eternity—“whose names are in the book of life”—to pull our eyes above the fray. When our future is drenched in grace, our present can be too. We end with a vivid, modern story of everyday grace on a city bus to prove that small acts of kindness can rebuild trust and create community anywhere. If grace can transform a daily commute, it can heal a church family. Listen, reflect, and share your next peacemaking step with us.If this conversation helped you, follow the show, leave a review, and share this episode with a friend who could use a nudge toward reconciliation.Support the showStephen's latest book, The Disciples Prayer, is available now. https://www.wisdomonline.org/store/view/the-disciples-prayer-hardback

Thank you for listening to Episode 213 of The Pitchy Podcast.Questionable Choices, Disagreement and Stunning Performances Were The Story Tonight! In this episode, Stephanie and James are sharing their takes on this episode of NBC's The Voice. We'll discuss the third round of the knockouts; the artists, performances, coaches decisions and more. But we don't stop there! On our Patreon, they share more of their thoughts about the performances, as well as which artists we would have picked to move forward, and much more. If you're interested, consider joining us on Patreon for only $5 per month. Details for Patreon are below. Let us know in the what you thought of tonight's episode and the artists.Time Stamps:00:00-Cold open and show opening4:20-Ryan vs Conrad 12:00-Rob vs vs Marty24:00-Trinity vs Jack29:20-DEK of Hearts vs Kayleigh40:00-Closing ****************************************Pitchy Podcast Patreonpatreon.com/ThePitchyPodcastBe sure to subscribe to The Pitchy Podcast on your favorite podcast platform so you know when we drop new episodes!Also tap the link to head to our YouTube channel and hit that SUBSCRIBE button. https://youtube.com/@thepitchypodcastLastly, be sure to follow us on Instagram @thepitchypodcast to keep up with new episode updates, listen to episode clips and more. Thanks for listening! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As we continue our study through the book of Acts on today's program, we reach chapter fifteen. The theme of this chapter is conflict. Disagreements can ruin your day and even ruin a relationship, but they can also be healthy and productive. As we pick up the story we invite you to join in by turning to Acts chapter fifteen

Send us a textJames Chicano is a nationally recognized conflict resolution expert, facilitator, and leadership coach with over 25 years of experience. He specializes in helping leaders navigate high-stress and high-stakes challenges with clarity and composure. James has worked on hundreds of complex cases across both the public and private sectors, focusing on workplace conflict, organizational change, team dysfunction, and multi-stakeholder tension. He emphasizes the importance of being "conflict competent" as a leader and discusses the need to hone skills that many leaders often overlook, including negotiation, mediation, and coaching. Throughout the conversation, James imparts valuable insights into the nature of conflict and how it can be transformed into a constructive force for organizational improvement.James underscores the critical competencies required for effective conflict management, such as emotional intelligence, assertiveness, and deep listening. Attuned to the dynamics of modern workplaces, he also shares unconventional methodologies like breathwork to manage tension, encouraging leaders to explore new ways of fostering healthy communication and understanding.Key Takeaways:Conflict Competency: Leaders need to develop conflict management skills, including negotiation and facilitation, which are often underemphasized in traditional leadership training.Attitude, Process, and Skills: These three dimensions—attitude towards conflict, processes for resolution, and specific skills like deep listening and empathy—are crucial in managing disagreements effectively.Emotional Regulation: Techniques like breathwork can help leaders and employees alike manage emotions and maintain focus during challenging conversations.Curiosity and Listening: Staying open and curious, coupled with deep listening, can open pathways to understanding and resolving conflicts constructively.Owning the Approach: Leaders must decide and own their role in a conflict, choosing between engagement, coaching, or facilitation strategies to manage tensions effectively.Notable Quotes:"Conflict is a phenomenon of difference, and it occurs all over. The question is, what strategies are available to deal with it?""In my mind, we have to be very deliberate about how we engage in conflict.""Leaders are expected to have a multitude of different capacities when addressing conflict.""Effective communication is the creation of shared meaning—it doesn't mean we agree, but we have a sense of where we're each coming from."Resources:James Chicano on LinkedInUniversity of Victoria: Website (implicit reference)For more episodes like this and to remain updated, connect through the "Leadership Moments" podcast on Instagram and LinkedIn.All episodes and guest requests can be found at:www.leadershipmomentspodcast.comFollow Stacey Caster on Instagram @staceycaster_Follow Tracy-Ann Palmer on Instagram @tracy_ann_palmer

Unstoppable (Despite) Disagreement | Pastor Brandon Risch | Unstoppable: Week 09 | November 09, 2025

Acts 15:36-41 – Sharp Disagreement

Husky voice, Friday night whiskey, and a mountain of cheese from the book launch. In this episode I lift the lid on what really happens inside a print judging room. The rotation of five from a pool of seven. Silent scoring so no one nudges anyone else. How a challenge works, what the chair actually does, and why we start with impact, dive through craft, then finish on impact again to see what survives. Layout over composition, light as the whole game, and a final re-rank that flattens time drift so the right image actually wins. If you enjoy a peek behind the curtain, you will like this one. You can grab a signed copy of the new Mastering Portrait Photography at masteringportraitphotography.com and yes, I will scribble in it. If you already have the book, a quick Amazon review helps more than you know. Fancy sharpening your craft in person? Check the workshops page for new dates and come play with light at the studio.  The book: https://masteringportraitphotography.com/resource/signed-copy-mastering-portrait-photography-new-edition/ Workshops: https://masteringportraitphotography.com/workshops-and-mentoring/   Transcript [00:00:00]  Hey, one and all. How are you doing? Now? I'll be honest, I still have the remnants of a cold, and if you can hear that in my voice, I do apologize, I suppose you could call it slightly bluesy, but you can definitely hear that I'm ever so slightly husky. It's Friday night, it's eight 30, and I was, I've been waiting a week to record this podcast, hoping my voice would clear it hasn't, and so I've taken the opportunity having a glass of whiskey and just cracking on. So if you like the sound of a slightly bluesy voice, that's great. If you don't, I'm really sorry, but whichever, which way I'm Paul. And this is the Mastering Portrait Photography podcast. So it's been a busy month or two. You can always tell when it's busy [00:01:00] 'cause the podcasts. Get, don't really get delivered in quite the pace I would like. However, it really has been a busy couple of weeks the past few. Let me, I'm gonna draw your attention to it. The past couple of weeks, we've, there's a ton of stuff going on around us for a moment. I was up in Preston. I've been up in Preston twice over the past couple of weeks. The first one was working as a qualifications judge for the BIPP, the British Institute Professional photographers. Um. Which I love judging. I love judging. It's exhausting, but I love it. And that was qualifications, panels. Then last week was the launch. Of the updated edition of Mastering Portrait Photography, the book, which is where it all started, where Sarah Plata and I published this book that seems to have been incredibly popular. 50,000 copies translated from English into four other languages. Chinese, Korean, German. And Italian, do not ask me, do not ask me the logic on why the book is in those [00:02:00] particular languages. To be fair, we only found out about the Chinese and Korean when we were trying to get some marketing material together to talk about the new book Nobody had told us. I'm not even sure the publisher knew, to be honest. Uh, but we have found copies. We have a Chinese copy here in the studio. I'm still trying to get a Korean version. So if you are listening to this. Podcast in Korea. Please tell me how to get hold of a version in Korean because we'd love to complete the set. There's, in fact, there's two Italian versions. We knew about that. There's a German version we knew about that hardback version. It's great. It's really beautiful. Very I, like I, I don't live in Germany and I don't like to stereotyping entire nation, but the quality of the book is incredible. It's absolutely rock solid, properly engineered. Love it. We have a Chinese version here but the Korean version still alludes us. However, this week the new version, mastering portrait photography is out. And as you know, I, Sarah interviewed me for the podcast last week to talk about it. Well, it's out. We've had our launch party, uh, we invited everybody who [00:03:00] has featured in the book who, everybody, every picture in the book that we asked the person in it to come to the studio for a soiree. And it was brilliant. I've never seen so much cheese in all my life, and by I don't mean my speech, I mean actual cheese. We had a pile of it, still eating it. So it's been a week and I'm still eating the cheese. I dunno quite how, well, quite by how much we vacated, but probably by several kilos. Which I'm enjoying thoroughly. I've put on so much weight this week, it's unreal, but I'm enjoying the cheese. And then on Sunday we had an open day where we had set the studio out with some pictures from the book and some notes of the different people. Who featured and what I might do, actually, I'd, I wonder if I can do a visual podcast. I might do a visual podcast where I talk about those images, at some point on the website, on masteringportraitportraitphotography.com. I will do the story and the BTS and the production of every single image that's in the book, but it's gonna take me some [00:04:00] time. There's nearly 200 images in there. Um, and every one of them, bar one is a new image or is, is. It is, it is a new image in the book, and it has been taken in the 10 years or the decades subsequent to the first book, all bar one. Feel free to email me. Email me the image you think it might be. You'll probably guess it, but it's it's definitely in there. Um, and so it's been really busy. And then at the beginning of this week, I spent two days up in Preston again, judging again, but this time it was for the British Institute of Professional Photographers print Masters competition. Ah, what, what a joy. Six other judges and me, a chair of judges. Print handlers, the organizers. Ah, I mean, I've seen so many incredible images over those 48 hours, and in this podcast I want to talk a bit about how we do it, why we do it, what it feels like to do it, [00:05:00] because I'm not sure everybody understands that it's it, it's not stressful, but we do as judges, feel the pressure. We know that we are representing, on the one hand, the association as the arbiters of the quality of the curators of these competitions, but also we feel the pressure of the authors because we are there too. We also enter competitions and we really, really hope the judges pay attention, really investigate and interrogate the images that we've entered. And when, when you enter competitions, that heightens the pressure to do a good job for the authors who you are judging. So in this podcast, I'm gonna talk through some of the aspects of that. Forgive me if it sounds like I'm answering questions. It's because I wrote myself some questions. I wrote some [00:06:00] questions down to, how I structures the podcast usually, uh, the podcast rambles along, but this one I actually set out with a structure to it, so forgive me if it sounds like I'm answering questions. It's 'cause I'm answering my own questions. What does it feel like? How do you do it? Et cetera, et cetera. Anyway, I hope it's useful. Enjoy. And it gives you an insight into what it's like to be a competition judge. Okay. As you walk into the judging room. For me at least, it's mostly a sense of excitement. There's a degree of apprehension. There's a degree of tension, but mostly there's an adrenaline rush. Knowing that we're about to sit and view, assess, score these incredible images from photographers all over the world, and let's remember that every photographer when they enter a print competition, which is what I'm talking about primarily here. Every photographer [00:07:00] believes that print that category that year, could win. Nobody enters an image thinking that it doesn't stand a chance. Now you might do that modest thing of, I don't know, you know? Oh no, I don't. I I just chance my arm. No one enters a print they don't think has a chance of doing well. That just doesn't happen. It's too expensive. It takes too much time. And as judges. We are acutely aware of that. So when you walk into the room, lots of things are going in your on, in your heads. Primarily, you know, you are there to do a job. You are there to perform a task. You are going to put your analytical head on and assess a few hundred images over the next 48 hours. But as you walk in, there's a whole series of things. You, you are gonna assess the room. You see that your fellow judges, you're gonna see the print handlers. You're going to see the chair, you're gonna see the people [00:08:00] from whichever association it is who are organizing it, who or who have organized it. You'll see stacks of prints ready to be assessed. There's a whole series of things that happen. A lot of hugging. It's really lovely. This year the panel of judges, uh, had some people in it I haven't seen for quite a few years, and it was beyond lovely to see them. So there's all of that, but you, there's this underlying tension you are about to do. One of the things you love doing more than anything else in as part of your job. So there's the excitement of it and the joy of it, but there's always this gentle underlying tone of gravitas of just how serious it is. What we are doing. So there will be plenty of laughter, plenty of joy, but you never really take your eye off the task in hand. And that's how it feels as you go to take your seats on the judging [00:09:00] panel. So the most important thing, I think, anyway, and I was chair of qualifications and awards for the BIPP for a number of years, is that the whole room, everybody there is acting as a team. If you are not gonna pull as a team, it doesn't work. So there has to be safety, there has to be structure. There has to be a process and all of these things come together to provide a framework in which you assess and create the necessary scores and results for the association, for the photographers, for the contestants. So you take your seats, and typically in a room, there are gonna be five judges at any one time assessing an image. It's typically five. I've seen it done other ways, but a panel of judges is typically five. The reason we have five is at no point do all of the judges agree. [00:10:00] We'll go through this later in more detail, but the idea is that you have enough judges that you can have contention, you can have. Disagreements, but as a panel of judges, you'll come up with a score. So you'll have five judges sitting assessing an image at any one time. To the side of the room, there'll be two more judges typically. Usually we have a pool of seven, five judges working, two judges sitting out every 10 prints or 10 minutes or whatever the chair decides. They'll we'll rotate along one, so we'll all move along one seat and one of the spare judges will come in and sit on the end and one of the existing judges will step off. And we do that all day, just rotating along so that everybody judges, broadly speaking, the same number of images. Now, of course there is a degree of specialism in the room. If a panel has been well selected, there'll be specialists in each of the categories, but you can't have, let's say there's 15 categories. You [00:11:00] can't have five specialist judges per category. That's simply impractical. Um, you know, having, what's that, 75 judges in a room, just so that you can get through the 15 categories is. A logistics task, a cost. Even just having a room that big, full of judges doesn't work. So every judge is expected to be reasonably multi-talented, even if you don't shoot, for instance, landscapes. You have to have a working knowledge of what's required of a great landscape. Because our job as a panel isn't that each of us will spot all of the same characteristics in an image, all of the same defects, all of the same qualities. Each judge has been picked to bring their own. Sort of viewpoint, if you like, to the image. Some judges are super technical, some judges, it's all about the atmosphere. Some judges, it's all about the printing and there's every bit of image production is [00:12:00] covered by each of the individual specialisms of the judges. And so while there is a degree of specialism, there will be a landscape. Specialist in the room or someone who works in landscape, there will be plenty of portrait photographers, wedding photographers, commercial photographers. The idea is from those seven, we can cover all of those bases. So we have seven judges all at fellowship level, all highly skilled, all experienced. And then there's the chair. Now the chair's role is not to affect the actual score. The chair's role is to make sure the judges have considered everything that they should be considering. That's the Chair's job, is to make sure the judges stay fresh, keep an eye on the scores, keep an eye on the throughput. Make sure that every image and every author are given a. The time and consideration that they are due. What do I mean by that? Well, I just mean the photographers spent a lot of time and effort and [00:13:00] finance putting this print in front of us, and so it's really important that we as judges give it due consideration. The chair, that's their role is to make sure that's what really happens. So the process is pretty simple, really. We will take our seats as a panel of judges and when we are settled. The chair will ask for the print, one of the print handlers. There's normally a couple of print handlers in the room, one to put the image on, one to take the image off. The print handler will take the first image or the next image off the pile and place it in front of us on the light box. They will then check the print to make sure there's no visible or obvious dust marks, um, or anything, and give with an air blower or with the back of a a handling glove, or very gently take any dust spots away. They will then step back. Now, the way the judges are set, there are five seats in a gentle arc, usually around the light [00:14:00] box. The outer two judges, judges one and five will step into the light box and examine or interrogate the print carefully. They will take as much time as they need to ascertain what they believe the score for that image should be. They will then take their seats. The next two judges in, so let's say Judge two and four, they will step in to interrogate the print and do exactly the same thing. When they're ready, they'll step back and sit down. And then the middle judge, the final judge in seat three, they will step up and interrogate the print. And the reason we do it that way is that everybody gets to see the print thoroughly. Everybody gets to spend enough time. Examining the print. And at that point, when we all sit down, we all enter our scores onto whatever the system is we're using either using iPads or keypads. There's all sorts of ways of doing it, but what's really important is we do all of this in total silence and we don't really do it because we need to be able to [00:15:00] concentrate. Though that has happened, sort of distracting noises can play havoc. Um, we really do it so that we are not influencing any other judge. So there's no, oh, this is rubbish, or, oh, this is amazing. Or any of this stuff, because the idea is that each judge will come to their own independent score. We enter them, and then there's a process as to what happens next. So that's the process. If at some point a single judge when the image appears, says, I can't judge this for whatever reason, usually it's because they've seen the image before. I mean, there's one this week where I hadn't directly influenced the image. But the author had shown me how they'd done it, so they'd stepped me through the Photoshopping, the construction, the shooting, everything about the image. I knew the image really well, and so when the image appeared on the light box, I knew while I could judge it, it wasn't fair to the author or to the other [00:16:00] competitors that I should. So I raised my hand, checked in with the chair, chair, asked me what I wanted. I said, I need to step off this. I'm too familiar with the work for me to give this a cold read, an objective read. So I if, if possible, if there's another judge, could they just step in and score this one image for me? And that means it's fair for all of the contestants. So that's that bit of process when we come to our score. Let's assume the score's fine. Let's assume, I dunno, it gets an 82, which is usually a merit or a bronze, whatever the system is. The chair will log that, she'll say that image scored 82, which is the average of all five of us. She'll then check in with the scores and the panel of judges. He or she rather, uh, they, so they will look at us and go, are you all happy with that result? That's really important. Are you all happy? Would that result? Because that's the opportunity as judges for one of us, if we're not comfortable that the image is scored where we think it probably should. And [00:17:00] remember with five of you, if the score isn't what you think, you could be the one who's not got your eye in or you haven't spotted something, it might well be you, but it's your job as a judge to make sure if there's any doubt in your mind about the scoring of an image that. You ask for it to be assessed again, for there to be discussion for the team to do its job because it might be that the other members of the panel haven't seen something that you have or you haven't seen something that they have, that both of those can be true. So it's really important that you have a process and you have a strict process. And this is how it works. So the chair will say you are happy. One of the judges may say. No, I'm not happy or may say I would like to challenge that or may simply say, I think this warrants a discussion. I'm gonna start it off. And then there's a process for doing that. [00:18:00] So the judge who raises the challenge will start the dialogue and they'll start in whichever direction it is that they think the scoring is not quite right. They will start the dialogue that way. So let's say the score, the judge who's raising a challenge says the score feels a little low. What happens then is raise a challenge and that judge will discuss the image or talk to the image in a way that is positive and trying to raise the score. And they're gonna do that by drawing attention to the qualities that they feel the image has, that maybe they're worried the other judges haven't seen when they're done, the next judge depends, depending on the chair and how you do it. The next judge will take their turn and he goes all the way around with every judge having their say. And then it comes back to the originating judge who has the right of a rebuttal, which simply means to answer back. So depending on how the [00:19:00] dialogue has gone it may be that you say thank you to all of the judges. I'm glad you saw my point. It would be great if we could give this the score that I think this deserves. Similarly, you occasionally, and I did do one of these where I raised a challenge, um, where I felt an image hadn't scored, or the judges hadn't seen something that maybe I had seen in the image, and then very quickly realized that four judges had seen a defect that I hadn't. And so my challenge, it was not, it's never a waste of a challenge. It's never ever a waste because it's really important that every image is given the consideration it deserves. But at the end of the challenge that I raised, the scoring stayed exactly the same. I stayed, I said thank you to all of the judges for showing me some stuff that I hadn't noticed. And then we moved on. More often than not, the scores move as the judges say, oh, do you know what, you're right, there is something in this. Or, no, you're right. We've overinflated this because we saw things, but we missed these technical defects. It's those kinds of conversations. So that's a, a chair, that's a, a judge's [00:20:00] challenge. Yeah, this process also kicks in if there's a very wide score difference between the judge's scores, same process, but this time there's no rebuttal. Every judge simply gives their view starting with the highest judge and then working anywhere on the panel. Um, and then there's a rare one, which does happen which is a chair's challenge, and the chair has the right in, at least in the competitions that I judge, the chair has the right to say to the panel of judges. Could you just give this another consideration? I think there might be things you've missed or that feels like you're getting a little bit steady in your scoring. 'cause they, the chair of course, has got a log of all the scores and can see whether, you know, you're settling into like a 78, 79 or one judge is constantly outta kilter. The chair can see everything and so your job as the chair is to just, okay guys, listen, I think this image that you've just assessed. Possibly there's some things one way or the [00:21:00] other that you might need to take into consideration. It doesn't feel like you have. I'd like you to discuss this image and then just do a rescore. So those are the, those are the mechanisms. So in the room you've got five judges plus two judges who are there ready to step in when required either on the rotation or when someone recuses themself and steps out. Usually two print handlers and then usually there's at least one person or maybe more from the association, just doing things like making sure things are outta their boxes, that the scores are recorded on the back of the prints, they go back into boxes, there's no damage because these prints are worth quite a lot of money. And so, there's usually quite a few people in the room, but it's all done in silence and it's all done to this beautiful process of making sure it's organized, it's clear it's transparent, and we're working as one team to assess each image and give it the score that it deserves. so when the print arrives on the box. It has impact. Now, whether you like it or not, [00:22:00] whether you understand it or not, whether you can define it or not, the print has an impact. You're gonna see it, you're gonna react to it. How do you react to it? Is it visceral? Does your heart rate climb? Do you. Do you explore it? Do you want to explore it? Does it tell a clear story? And now is when you are judging a competition, typically the association or the organization who are running the competition will have a clear set of criteria. I mean, broadly speaking, things like lighting, posing layout or composition storytelling. Graphic design, print quality, if it's a print competition. These are the kinds of things that, um, we look for. And they're listed out in the competition guides that the entrant, the author will have known those when they submitted their print. And the judges know them when we're assessing them, so they're kind of coherent. Whatever it is that the, the entrance were told, that's what we're judging [00:23:00] to the most important. Is the emotional connection or the impact? It's typically called visual impact or just impact. What's really important about that is that it's very obvious, I think, to break images down into these constructed elements like complimentary colors or tonal range or centers of interest, but they don't really do anything except create. Your emotional reaction to the picture. Now, we do use language around these to assess the image, but what we're actually looking for is emotional impact. Pictures tell stories. Stories invoke emotions. It's the emotions we're really looking for. But the trick when you are judging is you start with the initial impact. Then you go in and you in real tiny detail, look at the image. Explore it, interrogate it, [00:24:00] enjoy it, maybe don't enjoy it. And you look at it in all of the different categories or different areas, criteria that you are, that the judges that the organization have set out. And then really, although it never gets listed twice, it should do, impact should also be listed as the last thing you look at as well. Because here's the process. You look at the image. There's an impact. You then in detail investigate, interrogate, enjoy the image. And then at the very end you ask yourself, what impact does it still have? And that's really important because the difference between those two gives you an idea of how much or how well the image is scoring in all of the other areas. If an image has massive impact when you, let's put 'em on the light box, and then you explore it and you [00:25:00] enjoy it, and you look at it under the light, and then at the end of it you're still feeling the same thing you did when it came on the light box, that's a pretty good indicator that all the criteria were met. If on the other hand, as you've explored the image, you've realized. There are errors in the production, or you can see Photoshopping problems or blown highlights or blocked blacks, or things are blurred where they should be sharp or you name it. It's these kinds of things. You know, the printing has got banding in the sky, which is a defect. You see dust spots from a camera sensor. These gradually whittle away your impact score because you go back to the end and you ask, what impact does the image now have? And I've heard judges use terms like at the end of the process, I thought that was gonna be amazing when it first arrived on the light box. I just loved the look of it from a distance, but when I stepped in, there were just too many things that [00:26:00] weren't quite right. And at the end of it, I just felt some would, sometimes I've heard the word disappointed you. So that's certainly how I feel. When an image has this beautiful impact and the hair stand up on the back of your neck and you just think, I cannot wait to step in and explore this image in detail. 'cause I tell you one thing, most authors don't own a light box. When you see a print on a beautiful light box, the, there's something about the quality. The way the print ESS is you actually get to see what a print should look like. So when you step in, you are really excited to see it. And if at the end of that process you're slightly disappointed because you found defects in the printing or problems with the focusing or Photoshop or whatever it is. You really are genuinely disappointed. So that's how you approach it. You approach it from this standpoint of a very emotional, a very emotional connection with the image to start with, and then you break [00:27:00] it down into its elements, whatever those elements are for the competition. And then at the end, you ask yourself really, does it still have the impact? I thought it would because if it does, well, in that case, it's done really, really well. one of the things that's really interesting about judging images is we, we draw out, we write out all of these criteria and. Every image has them really. I mean, well, I say that of course every image doesn't have them. If you are, if you're thinking about landscape or a picture of a shampoo bottle, it doesn't have posing, for instance, if that's one of your criteria. But typically there's a standard set of criteria and every image has them layout, color uh, photographic technique, et cetera. So if we look at let's say composition, let's talk about composition. Personally, I like to use the term layout rather than composition because it [00:28:00] feels a little bit more like a verb. You lay the image out, you have all of the bits, you lay them out. I like that because when we are teaching photography when we say to someone, right, what are all of the bits that you have in front of you? How are you gonna lay them out? It feels a lot more, to me, at least more logical than saying, how are you gonna compose the image? Because it allows. I think it allows the photographer to think in terms of each individual component rather than just the whole frame. So we are looking for how the image is constructed. Remember that every photographer really should think about an image. As telling a story, what's the story that you want somebody else? Somebody that you've never met. In this case a judge, but it could be a client or it could just be somebody where your work is being exhibited on a wall. What do you want them to look at? What do you want them to see? Where do you want that eye to go? And there are lots of tricks to [00:29:00] this, and one of them is layout or composition. So we've got through the initial impact, boom. And the excitement. And then you start to think, is the image balanced? I like to think of an image having a center of gravity. Some photographers will use center of interest, which is a slightly different thing, but I think an image has a center of gravity. The component parts of the image create balance. So you can have things right down in the edges of the frame, but you need something to balance it like a seesaw. You can't just. Throw in, throw parts of the puzzle around the frame. So you are looking for where do they land? And of course, as photographers, we talk about thirds, golden ratios, golden spirals, all of these terms. But what we are really looking for is does the image have a natural flow? Does it feel like everything's where it should be? Does your eye go to the bit that the author probably wanted you to look at? Have they been effective in their [00:30:00] storytelling? And by storytelling, I don't necessarily mean storytelling as in photojournalism or narrative rich photography. What I mean is what did they want you to see, and then did you go and see it? Separation? Is the background blurred? And let's say the, the subject is sharp. That's a typical device for making sure you look at the subject. Is the color of the background muted in a way that draws your attention? Again to whatever it is in the foreground. So layouts one of those tools. So we work our way around it and try and figure out does the positioning of all of the elements of the image does their positioning add or distract from the story? We think that author was trying to tell. Let's remember that it's not the judge's job to understand the story. It's the author's job to tell the story in a way that the judges can get it. Too often, you know, when I, when I've judged [00:31:00] a competition, someone will come and find me afterwards and say, did you understand what that was about? I was trying to say this, and it's like, well, I didn't see that, but that's not my fault. You know, it's, it's down to you to lead me pictorially to. Whatever it is you're trying to show. Same with all judges, all viewers, clients. It doesn't really matter. It's the author's job, not the judges. So at the end of that, you then move on to whatever's the next criteria. So you know, you assess these things bit by bit, and by the way, every judge will do it in a slightly different order. There'll be written down in an order. But each judge would approach it in a different manner. For me, typically it's about emotional connection more than anything else, it's about the emotion. I love that genuine, authentic connection of a person in the image. To me, the viewer. I will always go there if, if it's a portrait or a wedding or fashion image, if there's a person in it or a dog, I suppose, [00:32:00] then I will look for that authenticity, that, that visceral, it feels like they're looking at me or I'm having a dialogue with them. That's my particular hot button, but every judge has their room and that's how you approach it. So when it comes to a photograph in the end, you don't really have anything other than light when you think about it, right? That's, you pick up a camera, it's got a sensor, it's got film, it's got a lens on the front, and a shutter stopping light coming, or it goes through the lens, but the, the shutter stops it hitting a sensor. And at some point you commit light to be recorded. And it's the light that describes the image. There's nothing else. It's not something you can touch or hear, it's just light. And of course light is everything. I think, I think the term pho photography or photograph is a mix of a couple of words, and it's a relatively recent idea. I think [00:33:00] it was Victorian and it's, isn't it light and art photographic or photograph, um. So that's what it is. It's capturing light and creating a reaction from it. So the quality of light is possibly the most important thing. There is too much of it, and you're gonna have blown highlights, nasty white patches on your prints, too little of it. You're gonna have no detail in the shadows and a lot of noise or grain, whether it's film or whether it's off your sensor. And then there's the shape of the light. The color of the light, and it doesn't really matter whether it's portrait, wedding, landscape, product, avant garde, it's light that defines things. It's light that can break an image. So with portraiture, for instance, we tend to talk about. Sculpting or dimensionality of light. We tend to talk about the shape of the subject. We talk about flattering light. We talk about hard and soft light, and all of these things [00:34:00] mean something. This isn't the podcast to talk about those in detail, but that's what we're looking for. We are looking for has the light created a sense of shape, a sense of wonder, a sense of narrative. Does the lighting draw your eye towards the subject? And when you get to the subject, is it clear that the lighting is effective and by effective, usually as a portrait photographer anyway. I mean flattering. But you might be doing something with light that's counterintuitive, that's making the subject not flattered. That's maybe it's for a thriller style thing, or maybe it's dark and moody. Harsh, as long as in tune with the story as we are seeing it, then the lighting is assessed in that vein. So we've seen some incredible beauty shots over the past couple of days where the lighting sculpted the face. It had damaged ality, but it was soft. There were no hard shadows, there were no [00:35:00] blown highlights. The skin, it was clear that the texture of the skin, the light, it caught the texture. So we knew exactly what that would be. It had. Captured the shape. So the way the gens or shadows ripple around a body or a face tell you its shape. They haven't destroyed the shape. It's it's catch shape, but it hasn't unnecessarily sculpted scars or birthmarks or spots, you know? And that's how lighting works. So you look for this quality, you look for control, you look for the author, knowing what they're doing. With landscapes, typically it's, it is very rare, in my opinion, for a landscape. To get a good score if it isn't shot at one end of the day or the other. Why? Well, typically, at those points of the day, the light from the sun is almost horizontal. It rakes across the frame, and you get a certain quality to the way the shadows are thrown. The way the [00:36:00] light, sculpts hills, buildings, clouds, leaves, trees, the way it skips off water, whether it's at the beginning of the day or the end of the day. It's quite unusual though we do see them for an amazing photograph of escape to be taken at midday. But you can see how it could be if you have the sun directly overhead, because that has a quality all of its own. And you know, if when an author has gone to the effort of being in the right place to shoot vertical shadows with a direct overhead son, well maybe that's so deliberate that the, the judges will completely appreciate that and understand the story. So it's looking for these things and working out. Has the lighting been effective in telling the story? We think the author was trying to tell? Lighting is at the heart of it. So when we've been through every criteria, whatever they are, lighting, composition, color, narrative, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, [00:37:00] we've assessed every image, hundreds of them. We've had challenges, we've had conversations. We have a big pile of prints that have made it over the line. To whatever is your particular association scoring, whether it's merit or bronze or whatever. The puzzle isn't quite complete at that stage because there is of course, a slight problem and that problem is time. So if you imagine judging a section of images might take a couple of hours to do 70 prints, 60, 70 prints might take longer than that. In fact, it might take the best part of an afternoon. During that time. There's every chance the scores will wander. And the most obvious time is if a category spans something like a lunch break. We try to make sure categories don't do that. We try to complete categories before going for a break. We always try to be continuous, but [00:38:00] you've still got fatigue. You've got the judges rotating. So all of these things are going on. It sometimes it depends what images come up in what order could conceivably affect the scoring. For instance there's an image that came up this year where I think probably I was the judge that felt the strongest about it. There was something about this particular image that needed talking about, and so when it came up and it was scores that I raised a challenge and my heart rate, the minute the print hit the stand, my heart rate climbed through the roof. It was. Something about it that just connected with me. And then when I explored the image on the lights, on the light box, to me, there was very little that was technically holding it back. There were a couple of bits, but nothing that I felt warranted a lower score. And so I raised a [00:39:00] challenge. I said my point, I went through it in detail. I asked the other judges to consider it. From my viewpoint, they gave their views as to why they hadn't. But each of them understood where I was coming from and unlike the challenge I talked about earlier where no one changed their mind on this one, they did on this one. They also saw things that I saw when we went through it. But at the end of the process, the image was got a higher score, which is great, but. I didn't feel that I could judge the next image fairly because whatever came in, my heart rate was still battering along after seeing this one particular image. And that happens sometimes. It's not common, but I felt I needed to step off the panel before the next image came up. Which I did in work, working with the chair and the team. I stepped off for a couple of prints before stepping back on [00:40:00] just to let my eye settle and let myself get back into the right zone. But during the day, the zone changes. The way you change your perception of the images, as the images come through is so imperceptible, imperceivable, imperceptible. One of those two words is so tiny that you don't notice if there's a slight drift. And so there's every opportunity for an image to score a couple of points lower or a couple of points higher than it possibly could have done. If it had been seen at another point in the day. Maybe it had been, maybe if the image was seen after a series of not so strong images, maybe it would get a higher score. Or of course, the other way round. Maybe after seeing a series of really, really powerful, impactful images that came up, maybe it scored be slightly diminished. Both of those can be true. And so it's really important that we redress that any possible imbalance and every competition I've ever done has a final round. And the [00:41:00] way this is done is that we take the highest scoring images, top five, top 10, depending on the competition, and we line them up. And all of the judges now, not just the judges who are the five on the panel, all seven judges. Get an opportunity to bring each image back onto a light box if they wish, if they haven't seen them already. Because remember, some of those images may not have been assessed by the, well. It cannot have been assessed by all seven of the judges, so there's always gonna be at least two judges who haven't seen that image or seeing it for the first time as a judge. So we bring them back, we look at them, and then we rank them using one of numerous voting mechanisms where we all vote on what we think are the best images and gradually whittle it down until we're left with a ranked order for that category. We have a winner, a second, a third, a fourth, sometimes all the way down to 10 in order, depending on the competition. And that's the fairest way of doing it, because it means, okay, during the judging, [00:42:00] that image got, I dunno, 87. But when we now baseline it against a couple of images that got 90 something, when we now look at it, we realize that that image probably should have got a 90 as well. We're not gonna rescore it, the score stands, but what we are gonna do is put it up into there and vote on it as to whether it actually, even though it got slightly lower, score, is the winning image for the category. And every competition does something similar just to redress any fluctuations to, to flatten out time. It takes time outta the equation because now for that category, all seven judges are judging the winner at the same time, and that's really important. We do that for all the categories, and then at the end of that process, we bring back all of the category winners and we vote on which one of those. Wins the competition. Now, not every competition has an overall winner, but for the one we've just done for the print masters, for the BIPP print masters, there is an overall winner. And so we set them all out [00:43:00] and we vote collectively as a winner on the winner. And then, oh, we rank them 1, 2, 3, 4, or whatever. Um, really we're only picking a winner, but we also have to have some safety nets because what happens if for instance. Somebody unearths a problem with an image. And this has happened, sadly, this has happened a couple of times in my career where a photographer has entered an image that's not compliant with the rules but hasn't declared it. And it's always heartbreaking when it does happen, but we have to have a backup. So we always rank one, two, and three. So that's some backups, and that's the process. That's how we finish everything off. We have finished, we've got all the categories judged, the category winners judged, and then the overall one, two, and three sorted as well. at the end of the process? I can't speak for every judge. I can speak for me, I feel, I think three things. Exhaustion. It's really hard to spend 48 hours or longer [00:44:00] assessing images one by one, by one by one, and making sure that you are present and paying attention to every detail of every image. And you're not doing an author or an image a disservice. You pay each image or you give each image, you pay each image the due attention it deserves. I feel exhilaration. There's something energizing about assessing images like this. I know it's hard to explain, but there's something in the process of being alongside some of the best photographers that you've ever met, some photographers that you admire more than any others, not just as photographers, but as human beings. The nicest people, the smartest people, the most experienced people, the most eloquent people. There's something in that. So there's this [00:45:00] exhilaration. You are exhausted, but there's an exhilaration to it. And then finally, and I don't know if every photographer feels this or every judge feels this, I do. Which is massively insecure, I think. Can't think of the right words for it. There must be one. But I come away, much like when you've been out on the beers and you worry about all the things you've said, it's the same process. There was that image I didn't give enough credit for. There was this image I was too generous on. There were the things I said in a challenge when it gets a little bit argumentative or challenging. 'cause the clues in the title, you know, maybe I pushed too hard, maybe I didn't push hard enough. There are images you've seen that you wished you'd taken and you feel like. I'm not good enough. There's an insecurity to it too, and those are the three things I think as you leave the room, it's truly [00:46:00] energizing. Paradoxically, it's truly exhausting, but it's also a little bit of a head mush in that you do tend to come, or I do tend to come away a little bit insecure about. All the things that have gone on over the two days prior, and I've done this a long time. I've been judging for, I dunno, 15, 16, 17 years. And I've got used to those feelings. I've got used to coming away worrying. I'm used to the sense of being an underachiever, I suppose, and it's a wonderful , set of emotions that I bring home. And every time I judge. I feel better for it. I feel more creative. I feel more driven. I feel more determined. I feel like my eyes have been opened to genres [00:47:00] of photography, for types of imagery, for styles of posing or studio work that I've never necessarily considered, and I absolutely adore it every single second. So at the end of that, I really hope I've described or created a picture of what it's like to be a judge for this one. I haven't tried to explain the things we saw that as photographers as authors, you should think about when you are entering. I'm gonna do that in a separate podcast. I've done so many of those, but this one was specifically like, what does it feel like to be a judge? Why do we do it? I mean, we do it for a million reasons. Mostly we do it because people helped us and it's our turn to help them. But every photographer has a different reason for doing it. It's the most joyful process. It's the most inspiring process and I hope you've got a little bit of that from the podcast. So [00:48:00] on that happy note, I'm gonna wrap up and I'm gonna go and finish my glass of whiskey which I'm quite excited about if I'm honest. 'cause I did, it's been sitting here beside me for an hour and I haven't drunk any of it. I do hope you're all doing well. I know winter is sort of clattering towards us and the evenings are getting darker, at least for my listeners in the north and the hemisphere. Don't forget. If you want more information on portrait photography or our workshops we've announced all of the upcoming dates or the next set of upcoming dates. Please head across to mastering portrait photography.com and go to the workshop section. I love our workshops and we've met so many. Just lovely people who've come to our studio. And we've loved being alongside them, talking with them, hopefully giving a bit of inspiration, certainly taking a little bit of inspiration, if I'm honest, because everyone turns up with ideas and conversations. Uh, we would love to see you there. The workshops are all are all there on the website and the workshop section. You can also, if you wish, buy a signed copy of the book from mastering portrait photography.com. Again, just go to the [00:49:00] shop and you'll see it there on the top. Amazon has them for sale too. It is great. Amazon typically sells them for less than we do, but we have a fixed price. We have to buy them from the wholesaler at a particular price, whereas Amazon can buy many, many more than we can, so they get a better deal if I'm honest. However, if you want my paw print in there, then you can order it from us and it's supports a photographer and it's really lovely to hear from you. When you do, uh, one thing, I'd love to ask anyone who has bought the updated edition of the book, if you are an Amazon customer. Please could you go on to amazon.com and leave us a review? It's really powerful when you do that, as long as it's a good review. If it's a rubbish review, just email me and tell me what I could have done differently, and I'll email you back and tell you, tell you why I didn't. But if it's a half decent review, a nice review. Please head over to Amazon. Look for mastering portrait photography, the new version of the book, and leave us a review. It's really important particularly in the first couple of [00:50:00] weeks that it's been on sale. Uh, it would be really, really helpful if you did that. And on that happy note, I wish you all well. I've grabbed my glass of whiskey and I'm gonna wrap up and whatever else you do. Until next time, be kind to yourself. Take care.   

College professors report less student participation in class, rooted in a fear of disagreement. A Marquette University program is trying to change that.

In this episode, Ismail and Sameer dive into emotional intelligence (EQ) from a realistic angle, exploring how EQ isn't always about positive outcomes. They discuss moving beyond "agree to disagree," the paradoxes of empathy, leading with people you don't get along with, and knowing when situations are irreparable. A candid conversation on using EQ for effectiveness, not just nicenessKey Takeaways:Intro and the pitfalls of "agree to disagree."Empathy paradoxes and true understanding.Professionalism in tough relationships.Recognizing irreparable situations and EQ's role in effectiveness.Feel free to send us an email at info@emotionalintelligents.com and share your thoughts or visit us at https://linktr.ee/emotionalintelligents Send us a text

If you've tuned in before, you remember Marlene's iconic episode, From Conflict to Courage, and if you haven't, you don't want to miss her latest episode! Join Katie and Marlene for a leadership conversation that will leave you with more clarity and action steps you can take to bring more accountability and personal responsibility to your individual life, team, and organization.  Marlene Chism works with organizations that want to build confident leaders, collaborative relationships, and accountable cultures. With a master's in HR development, 500,000+ learners in her LinkedIn courses, and over 25 years as a consultant and trainer, Marlene specializes in helping leaders stop avoiding difficult conversations and start leading with clarity. Books include Stop Workplace Drama, (Wiley 2011); No-Drama Leadership (Bibliomotion 2015); and Stop Drama in Your Healthcare Organization (Greenbranch 2018) and From Conflict to Courage: How to stop avoiding and start leading (Berrett Koelher 2022.) Three truths Marlene has learned and live by: 1. Conflict is not the problem: Mismanagement is. 2. Disagreement doesn't damage relationships: disrespect does. 3. Every big problem in an organization can be traced back to a conversation that should have happened but didn't.  Connect with Marlene https://marlenechism.com/

Today, we're continuing our How to Disagree series with an episode called How to Disagree On Gaza and Zohran Mamdani.A reminder: these episodes feature coaching sessions and real-life disagreements. Our goal is to equip everyone with the skills (and some inspiration) to more productively disagree.Please note: this session was recorded live, on Substack, this summer. And as you know, quite a lot has changed since then…But with the NYC mayoral election today, we thought this was the right time to share this conversation.In this episode, journalist, podcast host and author Anya Kamenetz meets with the New York Times best-selling conflict guru, Amanda Ripley. Anya was struggling with discussing not only the war in Gaza, but also how the war, and divergent information sources, were complicating discussions with a close friend over Zohran Mamdani's candidacy in the New York City mayor's race.The session features in-depth coaching from Amanda on the concepts of “looping” an opposing argument and identifying the “understory,” tools we can all use to keep our disagreements healthy. And if you're listening from NYC, perhaps they can specifically help in conversations unfolding in your own life.The Questions:How do we discuss politics with friends and family who are not only reading different news sources, but who have internalized beliefs different to our own?How do you listen tactically and how can you encourage those in your life to do the same?How can you identify the understory for yourself and your counterpart in a disagreement?The GuestsAnya Kamenetz is a journalist and the author of The Gold Hour on Substack. Her work primarily focuses on the intersection of children, well-being, education, and climate change. She covered education for many years, including for NPR, where she co-created the podcast Life Kit: Parenting. Her last book was The Stolen Year: How Covid Changed Children's Lives, And Where We Go Now.Amanda Ripley is a New York Times bestselling author, a Washington Post contributing columnist, and the co-founder of Good Conflict, a media and training company that helps people reimagine conflict. She has written three award-winning, nonfiction books about three very different subjects: High Conflict, The Smartest Kids in the World, and The Unthinkable Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

President Cyril Ramaphosa has convened a closed-door meeting with leaders of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in Krugersdorp, West of Johannesburg. The talks aim to resolve recent disagreements and accusations within the coalition. The GNU Clearing House, led by Deputy President Paul Mashatile, was established earlier this year to iron out policy differences among the 10 parties. Elvis Presslin spoke to DA MP and national spokesperson, Karabo Khakhau

Today, we're doing the second episode in our new series: How to Disagree.A reminder: these episodes feature coaching sessions and real-life disagreements. Our goal is to equip everyone with the skills (and some inspiration) to more productively disagree. On to the episode…You know that feeling when you walk into a room and realize someone's talking about you? Imagine that on steroids: you tune into a Substack Live to learn your friend is talking about your disagreement in front of an audience! That's exactly the set up for today's episode, a follow-up to How to Disagree about Gender with a Close Friend (Part I). In Part II, we get to hear from Larissa Phillips' friend, “Jane,” and see them bring Bob Bordone's coaching to life as they navigate their disagreement and a new chapter in their friendship.The Questions:Is it possible to remain close friends after growing apart ideologically?How can you remain curious when you strongly disagree?Are there some topics we should avoid entirely as friends? Is gender one of them? And how did it get this way?The GuestsLarissa Phillips is a columnist for The Free Press whose work focuses on finding community and fostering relationships as a Democrat living in the rural Hudson Valley. She is also the Director and Founder of the Volunteer Literacy Project, teaching basic literacy to adults. Christina Thyssen is a writer, story coach, and professor of writing and literature at the University at Albany. She is the co-founder of Hudson Valley Story Workshops and runs a story slam in Catskill, NY. Christina also teaches writing and storytelling to prisoners. A special thank you to Larissa and Christina for going on this journey with us. It took a tremendous amount of courage. And if you haven't already, check out Larissa's excellent article on her experience with us in The Free Press. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

On today's menu we're doing something new — The ETR 3!Our Favorite top 3 Vegas spots across 20+ categories … from brunches and burgers to power lunches and pastries. Disagreements? Oh, there are plenty. Abstentions? Definitely. Trash talk? Always.Categories include: ☕ Coffee Shops |

This is our weekly LIVE Q&A. To send us a question, visit http://www.KeithFoskey.com Questions and TimestampsCan Christians Do Halloween? 15:57 
Why Church Discipline Feels Controversial 27:15
Youth Group “Merch” 31:47
Membership When You Work Nights/Weekends 42:15
Disagreement, Tone, and Calling to Teach 49:10
Sex During Menstruation 58:45
Shopping Ethically in a Fallen World 1:11:59
Anger with God (Theodicy) 1:22:38
Divine Election and Human Guilt (Theodicy) 1:22:38
Antichrist & Tribulation in Amillennialism 1:36:55
Dating Revelation & Amill/Postmill Frameworks 1:40:45
Kingdom Through Covenant Question 1:42:25
2 Thess 3 — Who Should Not Eat? 1:43:44
Sanctification vs. Glorification 1:48:30
Progressive Sanctification & “Quitting” a Particular Sin 1:52:26 
Leading Through Infertility 1:57:27
Common Grace and Annihiliationism 2:01:30
Justin Peters on Roman Catholicism 2:06:45
Thoughts on Michael Heiser's Theology 2:09:17
John's & Jesus' Baptisms—What's the Difference? 2:12:30
Federal Vision, Sabbath “Fulfillment,” and Doug Wilson 2:16:30
Were Ruckman's Teachings Heresy? 2:22:40
Ordination Amid Doctrinal Differences 2:26:30
Thoughts on Paul Washer 2:30:50Support the Show: http://www.buymeacoffee.com/Yourcalvinisthttps://www.TinyBibles.comYou can get the smallest Bible available on the market, which can be used for all kinds of purposes, by visiting TinyBibles.com and when you buy, use the coupon code KEITH for a discount.Love Coffee? Want the Best? Get a free bag of Squirrelly Joe's Coffee by clicking on this link: https://www.Squirrellyjoes.com/yourcalvinistor use coupon code "Keith" for 20% off anything in the storeDominion Wealth Strategies Visit them at https://www.dominionwealthstrategists.comhttp://www.Reformed.Moneyand let them know we sent you! https://www.HighCallingFitness.comHealth, training, and nutrition coaching all delivered to you online by confessionally reformed bodybuilders and strength athletes.Visit us at https://www.KeithFoskey.comIf you need a great website, check out https://www.fellowshipstudios.com

Be sure to visit https://dwtbpodcast.com for more information and add your name to start receiving their newsletter. If you'd like to support this show, rate, subscribe and leave a review on your podcast app.Books/Resources Mentioned:Scar Tissue ,by Melissa DlugoleckiConnect with AJ & Mike:AJ Harper, website Write A Must-Read  Free resourcesAJ's Socials:FacebookLinkedInMike Michalowicz, websiteAll books Mike's Socials: IGFBLinkedIn

Today, we're introducing the first episode in a new series: How to Disagree. As we expand our work to model and enable productive disagreement across lines of difference, we are trying something new with “How To Disagree.” Instead of bringing together experts to have a productive disagreement on social or political issues, we're delving into interpersonal disagreements.Episodes will feature coaching sessions with an individual struggling with a real-life disagreement (with a friend, family member or colleague) working with a world-class conflict resolution expert. Through these sessions, our guests will learn how to approach their particular rift, as well as more general skills and tools on how to more productively disagree. The first in this series is How to Disagree About Gender with a Close Friend, featuring Larissa Phillips. We actually recorded this session with Larissa live on Substack, and are very excited to share a produced version with you. Also, check out Larissa's excellent article on her experience with us in The Free Press.The Questions:How do we discuss politics with our friends when we don't see eye to eye?How do we engage one another without trying to persuade?How do we prepare for disagreements on hot button topics like gender?The GuestsLarissa Phillips is a columnist for The Free Press whose work focuses on finding community and fostering relationships as a Democrat living in the rural Hudson Valley. She is also the Director and Founder of the Volunteer Literacy Project, teaching basic literacy to adults. Bob Bordone is a senior fellow at Harvard Law School who has spent the last 25 years teaching negotiation and conflict resolution. He teaches negotiation to individuals and teams with a particular interest in addressing the United States' polarized climate. Bob recently wrote a book with a neuroscientist called Conflict Resilience: Negotiating Disagreement Without Giving Up or Giving In. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

A 21-year-old woman, identified as Maafua, has allegedly stabbed her 29-year-old husband, Kofi, during a heated argument over food at Mamanso near New Abirem in the Birim North District of the Eastern Region A 21-year-old woman, identified as Maafua, has allegedly stabbed her 29-year-old husband, Kofi, during a heated argument over food at Mamanso near New Abirem in the Birim North District of the Eastern Region

Conflict is normal — even in the healthiest female friendships. But how you handle it can determine whether your bond deepens or slowly fades away. In this episode of The Friendship Tour, Cecelia sits down with Associate Marriage and Family Therapist, Ashley Cook, to discuss conflict — why it happens, why we avoid it, and how to navigate it with grace. Ashley walks through the five styles of conflict resolution — avoidance, defeating, compromise, accommodating, and collaboration — and shares why collaboration is often the healthiest approach, though each style has its place. Together, they explore:

What can we do to avoid family disagreements? Jacob's and Laban's conflict over flocks, deceit, and even stolen idols pushed them to the edge—but God stepped in to bring resolution.

172

In a world divided by opinions, Paul reminds us in Romans 14 that the church was never meant to be uniform, but unified. In this week's message, Pastor Jamie Grisham shares a powerful word on “Unity Without Uniformity.” From the early church in Rome to our world today, we're reminded that:• Differences aren't defects, they're design.• Disagreement doesn't have to mean division.• Convictions are personal, not weapons.God intentionally built His Church with different backgrounds, strengths, and perspectives to reveal His fullness. When love opens the door, the lost walk in—and unity births revival. Key Takeaways:• Don't judge where someone has freedom.• Don't flaunt freedom where someone has conviction.• Choose people over preference.• Pursue peace and build each other up.Romans 14:19 — “Let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another.”Watch now and discover how to live in unity, walk in grace, and reflect the love of Christ in every difference.FOLLOW US!WEBSITE: https://www.compassiondickson.church/FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/compassiondicksonINSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/compassionchurchdickson?igsh=eXp3Mm9ubG81aTQx&utm_source=qrSunday Extended Podcast: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRTsMFJ4TR5xa0PahwBjfzWK772IOi9G8&si=lsIu5iqaQwl79Jwj

What happens when family disagreements spiral into conflict? Jacob and Laban's clashing over flocks and wages shows how quickly strife can divide even close relatives. Join Jim Scudder on InGrace for part one of How to Solve Family Disagreements, and discover God's wisdom for healing broken relationships.

Send us a textWe sit with author and podcaster Teri M. Brown to explore how fiction builds empathy, why Ukraine's past matters to the present, and how to argue without hate. We challenge media echo chambers, defend real free speech, and make the case for reading widely as an antidote to doomscrolling.• the meaning behind Sunflowers Beneath the Snow• 2014 as the overlooked precursor to 2022• focusing on people over punditry• correcting errors and valuing accuracy• free speech versus threats and incitement• media bias in a 24-hour news cycle• reading fiction to expand empathy• labels versus listening and real debate• civics and argument skills in schools• independent thinking and mixed positions• compromise as a civic habit, not a weaknessGive a like, share, subscribe. If you feel generous, donate $3 a month. I'll start having exclusive episodes, you have your own emotes, you get a shout outFollow Teri M BrownHer websitehttps://www.terimbrown.com/Her Promoted Bookhttps://www.terimbrown.com/10-little-rules-dba.htmlYouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaQ6p-EOSGd1tEeWijQSl9ATwitterhttps://www.facebook.com/TeriMBrownAuthorPinteresthttps://www.pinterest.com/terimbrownauthor/Instagramhttps://www.instagram.com/terimbrown_authorLinkedinhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/TeriMBrown/TikTokhttps://www.tiktok.com/@terimbrown_authorEpisode 288https://www.buzzsprout.com/2308824/episodes/17492234-288-the-tandem-journey-finding-adventure-beyond-your-box-with-teri-m-brownGround Newshttps://ground.news/Support the showFollow your host atYouTube and Rumble for video contenthttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUxk1oJBVw-IAZTqChH70aghttps://rumble.com/c/c-4236474Facebook to receive updateshttps://www.facebook.com/EliasEllusion/ LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/eliasmarty/ Some free goodies Free website to help you and me https://thefreewebsiteguys.com/?js=15632463 New Paper https://thenewpaper.co/refer?r=srom1o9c4gl

Ever heard of 'Chatfishing’? Believe us, it's a thing, people, and may make you look at every message you receive in a whole new light. The trend is now to use ChatGPT for banter on dating apps and it’s leading to some awkward in-person dates. The bus tour your did through Europe in your twenties has now been replaced with sunrise yoga and morning run clubs. We discuss why Gen Z is too sensible for that kind of wild fun with a bunch of strangers. Do you treat your friends like family? And should you? There are pros and cons which we unpack. Plus, the 'cunty bob' is out, and long hair is officially back in as we enter the Rapunzel age. But is long hear now a flex or an act of personal rebellion? And all our best reccos including a must-listen podcast, a book Em wants you to read and a go-to 80’s beauty product that's back. Support independent women's media What To Listen To Next: Listen to our latest episode: What Did You Do Yesterday? Listen: "A Comedian Hurt My Feelings" Listen: Every Thought We Had About The Victoria Beckham Documentary Listen: The Victoria Beckham Documentary Is Hard To Watch Listen: The New High Status Boyfriend Listen: The Problem With Compliments Listen: The Couple Who Need To Stay Away From Each Other Listen: LITTLE TREAT: Holly & Jessie Spill The Tea On Writing A Book Connect your subscription to Apple Podcasts Discover more Mamamia Podcasts here including the very latest episode of Parenting Out Loud, the parenting podcast for people who don't listen to... parenting podcasts. Watch Mamamia Out Loud: Mamamia Out Loud on YouTube What to read: This is why we fight. 'My hair used to look thin and dry. Then I found this $19 Korean hair oil.' What actually works for hair loss for women? We asked an expert. 6 of the best hair growth serums that actually work. Women everywhere are now using this 'free therapist' and there's one big catch. The 28-year-old who has sex with her AI boyfriend. 'I'd resisted my Contiki guide all week. Then he invited me to his hotel room.' THE END BITS: Check out our merch at MamamiaOutLoud.com Mamamia studios are styled with furniture from Fenton and Fenton GET IN TOUCH: Feedback? We’re listening. Send us an email at outloud@mamamia.com.au Share your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice message. Join our Facebook group Mamamia Outlouders to talk about the show. Follow us on Instagram @mamamiaoutloud and on Tiktok @mamamiaoutloud CREDITS: Hosts: Jessie Stephens, Holly Wainwright & Emily Vernem. Group Executive Producer: Ruth Devine Executive Producer: Sasha Tannock Audio Producer: Leah Porges Video Producer: Josh Green Junior Content Producers: Coco & Tessa Mamamia acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the Land we have recorded this podcast on, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present, and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures. Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is God in some way limited? Is all matter conscious in some way? How does LDS theology align with the latest philosophy and science? What does a renowned Philosopher like Philip Goff think about these sorts of questions. Join us for an eye opening conversation. https://philipgoffphilosophy.com/ Our LinksWebsite: http://thoughtfulfaith.orgInstagram:   / thoughtful.faith  TikTok:   / thoughtful.faith  Podcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1478749DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this video are entirely the opinion of the creator and do not necessarily reflect any officially endorsed positions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints or channel sponsors.

We reacted to the best (and worst!) advice you shared about navigating your twenties. From finding faith-filled mentors to practical hacks like travel credit cards, we covered it all—yes, even a slightly controversial convo about giving up a dog. We laughed, we disagreed, and we got real about everything from building community to trusting God's voice in seasons of uncertainty. Whether we're looking back on our twenties or walking through them now, this episode reminded us how important it is to stay rooted in Jesus, go all in with our people, and keep saying yes to what He's doing. In This Episode [00:00] Real Talk on Twenties: Chaos, Faith, and... Dog Drama?[06:00] Friendship, Mentors & Finding Women Who Sparkle for Jesus[10:30] Creating Community & Trusting God with the Next Right Thing[14:30] Travel Hacks, Gut Checks & Discernment vs. Desire[18:30] When You Feel Stuck: Pivoting, Surrendering, and Letting God Lead[24:00] Altar Moments, Obedience, and God's Faithfulness in the Unknown Thanks to Our Sponsors Brooklyn Bedding: Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠brooklynbedding.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and use our promo code FTG at checkout to get 30% off site wide. This offer is not available anywhere else. NIV Application Study Bible - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Grab your copy today!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Winshape: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Learn more or submit your application today⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! If you'd like to partner with For The Girl as a sponsor, fill out our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Advertise With Us⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ form! Follow us!

Disagreements are a part of life. But too often in today's climate, we see arguments escalate with no real effort put into resolving the conflict and preserving the relationship. What guidance does the Bible give us on conflict resolution?

Disagreements are a part of life. But too often in today's climate, we see arguments escalate with no real effort put into resolving the conflict and preserving the relationship. What guidance does the Bible give us on conflict resolution?

The 5 D's of business that you need to be aware of and protect yourself from. A few podcasts ago, Justin Maxwell gave us the ways to identify and predictably reduce taxes. He mentioned the 5 D's and we didn't have time to cover them. This episode covers the 5 D's: Death, Divorce, Disability, Disruption, and Disagreements. Free P&L Statement and Balance Sheet https://tinyurl.com/2rjd6wxu Ruth King Twitter - @RuthKing LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/ruthking1/   Podcast Produced by Nick Uttam https://www.linkedin.com/in/nick-uttam-4b33a1147

DISAGREEMENT VERSUS DIVISION

As the start of the Fantasy Basketball draws nearer, Mike "The Man" Gallagher takes on Drew "The Machine" Dinkmeyer in ETR's yearly fiercely contested Man vs. Machine battle to debate the biggest fantasy basketball disagreements in their pre-season rankings. 

In this week's episode, Laura and Nico are joined by their good friend Derek Matthews for an honest conversation about hurt congregations, finding comfort and peace while navigating tense cultural moments, and learning to listen to the one voice that truly matters, the Lord's, amid all the other loud voices of the world. Though our nation and churches are facing division, we can find hope in Ephesians 2:11–13, which reminds us that Jesus has already torn down the dividing wall between us. No matter what you face, remember your situation is not your savior. Jesus is. To join our monthly partnership team & help make episodes like this possible, go to CallHerHoly.com/donate. We love you holy babes,  Laura & Nico   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hour 3 for 10/8/25 Drew and attorney Phyllis Sower cover if one should give kids an inheritance (1:00), the struggle of earning money (12:36), and one inheritance cautionary tale (17:43). Then, former congressman Jeff Fortenberry covers the Jay Jones Scandal and political disagreement (27:25) and knowing your media (42:24). Link: https://catholicbar.org/

In this Episode: This podcast episode of the "Achieve Results Now podcast" focuses on the importance of overcoming your ego to find clarity and achieve better life results. Hosts Mark Cardone and Theron Feidt argue that people's need to be "right" often prevents them from discovering the truth and improving. Key Theme: Truth Over Ego The hosts share the central quote for the episode: "Don't let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." They explain that the need to be right comes from ego, a subconscious self-protection mechanism that makes people think being wrong means they are a "bad person." The podcast then outlines a three-step guide to help listeners move past their ego and embrace a growth mindset. 3-Step Guide to Overcoming Ego 1. Practice the "I Could Be Wrong" Mindset Acknowledge the Possibility: Internalize the idea that you might be incorrect, rather than using the phrase as a disclaimer before arguing your point. Shift Your Goal from Winning to Learning: Instead of approaching discussions with the goal to dominate or win the argument, approach them with the goal to learn new information. This change in mindset lowers your defenses and opens you up to growth. The hosts emphasize that it takes courage to admit, "I don't know the answer to that." 2. Focus on Understanding, Not Just Arguing Listen Actively: Pay attention to what the other person is saying with the intent to understand, not just to prepare your reply. Ask Clarifying Questions: Use open-ended questions like, "Can you help me understand that?" or "Tell me more about that?" to dig deeper into the issue. Summarize/Restate Their Points: Verbalize your understanding of their points or challenges. This helps them feel heard and allows them to correct you, leading to mutual clarity and better relationships. This concept is likened to the medical idea of being "prescriptive" instead of just handing someone your "glasses." 3. See Mistakes and Disagreements as Opportunities Change "Problems" to "Opportunities" or "Challenges": This slight change in language lowers the temperature of the situation and reflects the truth that challenges are a chance to learn and get better. Embrace Humility (and being wrong as a win): You learn far more from your mistakes than your successes. Being a "lifelong learner" requires being comfortable with being wrong. Model the Behavior: Show others it's okay to be wrong. When you are corrected, thank the person for helping you learn and grow. This is especially important for parents to do with their children to build trust. The hosts conclude by encouraging listeners to apply these steps to have more productive conversations and achieve better results in all areas of life, not just money or career. ARN Suggested Reading: Blessings In the Bullshit: A Guided Journal for Finding the BEST In Every Day – by Mark Cardone & Theron Feidt https://www.amazon.com/Blessings-Bullshit-Guided-Journal-Finding/dp/B09FP35ZXX/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=blessings+in+the+bullshit&qid=1632233840&sr=8-1 Full List of Recommended Books: https://www.achieveresultsnow.com/readers-are-leaders Questions? 1.   Do you have a question you want answered in a future podcast? 2.   Go to www.AchieveResultsNow.com to submit. Connect with Us: Get access to some of the great resources that we use at: www.AchieveResultsNow.com/success-store www.AchieveResultsNow.com www.facebook.com/achieveresultsnow www.twitter.com/nowachieve Thank you for listening to the Achieve Results NOW! Podcast.  The podcast that gives you immediate actions you can take to start seeing life shifting results NOW!

First off, if you regret a big decision in life that you can't change, please know that you are not alone. You might never be able to change the decision that you regret, but you can change how that regretful decision will impact your future. Text me at 972-426-2640 so we can stay connected!Support me on Patreon!Twitter: @elliottspeaksInstagram: @elliottspeaks

Recently, First Lady Melania Trump convened the second White House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in Education. There is simultaneously an incredible amount of excitement around AI in schools and just beneath it, a sort of terror about its potential impacts and all we do not know. We wanted to take a macro approach and examine the current state of AI in education, its promise, the fears, and what the near future may look like.The Questions:Is AI in the classroom a force for good?Can we still produce critical thinkers in an AI-driven classroom?Will AI just be another ed tech flash in the pan?To have this conversation, we brought together two leading eduction experts with nuanced, divergent views on the roles technology, and AI specifically, should play for teachers and students.Eric Westendorf is a former principal who founded the ed tech company LearnZillion, and now is the co-CEO of Coursemojo, which is using AI to enhance in-class learning by supporting teachers in providing the right support for every student.Justin Reich is an Associate Professor in Comparative Media Studies and Director at MIT Teaching Systems Lab, and is the author of a new book, Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can't Transform Education.Two notes on terms. Our guests mention NAEP: the National Assessment of Education Progress. There's also discussion of the Alpha School: a network of US private schools that combines AI-driven adaptive software for core academics with in-person adult “Guides” who act as mentors. It operates in Texas, Florida, Arizona, and California. According to Alpha School, their combination of technology and mastery based learning allows children learn core subjects in just two hours daily. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

This week on Taking The Myth, Stephen Knight (@GSpellchecker) and Iram Ramzan (@Iram_Ramzan) discuss all the big topics. 0:00 Intro 0:29 Iram's travels to Israel 6:08 Iram's reporting on the Druze 13:13 The assignation of American conservative Charlie Kirk 25:15 The Jimmy Kimmel suspension 28:24 What do we know about Tyler Robinson? 31:18 Islamic knife attacker spared jail. 41:39 Tommy Robinson's ‘Unite the Kingdom' march. 49:33 The bizarre claims about Sadiq Khan 59:05 Reform conference, Lucy Connolly and other cranks. 01:07:45 Disagreement on Israel and claims of “genocide”. 01:18:55 The UK recognising a Palestinian state Stephen Knight's Substack: www.sknight.substack.com Iram Ramzan's Substack: https://iramramzan.substack.com/ Support the podcast at www.patreon.com/gspellchecker Also available on iTunes, Stitcher, YouTube & Spotify.

Recorded by María Auxiliadora Álvarez for Poem-a-Day, a series produced by the Academy of American Poets. Published on September 29, 2025. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.poets.org⁠

Hey fellow loneliness destroyer, text me!Disagreements don't have to end friendships. In this video, Zoe shares practical tools for how to disagree with friends without losing them. You'll learn how to focus on the person, not the position, listen longer than you talk, and use communication strategies that lower the temperature instead of blowing things up.Friendships are worth protecting, even in a divided world. If you've ever wondered, “Will this be what ends it?” this episode will show you how to navigate conflict, hold tension with humility, and build the kind of deep, meaningful friendships that can survive differences.The Beyond Small Talk Cohort is coming. Here's where to learn what it's about and join the waitlist!Support the showRemember, you're worth having and building rich friendships! The connection you've been looking for is on the way, and it all starts by being Accidentally Intentional.Are you ready to tackle loneliness once and for all? Download the FREE '5 Steps To Build RICH Friendships' E-Book!Want to work with Zoe 1-on-1 for personalized friendship coaching for that extra push and source of accountability? Zoe has limited slots available on a rolling basis, so please email contact@accidentallyintentionalpod.com (subject line: COACH ME) and the team will be in touch with next steps! Subscribe to the Accidentally Intentional YouTube channel!

Disagreements are inevitable—whether in families, friendships, or even the church. As our daily prayer and devotional, taken from Paul's words in 1 Corinthians, reminds us, while differences of opinion will always exist, division doesn’t have to. Because we are united in Christ, we have the power to pursue unity, even in the midst of disagreement. Unity is not about ignoring conflict or pretending everyone thinks the same. Instead, it’s about choosing grace over pride, peace over division, and Christ’s love over personal preference. The church in Corinth struggled with this, and so do we today. Yet Paul’s reminder is clear: our shared identity in Christ outweighs anything that could divide us. Today's Bible Reading: "I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought." – 1 Corinthians 1:10 (NIV) Key Takeaways Unity in the church begins with personal holiness—reflecting Christ in our own lives. Disagreement is not the same as division; we can disagree and still walk in unity. Paul’s call to unity isn’t just for the early church—it’s God’s will for believers today. When tempted to let differences divide, we must remember that we are one family in Christ. Let’s Pray Together Heavenly Father, thank You for the gift of Your Word. Help us to pursue unity in our relationships and within the church. When disagreements arise, give us wisdom to respond with grace and humility. Remind us that we are one family, united in Christ, and called to reflect His love to the world. In Jesus’ name, Amen. Calls to Action Ask God to show you one way you can promote unity in your church this week. When conflict arises, pause and pray before responding. Share this devotion with someone who needs encouragement in a season of division. Related Resources What Does It Mean to Live in Unity with One Another? – Crosswalk.com 7 Bible Verses about Unity – BibleStudyTools.com Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

In this episode of Pastors' Wives Tell All, the hosts dive into a raw and timely conversation about the weight pastors and ministry leaders carry in seasons of tragedy, grief, and political tension. They reflect on the overwhelming expectations placed on church leaders, the dangers of letting politics overshadow the gospel, and the deep need for prayer and community support. This is not a political episode—it's a call to remember that Jesus, not an agenda, is our message.Together, they explore how to handle disagreements with love, why the Church must prioritize the Bible over political opinions, and how fear can drive harmful actions when faith should lead us. Through honest dialogue, the hosts remind us to stay grounded in what God has called each of us to do—because people matter more than politics.Key Takeaways:This isn't about politics—it's about Jesus.Pastors face heavy, often unrealistic expectations.Grief and tragedy impact faith communities deeply.The Church must preach the gospel, not political agendas.Disagreements should be navigated with love and respect.Prayer is vital for our nation, our churches, and our communities.No matter someone's beliefs, we should never rejoice in death.Fear often fuels negative actions—faith must guide us instead.God calls us to obedience, not to living under others' expectations.Get all the info about our next pastors' wives retreat and apply here:https://www.pastorswivestellall.com/attendaretreatTo purchase the BOOK, head here: ⁠https://pastorswivestellall.com/book⁠⁠To shop our MERCH, head here: ⁠https://pastorswivestellall.com/shop⁠⁠Want to support the Pastors' Wives Tell All podcast ministry? Become a patron: ⁠https://www.patreon.com/pastorswivestellall ⁠⁠SUBSCRIBE: ⁠Sign up⁠ for our email list and receive updates on new episodes, free gifts, and all the fun! Email sign up ⁠⁠HERE⁠⁠!CONTACT US: ⁠hello@pastorswivestellall.com⁠⁠FOLLOW US:Website: ⁠⁠pastorswivestellall.com⁠⁠Instagram: ⁠⁠@pastorswivestellall⁠⁠Facebook: ⁠⁠@pastorswivestellall⁠⁠JESSICA:Instagram: ⁠⁠@jessica_taylor_83⁠⁠, ⁠⁠@come_away_missions⁠⁠, ⁠⁠@do_good_project__⁠⁠⁠Facebook: ⁠⁠Come Away Missions⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Do Good Project⁠⁠Websites: ⁠⁠Do Good Project⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Come Away Missions⁠⁠JENNA:Instagram: ⁠⁠@jennaallen⁠⁠, ⁠⁠@jennaallendesign⁠⁠Facebook: ⁠⁠@JennaAllenDesign⁠⁠Website: ⁠⁠Jenna Allen Design⁠⁠STEPHANIE:Instagram: ⁠⁠@msstephaniegilbert⁠⁠Facebook: ⁠⁠I Literally LOL⁠⁠Website: ⁠⁠Stephanie Gilbert⁠

On a new edition of Weekend Conversations on ⁠⁠the Elevate Podcast⁠⁠, host Robert Glazer and producer Mick Sloan discuss the reason assassination of Charlie Kirk, the reactions across the spectrum to that event, and what it all says about the state of discourse, debate, and political violence in United States. Robert and Mick dig into how online extremity tragically bleeds into real world violence, and what leaders (especially parents), can do to create a more respectful, civil world. Thank you to the sponsors of The Elevate Podcast Shopify: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠shopify.com/elevate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Indeed: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠indeed.com/elevate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Headway: ⁠⁠⁠makeheadway.com/elevate⁠⁠⁠ (Promo Code: Elevate) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Radicalization in Real Time — From Campus Disagreement to Political Assassination This isn't a cold, calculated political hit. According to retired FBI agent Jennifer Coffindaffer, what happened to Charlie Kirk may be far more frightening — and far more common. In this explosive third segment, Tony and Jennifer zoom out to explore the larger behavioral and cultural forces at play. Why did a 22-year-old with no record, no extremist ties, and no formal manifesto decide to take a sniper shot at a nationally known public figure? And why did it all come together in just over a week? The answer, it seems, has less to do with ideology and more to do with ego, entitlement, and broken impulse control. The two examine whether this killing marks a turning point in how political violence erupts — not through group indoctrination, but through social isolation and emotional instability. Tyler Robinson wasn't radicalized in a chatroom over years. He saw a flyer, got angry, and decided to act. Jennifer lays out the FBI's concern about “short-fuse actors” — lone wolves who act with little planning and massive damage. The discussion gets raw and real, covering everything from online behavior patterns to how society and law enforcement misread red flags until it's too late. If you're worried about where our discourse is heading, this segment is essential viewing. Because this isn't just about one man and one bullet — it's about the spark that lit it.

Radicalization in Real Time — From Campus Disagreement to Political Assassination This isn't a cold, calculated political hit. According to retired FBI agent Jennifer Coffindaffer, what happened to Charlie Kirk may be far more frightening — and far more common. In this explosive third segment, Tony and Jennifer zoom out to explore the larger behavioral and cultural forces at play. Why did a 22-year-old with no record, no extremist ties, and no formal manifesto decide to take a sniper shot at a nationally known public figure? And why did it all come together in just over a week? The answer, it seems, has less to do with ideology and more to do with ego, entitlement, and broken impulse control. The two examine whether this killing marks a turning point in how political violence erupts — not through group indoctrination, but through social isolation and emotional instability. Tyler Robinson wasn't radicalized in a chatroom over years. He saw a flyer, got angry, and decided to act. Jennifer lays out the FBI's concern about “short-fuse actors” — lone wolves who act with little planning and massive damage. The discussion gets raw and real, covering everything from online behavior patterns to how society and law enforcement misread red flags until it's too late. If you're worried about where our discourse is heading, this segment is essential viewing. Because this isn't just about one man and one bullet — it's about the spark that lit it.

Get Dr. Brian Keating's NEW Book for Only 0.99! This week only: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FN8DH6SX?ref_=pe_93986420_775043100 For over a century, cosmologists have believed that the universe began a single fiery moment. The Big Bang. But what if that story is incomplete? Or what if it's even wrong? My guest today, Professor Niayesh Afshordi, is a professor of astrophysics at the Perimeter Institute and the University of Waterloo. He and his colleague Bill Halpern argue that the real battle in science is over the mysteries of singularities, those points where our equations collapse and space, time and physics itself seem to break down. In a new book, Battle of the Big Bang, they take us inside the fight to understand whether the Big Bang was truly the beginning of it all, or whether it was just one chapter in a far stranger cosmic saga. KEY TAKEAWAYS 00:00:00 – Cosmologists no longer see the Big Bang as the beginning of time 00:11:01 – Singularity vs the later hot Big Bang phases like nucleosynthesis 00:12:13 – Survey of physicists shows “Big Bang” is understood differently 00:15:37 – Hawking and singularities 00:23:12 – Black hole information paradox remains unresolved after 50 years 00:30:26 – Religion remains a social tool 00:35:56 – The Simons Observatory was created to probe primordial gravitational waves in the CMB 00:39:50 – Scientific careers are constrained by funding and “hot topics” in research 00:41:17 – Science advances by tying ideas to observation, not just social structures 00:42:07 – Disagreement with Carlo Rovelli 00:44:54 – Competing quantum gravity models are ideas, not fully testable theories yet 00:46:14 – String theory, loop quantum gravity, and holography lack experimental evidence 00:47:55 – Cancellation of CMB Stage-4 highlights limits of experimental cosmology 00:49:14 – Afshordi views himself closer to an observer than a pure theorist 00:54:51 – Scientific progress benefits from bridging between communities 00:57:47 – Repulsive gravity in inflation avoids singularities but leaves open loopholes 01:01:00 – Singularity theorems can break down with quantum gravity or altered dimensions 01:03:05 – Our universe was born inside a black hole 01:06:16 – Future probes might let us see further back than the CMB 01:10:56 – Einstein unknowingly started the quest for quantum gravity - Additional resources: Get Niayesh Afshordi's book: https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Big-Bang-Cosmic-Origins/dp/0226830470 Get Dr. Brian Keating's NEW Book for Only 0.99! This week only: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FN8DH6SX?ref_=pe_93986420_775043100 Please join my mailing list here

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Description: Have you ever found yourself at odds with someone you deeply care about—unable to agree on something that really matters? Is it possible to stay connected, even when your beliefs clash? This seemed like an important question to answer, so we decided to go back into our archives to bring forward this 2021 conversation about one of the most challenging forms of reconnection: loving and staying in relationship with people who see the world differently. To help us navigate this complex emotional landscape, we're joined by Rozella Haydée White—also known as the Love Big Coach. A theologian, spiritual life coach, and leadership consultant, Rozella is passionate about helping people cultivate love that is both healing and justice-rooted. In this encore episode,  Rozella and Jen explore how to show up in hard conversations without losing yourself, and how to make space for compassion when disagreement feels like a wall. Rozella offers this powerful reminder: “If we believe that people are created in the image of God, then I don't really have a choice but to believe in people.” This conversation unpacks:  What it means to stay in a relationship when we do not see eye to eye How we keep loving family and friends when our values don't align anymore What do we do with our fractured families without creating havoc and disruption How we can hold two things that are true at once Thought-provoking Quotes: “If we believe that people are created in the image of God, then I don't really have a choice but to believe in people, because I don't believe that God creates anything but that which is life-giving, that which is creative, that which is good and holy.” – Rozella Haydée White “When I talk about love, I'm talking about that which is creative, that which is justice-seeking, and that which is ultimately sustaining for our mind, heart, bodies, and soul.” – Rozella Haydée White “Love does not mean absence of consequence or absence of conflict.” – Rozella Haydée White Resources Mentioned in This Episode: Love Big Coach - https://www.rozellahwhite.com/ A Rhythm of Prayer: A Collection of Meditations for Renewal by Sarah Bessey - https://amzn.to/466mtT3 Glennon Doyle's For The Love Episode - https://jenhatmaker.com/podcasts/series-02/finding-beauty-in-the-mess-with-glennon-doyle/ Brené Brown's For The Love Episode - https://jenhatmaker.com/podcasts/series-02/getting-vulnerable-with-dr-brene-brown/ Love Big: The Power of Revolutionary Relationships to Heal the World by Rozella Haydée White - https://amzn.to/3Vrm6Oh Guest's Links: Website - https://www.rozellahwhite.com/ Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/lovebigcoach/ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/lovebigcoach Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@lovebigcoach TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@lovebigcoach Connect with Jen!Jen's Website - https://jenhatmaker.com/ Jen's Instagram - https://instagram.com/jenhatmakerJen's Twitter - https://twitter.com/jenHatmaker/ Jen's Facebook - https://facebook.com/jenhatmakerJen's YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/JenHatmaker The For the Love Podcast is presented by Audacy.  To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices