All right, we're within a week of Christmas, and we're going to continue to talk about persecution. But it's still all about Christ. Let's pray as we begin. Lord, again, thank you that we're able to be here. Thank you for just an opportunity to think about you, to think about people who have attempted to be faithful to what you've said and have paid what really in the end is a short-term price, yet we look at them, Lord, and we recognize that these are difficult things. I pray you'd encourage us with this, that you'd help us to be able to think correctly about these things. In Jesus' name, amen. Okay, so we're continuing here, sort of the examples. Last time we kind of went into a case study about the Dessian persecution. And today we want to look at Reformation area persecution. And I'll be honest with you, I found this more of a challenge to prepare than I would have thought, just because there's just a lot of history and things. And so rather than give sort of a Let's have a history lesson about everything that happened during the Reformation and the persecutions. There's just too much, right? So instead, what I'm just going to do is pick out a few different examples just to help us think maybe more specifically. And I think in these examples, there are things that can encourage us. So the overall context here, of course, is that there was a fair amount of persecution that happened during the Reformation, that general time period. You know, roughly the early, like leading up to the Reformation was the 1400s. Martin Luther posted the Theses, I think it was 1517. I got that right? Nobody's saying, shaking their head, is that right? Okay, good. And somehow I always, I'm not sure about the century there. So 1517, and so the 1500s we're talking about. And there was, some of the things that I think make this somewhat confusing is that there's a lot of Catholic Protestant, but that's kind of like saying a lot of sort of government related persecution too, right? Because there was very close linkage between governments and churches at this time. And so to say, you know, essentially, and we'll talk about this later, so for example, in England, there was, I believe it was Edward VII, who I think was a Protestant, or at least was accepting of Protestants, right? But then Queen Mary came, and was Catholic and decided we are going to become a Catholic nation and persecuted the Protestants. But it was so much more of a governmental related thing as opposed to just a pure kind of like doctrinal dispute. So there's a lot of mixing here of politics, who has power, who has authority, if we're in charge we're not going to let anybody disobey us, that kind of stuff going on. And some of the Protestants did the same things. So this isn't just sort of one way. So it's kind of confusing that way. And again, a strong connection between church and state at this time. So we're going to look at three different examples. William Tyndale, Roland Taylor, and the Waldenses in Piedmont. So probably Tyndale you've likely heard of. The other ones you probably haven't, at least if you're like me. So let's start with Tyndale. He was born and ministered in England. He later went to Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium at different times as he was facing different pressures and things. And during that time period, he translated the New Testament and much of the Old Testament into English so the common person could read it. Prior to that, there wasn't There was the Latin Bible, and the typical person living in English-speaking lands couldn't read it. So what I'm going to do here is I'm going to look at a lot of what I've taken is from Fox's Book of Martyrs. It's one historical reference from the time. And what I want to do in terms of Tyndale is to look at, first of all, what was his motivation for translating? And I'm going to read passages. So some of these will be on the screen like this. Some of them I shall read a little bit later when we talk about Roland. But let's look at this first. So it says, Master Tyndale considered this only, or most chiefly, to be the cause of all mischief in the church, that the scriptures of God were hidden from the people's eyes. For so long as the abominable doings and idolatries maintained by the Pharisaical clergy could not be espied or couldn't be observed directly, I think is what that means. And therefore all their labor was with might and main to keep it down, so that either it should not be read at all, or if it were, they would darken the right sense with the mist of their sophistry. And so entangle those who rebuked or despised their abominations, wrestling the scripture unto their own purpose, contrary to the meaning of the text. They would so delude the unloaded lay people that though they felt in thy heart and were sure that all were false that they said, Yet couldst thou not solve their subtle riddles? Okay, so that's sort of hard for us to understand in today's language. But the essence of that, of course, is what he's saying is the fact that the people can't see God's word directly. is in many ways what's behind what has allowed the, at that time, the Roman Catholic Church to sort of have a lot of abuses that were against what scripture had said, right? And so a lot of things that were completely outside of scripture that were a big part of the church were, the people couldn't, realize that that was even happening because they didn't have access to scripture. And so he's kind of pointing out, this is sort of the root cause or very, you know, a root cause of why that situation is there. And later on when we look at the situation in Piedmont, we'll actually see probably a pretty good list of a lot of the sort of like issues that probably came through this. But when you think of Martin Luther and all the things that he stood against, and again, when we talked about him a while back, he wasn't trying to sort of create a completely separate church. He was originally trying to reform the Roman Catholic Church at the time, but it became clear that that They weren't going to go that direction. And he had very specific things that he said, this is against what Scripture says. Well, if it's what the church says, and it's against what Scripture says, I have to go with Scripture, right? Now, he was a trained monk that had access directly to the Scriptures. But so Tyndale sort of saw the same kinds of things, but said, you know what, a lot of the reason for this is because all the people are very susceptible to any teaching because they have no way of cross-checking it. So that was the motivation. Now, of course, there's different responses to this. So he wrote the book, and the godly books of Tyndale, and especially the New Testament of his translation, after they began to come into men's hands and to spread abroad. brought great and singular profit to the godly. But the ungodly, envying and disdaining that the people should be anything wiser than they, and fearing lest by shining beams of truth their works of darkness should be discerned, began to serve with no small ado. So we see a different response here. We see those that sort of were truly interested in what God had to say, it was greatly profitable to be able to read the scriptures directly, and I think we find that too. I mean, imagine if you could not ever take a copy of scriptures and use that yourself. that the scriptures were in some language completely unaccessible to you, and only Steve and Tom and I could read that language. And so everything you learned was just whatever we said, right? That's not a great situation. But very different responses. So a question here, how does what you see here relate to 1 Corinthians 1.18? Let's turn to 1 Corinthians 1.18. And we've looked at this before in this study itself even. So I'll read 1 Corinthians 118. For the word of the cross or the message of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God. So do you see, like what is the connection here between what that is saying and what you see here on the slide? Or is there a connection? There's a connection. Because if you have lost men teaching doctrine of any kind, the Holy Spirit is not going to draw. Yeah, so if there's men who are lost who are more concerned about their positions, more concerned about maintaining their power structure than they are about what is it that God has truly said, right? And don't see the gospel as the power of God to be unleashed among people, right? There's going to be a very different response to the message of the gospel. The message of gospel is offensive to those who don't see it as their true salvation. I've always wondered why unbelievers lash out against the gospel if it's just following, you know, like they must in some sense feel condemned by it. Yeah, the question is why would believers lash out against the gospel if it's just folly, if it's just foolishness? And yeah, I think what you were, a little bit of your conjecture there is that it is foolishness, but it's sort of like, well, if that's true, then I'm in a bad position, right? So it must not be true. We have to not let that be true. I think that's very much what can be behind it. And I think, you know, there's also just, there's two kingdoms in this world. There's the kingdom of light, the kingdom of darkness, right? And there's a sense that Jesus said, he who is not for us is against us, right? And I've seen that distorted completely in terms of saying, well, if you're not for our church, and you're setting churches against churches. Not only that's what Jesus is meaning, but I think what we're talking about here is just those who see the gospel and those who are believers in it, and those that aren't, there is enmity between those two groups, right? So there is sort of an unrational hatred, I think, that can be there as well, not just a pure rational thinking kind of thing. So, you know, I thought this is a good example, in a way, of what we see in 1 Corinthians 18, and it comes down to where is the value, right? What is the value in the gospel itself? And if you see it that way, then you're gonna want that to get out to other people, right? Or is the value in maintaining something that isn't really the gospel? Okay, so here's some arguments that are made against Tyndale's translation. But the clergy, not willing to have that book prosper, meaning Tyndale's translation, cried out upon it that there were a thousand heresies in it, and that it was not to be corrected, but utterly to be suppressed. Some said it was not possible to translate the scriptures into English. Some said that it was not lawful for the lay people to have it in their mother tongue. Some that it would make them all heretics. And to the intent to induce the temporal rulers unto their purpose, they said it would make the people rebel against the king. So this is Fox's take on sort of the people who were against the scriptures. And by and large, these are some of the things that they claimed. And so here's my paraphrase of the above, is that it will be a huge mess if we let everyone read and glean the truths of scripture on their own. Were they right? John? Well, yes, in the sense that it's gonna involve this huge, like, turning of the hourglass upside down, because we've been doing it the wrong way for a very long time, and we're very invested in the wrong way of doing things. So yeah, it was a huge mess. But that's the nature of setting it right. It's sort of like remodeling your house when there's something very wrong with it. It's going to be a huge mess, but it's the right thing to do. Yeah, so it's like John said, like remodeling your house. It's gonna be a huge mess because you're trying to take something and turn it right that's a problem. And you know, admittedly, it is less clean, right? It's sort of more systematic to sort of have, here is the one and only defined by others allowed interpretation, right? But you're right, there was long periods of time where that had led to entrenched, you know, really wrongs, you know, when you look at some of the things that were being taught, were just against scripture, not just extensions, but were against what scripture said. I think it was, oh, I forget when I was reading about this, Some folks that were against 10-0 were saying, OK, well, if everybody has a scripture, then there's going to be 1,000 different heresies. And I think the benefits of having a scripture in the language are far away, but there is some sense in which You know, you think of all the different church splits and all the different false gospels and all the different things. So, the benefit's not really the cost, but there is a reality to that. Yeah, what Nathan was basically saying is that there is a cost to this, right? This does allow the potential of lots of, you know, potential church splits and different denominations, and even including heretical denominations that still would sort of claim to use scripture, right? So, you know, this is, it's one of those cases where there's not, it's probably the least bad option, right? In a sense that the true gospel, I believe when you look historically, it is fairly demonstrable that since the Reformation, there has been more propagation of the true biblical gospel than there was for many hundreds of years prior to the Reformation. But that didn't come without messiness. And that's part of living in this world. We see that again and again in many different situations where there's often not just the beautiful, crisp, clean, everything fixed kind of solution. That's true in our lives, that's true even here. So yeah, I think we don't need to pretend that there's no risk at all. And there's a balance to be had, right? You know, at some level, every individual believer needs to be able to look at Scripture and say, that's what I agree with. Yet at the same time, I think that, you know, and this is a whole new topic, right? So as a church, we don't see ourselves as kind of reinventing ourselves week by week. Like, let's come up with, you know, what does everybody think about this this week? It isn't sort of the way that we tend to go, right? We're trying to tie it to Scripture. And, you know, if there's something that is wrong, we should make an adjustment. But, you know what I mean, there's some value in some stability in terms of things. Anyway, that's sort of its own separate topic. This is totally a pop open the can of worms kind of a topic. But anyway, just want to be honest about that. So some of the critiques are potentially legitimate. But yeah, I still say that the benefits far outweigh that. When you talk about the true gospel going forth and people becoming united with Christ, that enables that so much more. Okay. All right, so finally, let's just read about his martyrdom. At last, after much reasoning, when no reason would serve, although he deserved no death, he was condemned by virtue of the emperor's decree made in the assembly at Augsburg. Brought forth to the place of execution, he was tied to the stake, strangled by the hangman, and afterwards consumed with fire. At the town of the Lorde, A.D. 1536, crying at the stake with a fervent zeal and a loud voice, Lord, open the king of England's eyes. Such was the power of his doctrine and the sincerity of his life that during the time of his imprisonment, which endured a year and a half, he converted, it is said, his keeper, the keeper's daughter, and others of his household. So he was trying to live out a faithful life, even in prison, and actually had some fruit of that. He's a well-known martyr. Most of you have heard his name, probably, just from, I mean, there's a publisher named Tyndall, and of course, he's like the first, I believe, the first English translation. of scripture. Okay, so let's talk about the Waldenses. So the Waldenses is sort of a group of people who, you know, I want to go into this, it's a little bit related to the Mennonites maybe. I think Waldo was maybe the originator why they're called the Waldenses. But they were a group of people living in France and then were encountering sort of some persecution, so they went to the Piedmont region of Italy, they lived there peacefully for a long time, they paid the taxes to the Roman clergy, you know, at the time, and this is still true in some countries, part of your income tax is to support the church, you know, and it's like That's, I think in Finland, there's still, maybe it's optional, but most people pay their 1% or 2% so that the church can hire pastors and things like that. And it's collected by the government, government church. Very different than our way of thinking, right? So they were doing that, but they were still accused of being heretics for these reasons. And this is the main thing that I wanted to kind of put forward, because this helps to sort of see, it's like they're not out there attacking anybody, they're just trying to live their life. But it's sort of like, you can't do that. And these were the things that they were accused of, that they did not believe in the doctrines of the Church of Rome. and there's a whole host probably of things that went with that, including saint worship and that kind of stuff, that they made no offerings or prayers for the dead, that they did not go to Mass, that they did not confess and receive absolution. In other words, you must have a priest declare your forgiveness of sins to be forgiven kind of thing. and that they did not believe in purgatory or pay money to get the souls of their friends out of it. Remember the whole thing about, yeah, indulgences, thank you. You know, there were some abuses at the time of where there was a lot of fundraising that was being done by selling indulgences and convincing people to pay so that their relatives would get out of purgatory faster. Yeah, they were part of Anabaptist, yep, and so there's sort of, again, it's a very complicated time, so there's kind of an Anabaptist group that was very much kind of, let's separate from church and state, that was one of the big things about an Anabaptist, and there were many other things too. And so some of the things that the Anabaptists believed we would as well, some of the things maybe not. But the Anabaptists, they were Protestants that were more like, sort of like the Protestants who wanted to have the state church be Protestant were against the Anabaptists, right? So they were sort of like Protestants against Protestants here too. But when I look at this list, you know, I look at this and I'm kind of like, if that's what defines a heretic, I'm a heretic, right? I don't see anything on the list where it's like, well, yeah, I agree with that, right? These are all things that I would say we don't believe scripture teaches. I mean, the first one's a little bit vague, but I know there's some specifics there that, I would also certainly not agree with. So this is just, that's the main reason I'm expressing this, is just to show here's a list of some of the things that people were being defined as a heretic. And essentially what this means is you're not, essentially you're not a Church of Rome Catholic. If you're not doing these things, you're not that. So by definition, you're a heretic. It's kind of what it essentially came down to. Okay, so let's talk about Roland Taylor. One of the things I like about Fox's Book of Martyrs is that he doesn't just cover the big people like Tyndale and Huss and others, but he covers sort of run-of-the-mill people. So this was sort of a well-respected regular pastor in England, you know, a guy that had a church. And so I'm going to do a couple little bit longer readings. I mean, these aren't super long, maybe a couple of minutes, but pretend that it's in the evening, there's a fire going, and we're just having like an evening reading here. So this isn't Sunday school. This is just, let's just read some light reading. So the first one is sort of more about kind of who he was. Not only was his word of preaching unto them, you can sip your hot chocolate, but all his life and conversation was an example of unfeigned Christian life and true holiness. Now, let me also state, Fox, writing this book, had, an agenda. I think it was a worthwhile agenda. But, you know, this is a very, very positive, glowing view. And this is a little bit like what happens in most eulogies, right, where, you know, everything positive about that person is talked about and all the negative stuff we sort of ignore, right? So recognize he was a sinner. I'm sure if you looked at his life, there's things that he didn't do perfectly. So let's just recognize that. But I do believe that this likely characterized him, right? So example of unfeigned Christian life and true holiness. He was void of all pride. Okay, no way. I don't buy that. Absolutely not. Was he perhaps a humble man? I totally believe that. Go there. Humble and meek as any child, so that none were so poor, but they might boldly, as unto their father, resort unto him. Neither was his lowliness child or fearful, but as occasion, time, and place required, he would be stout in rebuking the sinful and evildoers, so that none was so rich, but he would tell them plainly his fault, with such earnest and grave rebukes, as became a good curate and pastor. He was a man very mild, void of all rancor, grudge, or evil will, ready to do good to all men, ready to forgive his enemies, and never sought to do evil to any. Fox could not have said that about Martin Luther, let's just say. Right, Martin Luther had other good characteristics, but this does not describe Martin Luther. So I think there's certainly element, you know, this is probably an accurate thing. To the poor that were blind, lame, sick, bedrid, or that had many children, he was a very father, a careful patron, a diligent provider, insomuch that he caused the parishioners to make a general provision for them. and he himself gave an honest portion yearly to the common almsbox. His wife also was an honest, discreet, and sober matron, and his children well-nurtured, brought up in the fear of God and good learning. He was a good salt of the earth, savorily biting the corrupt manners of evil men, a light in God's house, set upon a candlestick for all good men to imitate and follow. Thus continued the good shepherd among his flock. Governing and leading them through the wilderness of the wicked world, all the days of the most innocent and holy king of blessed memory, Edward VI. Okay, I said Edward VII before, it was Edward VI. But on Edward VI's demise and the succession of Queen Mary to the throne, he escaped not the cloud that burst on so many besides. So this is when Queen Mary came and sort of like, okay, we're converting, the whole country is now Catholic. If you're not Catholic, off with your head. It was a very, I mean, the word Bloody Mary refers to this Mary. That's where that term came from. Queen Mary to the throne, so he escaped not the cloud that burst on so many beside. For two of his parishioners, Foster, an attorney, and Clark, a tradesman, out of blind zeal, resolved that mass should be celebrated in all its superstitious forms in the church of Hadley on Monday before Easter. This Dr. Taylor, entering the church strictly forbade, but Clark forced the doctor out of the church, celebrated mass, and immediately informed the Lord Chancellor, Bishop of Winchester, of his behavior, who summoned him to appear and answer the complaints that were alleged against him. So basically, we're gonna celebrate mass, he said, no you're not, not here, that's not right, and was then brought in because of that. The doctor, upon the receipt of the summons, cheerfully prepared to obey the same and rejected the advice of his friends to fly beyond the sea. His friends said, get out of here. This is not going to go well with you. And he said, no, I'm going to stay. When Gardner saw Dr. Taylor, he, according to common custom, reviled him. Dr. Taylor heard his abuse patiently. And when the bishop said, how darest thou look at me in the face? Knowest not who I am? Dr. Taylor replied, you are Dr. Stephen Gardner, Bishop of Winchester and Lord Chancellor, and yet but a mortal man. But if I should be afraid of your lordly looks, why fear ye not God, the Lord of us all? With what countenance will you appear before the judgment seat of Christ and answer to your oath made first unto King Henry VIII and afterward unto King Edward VI, his son? A long conversation ensued in which Dr. Taylor was so piously collected and severe upon his antagonist that he exclaimed, thou art a blasphemous heretic. This is the accusation to Taylor. Thou indeed blasphemous is the blessed sacrament. Here he put off his cap and speakest against thy holy mass, which is made a sacrifice for the living and the dead. The bishop afterward committed him into the king's bench. He was a big guy. Okay, so that's kind of how he got caught. I mean, he just was sort of caught up in the politics of the time. But I thought this was very useful. So this is, so now he's basically given the sentence of death because he didn't want mass. He wasn't allowing sort of his church to become a Roman Catholic church. So in the process of that, they were, you know, he was being sentenced to death, and then the jailer that he's with is like, okay, I'll let you visit your wife and children, or let your wife and children come visit you. So this is what he, what Fox recorded that. After supper, walking up and down, he gave God thanks for his grace, that he had given him strength to abide by his holy word. With tears, they prayed together, realizing this is probably the last time they'd be together, right, before he would die. and kissed one another. Unto his son Thomas he gave a Latin book containing the notable sayings of the old martyrs. And in the end of that, he wrote his testament. I say to my wife and to my children, the Lord gave you unto me and the Lord hath taken me from you and you from me. Blessed be the name of the Lord. Amen. I believe that they are blessed which die in the Lord. God careth for sparrows and for the hairs of our heads. I have ever found him more faithful and favorable than is any father or husband. Trust ye therefore in him by the means of our dear Savior Christ's merits. Believe, love, fear, and obey him. Pray to him, for he hath promised to help. Count me not dead, for I shall certainly live and never die. I go before, and you shall follow after to our long home. So I felt like that was super helpful and encouraging in terms of here he's dealing with kind of this issue of this is going to separate him from his family. His children would no longer have a father. His wife would no longer have a husband. Right? But I believe what we see here is an example of someone who really understands kind of where family fits in, in sort of the priorities with life. Right? Family is not number one. Family's up there, it's important. But certainly, obedience to God, relationship with God is more important. And I think, I suspect that many of us could find ourselves maybe, I don't know, we can easily turn family into an idol, right? Where it's like, I'm worshiping my family, and if my family is gonna be harmed, then doesn't matter anything else. That's the number one thing, right? And that's not scriptural in the sense that there are things that are more important than family. It seems weird to say that, right? And I think to some extent, you know, there's always like pendulums that swing, right? So I think in our culture, I mean, I think there's a recognition that family is important, but definitely there's this maybe growing sense that, yeah, you know. needing to sort of invest in your family is kind of maybe not as important, I don't know. But I think that this is helpful, I think, for us to look, somebody who's facing this kind of very stark, it's like he could have recanted, he could have potentially even fled, right? But he chose instead to stand on what he thought was right and most faithful before his God. at the detriment of his family, right? And I think there's times where we have to do that. That's just, that's hard, but it's just one of those things to think through. Let's make sure we don't make our family an idol, something that comes before God, right? Questions, thoughts, comments on that? Deborah? The follow-up on what his brother did, I mean, if he stayed, if he, vacillated at all when his friends were calling him to flee, and he did, he would live, because of the conviction, clearly seen in his strength and prowess, he would have lived in torment in his own heart, that he made, you know, going around in circles of, I displeased my father, I disobeyed him, you know, it would have been very hard for him. So if he lived that life consistently, and his wife understood that, His children understood who he was, and that's an encouragement. Yeah, what Deborah was saying, for those in the back and online, is that if he had sort of maybe fled or given in, he would have probably lived the Refa's life kind of feeling like he wasn't being faithful, and his wife and children understood that was being consistent with who he was, right? So there's a sense that this is living a consistent life. And yeah, I think that's very much the case, that this was what walking faithfully for him was. And as painful as it is, that was better than the alternative. And he has, again, that big picture perspective, that last couple sentences there. He's like, look, this is... This is painful, but you can trust God. I mean, I think he would fully agree with kind of what the theme of this class has been, is that God knows what he's doing, and we can trust him, right? That's kind of a summary of what he said to his family. Yeah, and this is one of those things where it's, you know, there's, I don't know that if he fled that it automatically would have been wrong, right? So there's sort of, everybody has to walk their path. But again, I found this helpful myself, and I just think You know, we sort of have to attempt to recognize our own biases and weaknesses, right? And I think we can become, you know, family idol worshipers pretty easily. Because family is awesome. Family is great, right? But we have to realize family is not the number one. Family is high on the list, but there's other things that are more important. Good. So there were many, many other examples of persecution in the Reformation period. As Deborah was talking there, there were a lot of people that did recant, that did, under pressure, change, and then, exactly kind of what you were saying, that gnawed at them. They couldn't live with that. So there was an account of a woman who gave in, and she just couldn't live with herself. So she walked into the middle of a, of, I think it was in that case, a Catholic worship service and said, I recanted, but I stand here today and I declare that and sort of went back to what she felt like she had to believe. Basically, turned herself in and said, actually, arrest me, put me to death because, you know, but that was, you know, it wasn't totally clean in her life, right? And so, definitely there were, you know, she felt convicted and couldn't live with herself in a sense. It's like, I denied my savior and shouldn't have done that, right? So, and again, I think during this time period, it's very hard to separate religious persecution from political persecution because the church and state were so integrally tied. I honestly think that a lot of the theological arguments were sort of just the surface arguments. It's kind of like, okay, well, I'm gonna charge you with these things. Not really the passionate discussion that was going on. By and large, I don't think this was primarily a theological argument during this time. I think it was much more of, who has power? And out of this time period, and that was partly through the Anabaptists and others who said, look, this is what happens. I mean, so the Protestants kind of...what they were saying is, well, some of the Protestants who, yeah, they kind of corrected the Roman Catholic Church, but then they established their own church, their own state church. kind of we're starting to see the same kind of thing. And yeah, maybe their doctrine is more pure, but, you know, and so we started to, I think, have the separation of church and state. And by that, what I mean is not having the state establish the church. In other words, the church is not like a division of the state. We have the Department of Defense, the Department of State, Department of the Interior, and the Department of the Church, right? And there's countries that have that. That's totally what it means. And for Americans, it's just, we don't think that way. But that's kind of, in large part, because of what happened during this time period. And I think overall that is a very healthy separation because it allows the church to be more focused on not maintaining power and making sure that we get the taxes we need. And so we're more beholden to what the country leadership says than to what the scriptures say. Because if I want my paycheck next year, It's not. It's about making sure that we get the government funding. It's a very different kind of way of thinking. So I think that's one of the very helpful things that happened here. So a question. Think of totalitarian countries around the world. And we define what totalitarian means. And by this I mean most totalitarian countries tend to be atheistic. By totalitarian, it means everything is related to the state. Everything you must do is so you're subject to the state. Is there separation of church and state in a totalitarian country? I'm seeing heads shake no. And John, what do you? Depends if you ask somebody in church or somebody in the state, yeah. But here we have to say, what do we mean by that? What is the church in its Italian country? And from the state's point of view, what is the church? The government, yeah, that's right. So there may be a church, a physical church, or a group of people meeting, but the state says, we get to define what that is. And there can be no religious beliefs if they're not approved by us, and we declare what it is that you are going to believe, and we'll control that, right? And a purely atheistic to talentarian government still has a set of worldviews, still beliefs, and it's just not sort of religious, and there's not a recognition of God. In some cases there is, you know, the ruler is God or something, but there's still, in some sense, it's there still is a control of religious belief, right? There's basically, the government gets to decide what religious thoughts you have, right? And so, you know, that's one of the real challenges of living in a totalitarian country is where the state is able to decide what you do and don't believe, right? Jerry? This week is the 71st anniversary of the death of the Kim family in North Korea, and no one is allowed to be joyful this week. Yeah, so the 70... Yeah, that's right. The 71st anniversary of the Kim religion in North Korea, and so nobody is allowed to be joyful this week, is what Terry was saying. Of his death. Or of his death. Okay. because he died, and yeah, they're sort of treated as gods in some sense. And so, you know, there is, you can't escape theology. So, I mean, there is a theology within a totalitarian country. You look at an atheistic, and the theology says, here's how we define what God is. God is a, in that case, they would say, well, God is just made up, but they're still defining You know, an atheist, it's interesting, an atheist can only define, you know, look, think of the world, the word atheist. It's like atheist, right? It's against God. So an atheist can sort of only define themselves in reference to God. Kind of a funny position to be in. A quick American story, recently I saw online a church I had an interest in because of a friend, a connection, I want you to check in on this. They call themselves a church. The pastor, was during Sunday school, kind of like you would do a children's church at a Baptist church or something. She, the pastor, was doing it in front. And it was a mantra, give and take. She would speak. The teenagers, that was who she called forward, would repeat it. And they were current political talking points. Free health care for all. Free health care for all. It was indoctrination. Yeah, there's, yeah, in terms of what Deborah was saying is there's a lot of times churches can get into politics to the level of where it was, you know, saying free healthcare for all, and the church says free healthcare for all. It's like the liturgy or something. And yeah, and I think that's one of the reasons, so the church can push for a connection there. I'm sorry, the state can push for a connection, and the church can too. And that's one of the reasons we as a church try to have, we're not a political entity. We don't spend really any time talking about who you should vote for. And that's not a condition of membership. And we try to sort of, I mean, there's gonna be a connection at some level, right? But we're not here to make We're not here as a governmental body. That's not the mission of the church. All right, we are out of time. Thank you for your input. So the next two weeks, there is no Sunday school. So I think you probably know that, but starting back again on January 9th, we've got two more persecution ones. We'll cover Soviet-era persecution, and then January 16th, modern-day persecution, and then we will be done with this particular series. So no Sunday school the next two weeks, and we're pretty late, so because it's not biblically required to pray after Sunday school, I will just let you go in peace.