Welcome to Out of the Question, a podcast that looks behind some common questions and uncovers the question behind the question while providing real solutions for biblical world and life view. Your co-hosts are Andrea Schwartz, a teacher and mentor, and Pastor Charles Roberts. Thanks for joining us for another episode of Out of the Question. One of the marks of our current society is the overload of information and opinions that is available to people whether or not they are particularly interested. All sorts of media come at us with many differing voices telling us what we should and shouldn't do and what we should and shouldn't think. Proverbs 18, 17 states, the one who states his case first seems right until the other comes and examines him. The current voices today on either side of an issue often impugn critical characterizations of those who don't agree with them. We've all heard the arguments. If you do this, you're agreeing with evil. If you don't do this, you are letting evil win. So the question we're gonna examine today is this. In what ways should we or should we not align ourselves with people and groups that we don't share a world and life view with? Another way to say it is, whether it's during an election year or just for some matters of mutual concern, is it godly to join with those opposed to a biblical world and life view for a common cause? What are the limits? Charles, what is your take on this? I am reminded of something that happened many years ago when I was still a student in seminary in Philadelphia. Well, I've worked for an organization called the Christian Action Council, which I don't even know if it's around anymore, but it was a major pro-life ministry. I think it was originally started by Francis Schaeffer and Billy Graham and a few people like that. And she worked as a secretary for the Philadelphia office. And one of the things that they did was to organize peaceful protests at places that provided abortion. And there was one not far from where we live, so we went and participated in this picketing of this hospital that provided abortion. And there were quite a few other people there besides our group. And one of them, I don't know if they were an organized group or they were just a group of Roman Catholics who had showed up to protest along with our group, And you might say, well, how do you know they were Roman Catholic? Well, because they were very loudly praying the rosary. And it was very obvious as we were walking the picket line, so to speak, that we are walking with people who are saying things that are highly problematic in some ways compared to what we believe the Bible teaches or doesn't teach concerning the Virgin Mary and that sort of thing. And yet, I mean, certainly the issue of protesting and trying to stop human abortion is a very worthy cause. But I think that maybe some conversations need to be had if people agree that, yes, this is a worthy effort that we all should participate in. OK, but let's agree that we're not going to do this, that, or the other. So that's one of the first experiences I had as a Christian in being involved in an effort that had me doing things with another group of Christians who were part of a common cause. We all agreed this is something that needed to stop, and we needed to speak up about it. But then there were these other things happening that showed the limits about, okay, this is not really stopping me from doing anything, but I'm constantly hearing things, Hail Mary, full of grace, Lord, with the blessed art thou among women, that sort of thing. This is a major distraction from what I think we're doing. So my thoughts are then that it depends on the circumstance and what sort of preliminaries are laid down. On the other hand, I think that an argument could be made. I'm not necessarily prepared to make it right this moment, but somebody would say, you know, if your house is on fire, maybe you're not going to stop the people who are trying to put it out and ask them their views on the five points of Calvinism. You can deal with that after the fire is out. So that's kind of my take on it. And I think a lot of us have experienced participating in efforts, whether it's homeschooling and trying to see that certain oppressive laws are rescinded or health care and things of that nature. Sometimes you're going to be walking alongside people who, if you looked at everything down to the detail, you would say, well, we don't agree on these things, but we do think that the government should stay out of telling us what we have to do, what shots we have to take, et cetera. So it's not like this is an irrelevant question. It comes up all the time. And I've talked to people at various churches where fellow church members will come up to them and say, who are you voting for for president? Who are you voting for? Who are you voting for? Now, I think it's interesting, Charles, that people think they can just go up and ask people questions and expect an answer and in a lot of cases demand an answer. And it's one of those you can't win for losing because unless you're planning to give a whole treatise on your thought process, almost inevitably a fight will ensue. And that's where we hear expressions like the lesser of two evils or being pragmatic as opposed to being principled. And as I was thinking about this discussion, because we knew we wanted to talk about this, as it turned out, I got the latest issue of Calcedon's Horizon Build. And Martin Selbrede in the September issue, 2024, has an essay entitled Issues Versus Foundations. Yes. And he points out that many of the issues of our day will never be remedied, and then he makes the point, intentionally so. Now, that would probably sound odd to a lot of people, But the point of his essay is, what is an issue? He defines it as something that comes forth from another thing. It's the visible result of something else that lies, often hidden underneath it, sometimes several layers or levels underneath it. So the hallmark or the issues that we must be one way with or another often will be categorized under abortion or transgenderism or homosexuality or when we go to war or the direction of the economy. Well, if we're just dealing in issues, then maybe it's okay to decide I can work with this person or not. And it still may be strategically appropriate But as John the Baptist said about if you don't get the axe to the root, to the underlying foundational point, there really won't be a resolution. Yeah, and people often point to various scriptural bases for how they do or do not pursue this topic. You know, I think at one extreme is the classic fundamentalist approach to things, which is we need to be separate. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 6, do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers and have no association or connection with the unfruitful works of darkness, touch not the unclean thing, that sort of thing. But then some of those folks take it a step further and say, okay, I know your group, example, I know your group doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, and your group doesn't believe in smoking, and your group doesn't believe in dancing, but you're connected to that group across the street that does agree to those things, so I can't be associated with you anymore, because you're associated with those people even though you don't do it. And I think this is where things start to kind of go off the rails a bit, and these are internal battles that have been going on in the covenant community of God's people for many, many, many decades and centuries about the extent to which, and that's why we're talking about it. In Deuteronomy 2210, we read, you shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together. And that's another passage that people have pointed to as sort of a motif or a theme that if you are totally different in your views about the foundational issues, how can you plow together? How can you walk together? So the issue, to use the word issue, seems to be the approach to life. If you have a covenantal emphasis in life, then the question will be in covenant to whom? And since the Bible, Old and New Testament, Old and New Covenant, is how God relates to us and how we're supposed to relate back to him, there really isn't a place for making it up as you go along. Making it up as you go along could also be categorized as antinomianism. So there are a lot of people, for example, who are against the slaughter of children in the womb. But then those same people will say, and that's why capital punishment is wrong. Well, if you go to the scripture, if you have a covenantal foundation, you're gonna recognize that the death penalty is appropriate for certain offenses, one of which is murder. And so instead of saying, well, then I can't work on this cause because they don't agree with the biblical mandate for the death penalty, I think the approach, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm sure you've been involved in things with people who don't necessarily see eye to eye, and you just gave an example, that if we're going to be in those situations, that we don't stop having our light shine and we don't stop being the salt that we're called to be. In other words, we're walking together, we agree this is wrong, but we then don't put what we also know to be true in the background and say, well, I'll say this doesn't matter for right now. Yeah, that's where we run into problems in doing what you just described. But I think that It requires a certain amount of wisdom and maturity to know at what point something like that would come up, how to react to it and where you say, you know, I've got to draw the line here. I really can't go down that path, or I think I need to step away from this situation for just a moment. And that's not going to look the same in every circumstance and in every place. The situation I described at the beginning, I don't recall anyone else saying anything except my wife. She and I both talked about it on the way home from the picket line. But I suppose that the people who were regularly doing that, it was something that they just were willing to cooperate with and get along with for the greater good. as they would call it, and it certainly is if we can stop human abortion, then yes, that is a greater good. But I remember along that line, and I don't remember when he published this book, there was a guy, I think he is Roman Catholic, Peter Kreeft, K-R-E-E-F-T. He wrote a book back in the 90s, I think it was. It was well before 9-11, which is, of course, coming up tomorrow. But the title of the book was Ecumenical Jihad. and in the book he argued that orthodox jews muslims and christians have a common interest with a common sort of abrahamic religion background i guess is the way he would put it and that we all face the withering assault of secular humanism and encroaching secular society and cultural trends. And again, this was written many, many years ago. So this is a groundwork for all three of these religions to cooperate toward the end of fighting off and fighting back this encroachment. I don't know that the book ever took off. It was reviewed in places that found it somewhat interesting. Some pointed out some major problems with it. But that was somebody who wrestled with this in a very major way. And I haven't found any places where people of these three religions have cooperated very much for much of anything, which may be lamentable. I don't know. But it's hard when, say, you have three different religious worldviews. that have some things in common like they all three might agree what the nature of a family is in the nature of marriage and then you have an atheistic humanistic state that says, no, we're going to impose this view. Well, everyone who has the similar view on family and marriage is going to be suffering for that and having to deal with the consequences. So there might be some reason to cooperate in the short run, at least. But I think my idea would be you sure better have a plan to how you're going to deal with it after the battle is fought or lost, as the case may be. So again, if you don't find what's underlying it, for those of you who see me on social media and you and I have talked, this past week, I had a bout with getting hives. Now, they're not pleasant, but if I didn't look at the hives as a symptom of something else, then the only remedy would be just do whatever you can do to get rid of the manifestation of this problem. Well, I want relief, I wanted relief, but when all is said and done, it was a more important question to me, like why did I have them in the first place? So I think Martin Sobredi's article is saying, if you just deal on the symptom level, yes, that's evil, yes, that's evil, but you don't see the underlying issues that allow you, in essence, to be propagandized. So when somebody says, if you vote for that person, you're voting for evil. Well, if we don't talk about, does the Bible say you must vote? Well, I had a guest on a couple of weeks ago who basically pointed out, yes, we are responsible if we are in a position to choose our leaders to choose righteously. But if you just throw the term out evil in an accusative way, then really what you're doing is you're terminating any sort of conversation where somebody can say, I understand that this person or this candidate doesn't line up with what the Bible says, but does your doctor, does your boss, does your mayor. So we are used to living in a situation where not everybody we deal with lines up. But if you basically react to being told, well, then I can't vote for the lesser of two evils. So I guess I just won't vote. Maybe there's a propaganda machine somewhere that wants you not to vote because if they figure they can get you not to vote, then in essence the other candidate that they want will win. And I read an article yesterday that I even don't know exactly what organization, but was saying, by all means vote, but then don't vote for, if you have two candidates and neither won, leave it blank. you basically are saying none of the above. So for those who say you must vote, you must vote. Well, if you think that you should and prayerfully consider that you should, there's nothing that forces you to deal with the choices you're given. Would you rather die by volcano or tsunami? Well, can I have another choice, please? I hesitate to go too far down the path on this part of the discussion simply because it opens up a whole big to-do like you've alluded to. But I think it's important to say a couple of things, at least from my standpoint. It seems like every four years, as it relates at least to the presidential elections, we're told this is the absolute most important election in the history of the human race. I mean, if people would stop failing to remember things and we've got enough stuff online, go back and look at some of the publicity and the statements from four years ago and then eight years ago. It's the same at almost every cycle. And whatever the big ticket issue is, we've got to be delivered by candidates so-and-so, depending on your perspective. I'm reminded of the statement from Amos, the book of Amos chapter three, verse three, in the New King James Version reads, can two walk together unless they are agreed? And what's interesting, I mean, that sort of gets the gist of the translation, but I like the way some of the more paraphrased translations have put it because it brings out some of the other aspects of it. One of those translations has it, can two people walk together without agreeing on the direction? Will two people walk together unless they have agreed to do so? So there's some things implied in that statement from Amos. We want to, quote, walk together toward a more Bible-based society, a more moral society based on God's law. Now, that may mean that we have people who don't accept God's law and the divine revelation of God in Holy Scripture, but they do agree. that the withering assault on the traditional family is wrong, transgenderism is wrong. So maybe we can agree and walk together toward putting an end to that or limiting it or whatever it may be. But the question is, are we actually agreeing on the direction? So that's one thing. The other thing is, in this day and age, and I would say this dates back hundred years or more, but it's especially ramped up in our time. I don't mean because it's an election year, but because of the nature of technology and the way things have advanced. See, we can think that we are in fact voting for the lesser of two evils. which on maybe some kind of scale, we are doing so if that's what we're going to do. But what do we really know about the people that we think we can cooperate with, especially if it involves politicians? I mean, really all we know is what the media, whatever form that takes for people, tells us. And I heard someone say the other day that they were going to vote for a particular candidate because this particular candidate when he was president, appointed three Supreme Court justices that brought an end to Roe versus Wade. I'm not making light of that, but people, you know, you might want to go back and do some serious research. When you read the Supreme Court decisions, and that's another one of the big canards that's thrown out every four years, well, whoever's elected will appoint the next Supreme Court justice. And that's true. But why don't you take a look at the other decisions that those Supreme Court justices that were appointed by your favorite candidate there are other decisions on other topics. Because you may be quite surprised that some of these people who voted the way that you wanted them to on one particular issue voted completely different and in a profoundly non-biblical way than what you would expect. I found this out some years ago when I was doing research for a sermon that included some references to pornography and access to pornographic material on computers and public libraries. And it was a case that went before the Supreme Court And the main justices who struck down the effort to ban this stuff from the public libraries have been appointed by so-called conservative presidents. But yet here they were supporting this effort to allow pornography on the computers in public library. So Psalm 1113 says, if the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do? So I think we'd all agree that our society currently is not standing on the rock of Jesus Christ. Nope. So that doesn't require you to say, it's not perfect, therefore, I can't do anything that might get my hands dirty. The fact is our hands are already dirty. And if you have to plant something, you have to pull weeds, you have to do a lot of things, your hands get dirty. So the people who say, I cannot vote for this person because of X, Y, Z, if that's a prayerfully considered decision, and you're doing it in obedience to the law word of God, who am I to tell you you're wrong? However, in scripture, we have, and I kind of off the top of my head, are there instances where men that we know, or godly men, somewhat aligned themselves to ungodly people for a strategic or tactical reason? See, God doesn't require that we be ivory tower people. He knows we live in a world that involves conflict. I mean, he's told us sin produces conflict. So we shouldn't be looking for a quick fix. So just a couple, and maybe you can think of more Charles. When Abraham set out to rescue Lot, he went into league with people to help him that didn't necessarily have the same relationship or attitude towards God as he did. When David was being pursued by Saul, who I think we'd all would agree was wicked and evil, he went and lived among the Philistines, who I think he never forgot were wicked and evil. So as long as you understand that this move is much more like sticking your finger in the dike so that the flood doesn't happen, so long as somebody is reinforcing the dike, as opposed to, I just can't be bothered with sticking my finger in this dike because you know what, there are other people doing the same thing and they don't agree with me. And then, of course, we know that Paul appealed to his Roman citizenship. Oh, gee, it was the Romans who ultimately had him die. So it's not like we are not faced with, here we are, what do we do, but never confused. I don't think Paul ever confused that the Roman Empire was a godly empire, but he had a mission to do. appealing to his Roman citizenship allowed him to further the work of the kingdom. Yeah, and speaking of Paul, let me share something that he wrote in 1 Corinthians chapter 10, because it speaks to this issue in a very direct way in terms of how we individually deal with things like this, not so much in the issue of politics and things like that, but in interacting with people. that are different than we are or have a different orientation and how we sort of have to, quote, live together or do live together. And I'm going to read this from a more paraphrased translation. If you want the more literal word for word, people can look it up in whichever translation they prefer. But he says, eat anything that is sold in the market without letting your consuls trouble you. Certainly the earth is the Lord's and everything it contains is his. If an unbeliever invites you to his house for dinner and you wish to go, eat anything he serves you without letting your conscience trouble you. However, if someone says to you, this was sacrificed to a god, don't eat it because of the one who informed you and because of conscience. He says, I'm not talking about your conscience, but the other person's conscience. Why should my freedom be judged by someone else's conscience? If I give thanks to God for the food I eat, why am I condemned for that? So whether you eat or drink, so whatever you do, do everything to the glory of God. Don't cause others to stumble, whether they are Jewish, Greek, or members of God's church. I try to please everyone in every way. I don't think about what would be good for me, but about what would be good for many people so that they might be saved. There's a lot covered in that statement that I think could apply in some of these circumstances. But the one thing I want to come back to, well, two things. We need to be very certain, especially in this age, that we know what we're doing and that we're very certain that if we're voting or supporting something that we think is the better of the two choices for X, Y, and Z, then that's really, in fact, the case. But then the other thing is, in recognizing that we are doing that, or maybe we say, no, I can't be certain of that. So I'm not going to vote. I'm not going to participate in this, that, and the other. Well, the perennial question, and you've properly asked it many times, Andrea, well, what are you going to do? You can't just sit home and pout. And I think that in some cases, making that stand, that I reject this option. Oh, OK, I'm going to go vote, but my choice is between Lucifer and Satan. That's not a choice, really. So if you're not going to vote, if you're not going to participate because of the limits and the boundaries of fellowship, then what are you doing to build the kingdom and to lay the groundwork for something that is more godly, if that's what you feel the Lord has called you to do? Let's take the issue of abortion. And I've been involved with it for many, many years. And I have heard arguments on both sides, which I don't mean both sides that for abortion or against it, but how to deal with it. And that's why I brought up Proverbs 18, 17. The one who states this case first seems right. Oh yeah, right. And then the next guy says something. Oh yeah, right. So there are those and my sentiments are with these people. We should have laws on the books that say that abortion is homicide and that homicide shouldn't be legal. That other than unborn children, currently, we don't have rules that say blondes could be murdered, old people could be murdered, people who are of this color skin could be murdered. Regardless of the fact that people have hurt other people over the course of history, we don't have laws on the books that say it's okay to murder these people. But we do have laws on the books that say it's okay to murder unborn children. As a matter of fact, if you try to stop that, you are in arrears depending on how you try to stop it. On the other side of the fence, you have people who say, first the blade, then the whole ear in the corn. It's okay to do things incrementally because if we can get restrictions, then we're saving X number of children. We may not be saving all children, but we're saving some. Not everybody who expresses those views is necessarily being honest and forthright, but a lot of people who I have heard express those views. I don't doubt their sincerity. And rather than sitting down together and saying, okay, how could both of these approaches serve the kingdom of God, or is one of these approaches antithetical to God? See, we have to get, as Martin Mithalbrede said, get down to the foundation. On the one side, you can say murder is wrong. That's right there in one of the 10 commandments. The other people say, well, less murder is better than more murder. So can we hold to that position and think that God is pleased with just murdering some, but not everybody? And then there are those who will come back and say, yes, but there were many times in the Old Testament where God said, wipe out everybody, including men, women, children, and cattle. So if we're busy trying to put forth our argument as opposed to understanding what the revealed word of God is telling us about God and his purposes, then all we're gonna always be doing is dealing with issues and never get to why are we here in the first place? And is God powerful enough to end abortion? on his own, or is this whole effort meant that the people of God are supposed to do it? So I don't think it's as easy as, well, just accuse somebody of doing this or that. Spend the time and say, let's really understand what the word of God says. And if somebody doesn't think that the word of God matters in that point, well, you've learned something. you've learned that maybe you're sort of heading in the same direction according to the passage in Amos, but ultimately you get a little further and you're going to realize we're actually not going the same direction. Well, let me ask you a question because this is one that I've thought about a lot in recent decades as occasionally this topic comes up. evangelical and theologically conservative churches, Protestant churches in particular. What is your reaction, either verbally or non-verbally, when you might be having a conversation with a fellow Christian that maybe you've just met or maybe you've known them for a while? And they're lamenting the state of things. And they say, you know, I think what this country needs is revival. Now, what do you hear when somebody says that? And what are your thoughts about it? Well, revival is one of those words that can mean different things to other people. Oh, yes, it is, isn't it? Rarely. I mean, you do hear it. What this country needs is repentance. It is probably more accurate because When we think of the word revival, we think of somebody who maybe has stopped breathing and we're going to go ahead and do mouth-to-mouth or chest compressions to get them going, and we've revived that person. Well, the scriptures tell us that all are dead apart from Christ. So you really don't need revival, you need rebirth. That's the only thing that's going to take dead to become alive. But because churches have pandered to a populist or appealing sort of message. There are plenty of people who are truly undereducated when it comes to the word of God. So rather than decide that all these people are our enemies and we have to tell them how foolish they are, this is where hospitality comes in. People think like hospitality, oh, that's like making a nice dinner. No, it's dealing with somebody in a caring way and investing. So maybe it'll take months, maybe it'll take years before you and this person, assuming this person wants to continue conversing with you, come to a mutual understanding. Let's face it, nobody comes to faith unless the Holy Spirit brings them, but we are the means that God will use, otherwise the Great Commission means nothing. I raise that question about revival because here in this part of these United States, you come across this maybe not as much as you did 50 years ago, but it's still a common statement and declaration of what can really solve all of our problems. And I think that it sort of jumps over the issue that Martin talked about in the article. And that is, well, what about the foundations? That is the central thing. And if you want to take a look at a society that was falling apart and had fallen apart, look at the people of Judah with the coming of Josiah and his reign as king. You can describe that as revival if you want to, but it's really reformation. It's a recognition that we have not been faithful to God and what he calls us to be about doing. I don't know about today with the people of a different generation, but for a long, long time, when people heard that word revival, it meant fervent singing, it meant altar calls, it meant going forward and making a decision for Jesus and stopping yourself drinking and smoking and all the other things you've been doing that are, quote, bad. But nobody stopped it to say, well, wait a minute, what about the rest of it? What about how you're educating your children? What about government, politics, culture, all of these things? And it's been that sort of approach where the foundational issues have been ignored for something that's just been a little bit more surface. Okay, we can all agree that we shouldn't be doing things that are bad for our health, but what about the other stuff that God's law word tells us? So I'm simply saying that if you don't have a clear understanding of what God says the foundations are in his word, then we're just going to limp along and take two steps forward and five steps backward. And it never seems to get better unless you have a Josiah who steps forward and says, we have not been faithful. Here is the law. This is what we are going to do. We will start living according to God's word. Now, of course, I agree with you. Absolutely. We can't do that. We don't have the power to do that apart from the grace of God in our lives and giving us a new life in Christ Jesus. And so hospitality can certainly be an avenue. where people begin to understand that. I'm simply saying that, especially in an era where we're talking right now about government and politics and cooperation with others for a greater good, sometimes we can get sideswiped and not realize that the foundation is what we really want to be working toward. And let's make sure that in our agreeing to walk together with someone, that we aren't destroying the foundation or walking away from it. Right, the foundation, as Jesus laid out, is either gonna be on the rock, him, or sinking or moving sand. And I'm glad you brought up Josiah because he was one of the godly kings. Nobody questions that. However, when Josiah died, they went back to wanting all the things they wanted before. And post-Josiah, they still ended up going into captivity And Jeremiah would warn them of this. So it never is really going to be top down. Yes, it's great if you have a godly leader at the top, but unless the people embrace it and are willing to do the hard things. I mean, you talk to people and they like this candidate or that candidate, and you say, but both candidates are interested in throwing more money into public schools. Well, public schools are half the reason that people can't think, people can't proceed logically, and that they're susceptible to whatever propaganda comes along and they don't have the wherewithal to think it through. But you know what? We'll just say abortion is a more important issue than public schools. Well, I'm sorry. It's equally important in as much as if there is a consistent violation of God's law, there will be consequences. I don't know why people don't realize that God keeps his promises. As a matter of fact, there are a lot of precious moments, calendars that will tell us God keeps his promises. Well, there are promises in Leviticus 26. There are promises in Deuteronomy 28, there are promises in the book of Revelation, and some of them are very negative in terms of disobedience. So folks, yes, God keeps his promises. You just got to figure out whether or not you're going to be the recipient of blessing or cursing. Yeah, I think the issue with government schools is you know, after a certain number of decades and generations. In other words, to put it a different way, you don't have Roe versus Wade and so-called legal abortion without there having first been some foundations laid by those who wanted to have that from a long time ago. And those foundations were laid in the government school system to teach people a different worldview than that of Holy Scripture. And simply saying the Lord's Prayer at the beginning of the school year or the school day by the principal, we talked about that, that's not enough. That doesn't lay a foundation. And so you get from point A to point B because the foundation has been distorted on an issue that a lot of people, yeah, I know, hey, okay, so he wants to give all this money to public school, but he's gonna do this. And the important thing in recognizing that not only do we have the foundational issue, but moving forward, What are we supposed to do in this circumstance? And how are we going to accomplish what God expects of us to do? And a principled obedience to what God has told us in his word is extremely important. That's another foundation. And in the case of Josiah, what got him into trouble and led to his downfall was that he disobeyed the Lord and something the Lord told him not to do. So being right in a lot of things, I may step on toes with what I'm about to say, but currently there's a movie out chronicling part of the life of Ronald Reagan. And you can't be in some circles and say anything too negative about Ronald Reagan because he wasn't the other guy and look at the prosperity and everything else. But here's an example of whether or not you like most of what Reagan did. When Ronald Reagan was governor of California, he signed a law that said you could have no-fault divorce. Now, did he understand the ramifications of no-fault divorce? Is it biblical? Does God say, oh, well, when you want to divorce her, divorce her. As a matter of fact, Jesus commented on that. So could a lot of the problems that have occurred is because we allowed people to end their covenant of marriage and just say, we just want to be out of this. So instead of wholly endorsing one guy and then say, he's the best, he's what we need, examine what he says on a lot of things. Strategically or tactically, you might decide, you know what? In the interim, I'd rather have column A rather than column B. But if you don't recognize that a lot of those perspectives are evil and will lead to other evil things, then you can't throw your hands up and say, I just don't know how we got here. When I was younger, this is what happened. You know, all the people who want to go back to the fifties, well, the sixties came after the fifties. So where did the sixties, where was the seedbed for the sixties if it wasn't in the generations before? That's a, a domino effect that can be traced back even much further than that. So I think, in wrapping it up from my perspective, I think that Paul's exhortation in 1 Corinthians 10.31 is a good way to go. And I would encourage people to read Martin's article that you just referred to from Arise and Build, which I think is probably online now as well. But Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10.31, so whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, you should do it all to God's glory. And I think that's the key thing. But let's make sure we understand what God says glorifies Him. And all the preparation in line with what you just said needs to be ongoing. I mean, it's easy to understand certain things if you've been studying things for 10, 20, 30 years. And a lot of those who listen to our podcast are not kids. They're adults. If you have come late to this party and say, well, oh, and now I think biblical law is important. You better rethink everything that you thought before in light of it and recognize that God has given you the illumination right now and you can do something with it because you can speak from, I was this and now I'm that. I used to think this and now I think that. I used to put my emphasis here, but I realize now my emphasis should be someplace else. And we can see that God is faithful, but we have to be faithful in order to receive his blessings. And I think that's the whole idea of getting the axe to the root and looking at what's the foundation of what it is we're trying to achieve. And with that, I totally agree. That's my sign off. Out of the question podcast at gmail.com is how you reach us. Thanks for being with us and we'll talk with you next time. Thanks for listening to Out of the Question. For more information on this and other topics, please visit calcedon.edu.