Four Reasons We Have A Hard Time With The Necessity Of The Cross

Neal Pollard

The cross tells the truth about us and about God, all at the same time. That doesn’t necessarily make it easier for us to accept and understand. While the cross was a means of torture and punishment most frequently used in ancient times, what we know about it is that is was a painful, horrible way to die. The Roman statesman and philosopher, Cicero, called it the most cruel and the most horrible torture. Yet, God chose it and Jesus endured it. There are several reasons why we have a hard time accepting that the cross was necessary.

The cross says you can’t fix yourself. It confronts our pride by telling us that we must be saved and cannot save ourselves. The perishing think it folly, contrary to wisdom and a stumbling block (cf. 1 Cor. 1:18-23). We like to think that we command our destiny and hold the key to our own rescue, but we know it isn’t so. The cross is a loving reminder that help is available, but also necessary.

The cross says our sins are ugly. In a world that doesn’t want to diagnose behavior as sinful, the cross condemns what the Bible calls sin. “Your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you, that He will not hear” (Isa. 59:2). All the rationalizing, normalizing, and desensitizing in the world cannot negate heaven’s response to sin by allowing the cross to address it.

The cross says God has a specific way to fight and defeat sin. Many expect God to fix things through His power rather than through suffering. Or, people try to fix themselves. God conquers sin through sacrifice rather than force. We may think His way makes no sense, but Scripture teaches His higher thoughts and ways (Isa. 55:8-9). Naaman balked at God’s remedy for his physical illness. So many do the same at God’s remedy for our spiritual sickness.

The cross demands change and a personal response. It calls for surrender, repentance, and obedience, and we don’t generally like that. His cross demands that we take up ours (Luke 9:23). We can come as we are, but we cannot stay as we were. The old song asks, “What will you do with Jesus?” In the test of life, we can’t leave that question blank!

The cross humbles us, challenges our sense of justice, exposes our sin, and calls us to change. Perhaps for these or other reasons, we may question why Jesus had to die on the cross. But the fact of Christ’s crucifixion is central to both the Old and New Testaments. Not only can we not understand the Bible without understanding this, but we cannot under God without it.

Books by the Pollards

A Tiny Spark Snail Mail Club (Kathy Pollard)

When The Earth Was Divided: Understanding Peleg And Genesis 10:25

Brent Pollard

Within Genesis’ genealogies—a section we often skim—one verse has sparked debate for two millennia. Genesis 10.25 (NASB 1995) mentions Peleg: “for in his days the earth was divided.” Five words. No explanation. No footnote from Moses. Just a cryptic remark tucked between a father’s name and a son’s. Peleg’s father was Eber—the ancestor from whom the Hebrews take their name (Genesis 10.21; 11.16–19). The name Peleg comes from the Hebrew palag, meaning “to split” or “to divide.” The parallel account in 1 Chronicles 1.19 repeats the same statement, and Luke 3.35 places Peleg in the lineage of Jesus Christ.

So what was divided? The question matters—not because our salvation hinges on the answer, but because the Bible never wastes words.

The Oldest and Most Widely Accepted Interpretation

The most enduring interpretation—and the one with the deepest roots in Jewish and Christian scholarship—is that the “earth” in Genesis 10.25 refers to its people, not its geology. The pseudepigraphical book of Jubilees (second century B.C.) and the Biblical Antiquities of Philo (circa A.D. 70) both understand the division as a scattering of peoples rather than a fracturing of landmasses. The first-century Jewish historian Josephus agreed, as did the Seder Olam Rabbah, a rabbinical chronology dating to the second century A.D. Among Christian commentators, Keil and Delitzsch argue that erets (“earth”) here functions as a metonym for the world’s population, much as we might say “the whole world watched” when we mean its inhabitants.

Under this reading, the division is the aftermath of the Tower of Babel. God confused the languages of humanity (Genesis 11.1–9), and humans responded by fracturing into distinct linguistic, ethnic, and political groups. The Table of Nations in Genesis 10 catalogs exactly this kind of division: the descendants of Shem, Ham, and Japheth spreading across the ancient world, each “according to their languages, by their lands, by their nations” (Genesis 10.31, NASB 1995). Peleg’s name memorializes the era in which that scattering occurred.

A More Recent Theory: The Splitting of Continents

In the nineteenth century, commentator Adam Clarke proposed that Genesis 10.25 refers to a physical separation—the breakup of continents and islands from a single landmass. In 1858, French geographer Antonio Snider-Pellegrini cited this very verse to argue that the continents once fit together, decades before Alfred Wegener formalized the hypothesis in 1912. The sixteenth-century commentator Seforno suggested an environmental shift in Peleg’s generation that halved human lifespans, implying a cataclysm of enormous scale.

More recently, some creationist scholars, like Dr. Bernard Northrup, have argued from Hebrew philology that palag almost always denotes division by water—canals, channels, or ocean-spanning rifts. They point to Psalm 1.3, where the same root describes “streams of water,” and Job 38.25, where it describes a “channel for the flood.” If palag inherently conveys the sense of water-based division, then Genesis 10.25 may describe a literal geological event—perhaps the breakup of a supercontinent or catastrophic post-Flood sea-level changes.

However, even some young-earth creationists have expressed caution. A rapid breakup of the earth’s lithosphere would have produced geological violence rivaling the Global Flood itself. Within our own fellowship, Dr. Dave Miller of Apologetics Press has written that Moses’ comment about Peleg “most likely does not refer to the Earth’s continental division.”

A Third Possibility: Irrigation and Infrastructure

A less prominent interpretation attributes Peleg’s name to the digging of irrigation canals in Mesopotamia. Cyril Graham, a nineteenth-century English diplomat who traveled extensively in the Transjordan, argued that Peleg’s naming commemorated the first cutting of canals between the Tigris and Euphrates. While this reading aligns with the water-related sense of palag, it lacks meaningful biblical support and reduces a significant genealogical marker to a footnote on civil engineering.

So Which Interpretation Should We Accept?

Because the central question concerns what exactly Genesis 10.25 means by ‘the earth was divided,’ it is important to weigh the evidence for each interpretation. The principle taught by Fee and Stuart in How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth applies here: novel interpretations are usually wrong. With the majority of ancient Jewish and Christian scholarship pointing toward the division of peoples—not continents—and Genesis 10.25 appearing so close to the Tower of Babel account, the best-supported argument is that the division in Peleg’s day refers to the scattering of humanity. The text presents division as a pivotal event, tying Peleg’s era directly to Babel and making this interpretation central to understanding the passage’s significance.

Still, an honest reader senses a tension. On the third day of creation, God divided the dry land (erets) from the waters (Genesis 1.9–10). There, earth isn’t a metaphor for humanity; it’s literal ground. Reading erets as “people” in Genesis 10.25 requires accepting a shift in meaning that the text doesn’t explicitly signal. The metaphorical reading is plausible, but consistency may favor a literal sense.

A Name Worth Remembering

This question is a matter of opinion, not doctrine. Nothing in Genesis 10.25 affects the plan of salvation or the gospel’s terms. Where Scripture is clear, so should we be. Where it invites wonder, we can wonder—and should not impose our conclusions. What we can say confidently is: God, who names the stars (Psalm 147.4) and counts our hairs (Matthew 10.30), placed a man named “Division” in Jesus’s genealogy. However, the earth was divided in Peleg’s day; it was not random. It was Providence. Every division God allows, He intends to heal. In Christ, there is “neither Jew nor Greek” (Galatians 3.28, NASB 1995); one day, “every tongue will confess” Jesus is Lord (Philippians 2.10–11, NASB 1995). Peleg’s divisions are temporary. God’s Kingdom is not.

Books by the Pollards

A Tiny Spark Snail Mail Club (Kathy Pollard)

You Are Not The Owner

Carl Pollard

We live in a world that constantly says, “This is mine.” My time, my money, and my plans! 

But Scripture confronts that mentality head on. The Christian life begins with a fundamental shift in identity. You’re not an owner, you’re a steward.

A steward is someone entrusted with what belongs to another. And according to the Bible, everything we have, everything we are, and everything we will ever touch ultimately belongs to God. “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof” (Psalm 24:1). That includes me and you.

You Are a Steward of Your Life

You don’t belong to yourself. “You are not your own, for you were bought with a price” (1 Corinthians 6:19–20) That’s one of the hardest teachings in Scripture. Your life isn’t self-owned, it’s God-owned. You have been purchased by the blood of Christ. That means your life isn’t about personal fulfillment, comfort, or even your own plans. Out focus is now on faithful management of what God has entrusted to us. We should be asking, “What does the Owner want me to do with this?”

You Are a Steward of Your Time

Time is one of the clearest tests of stewardship because once it’s spent, it’s gone. “Making the best use of the time, because the days are evil” (Ephesians 5:16). Every day is a deposit from God into your account. You don’t control how much you get, but you do control how you spend it. We often say, “I don’t have time,” but the truth is, we all have the same 24 hours. We just have misplaced priorities. How much of our time is given to God’s Word? Prayer? Serving others? Teaching our families? And how much is consumed by distraction?

You Are a Steward of Your Money

Jesus talked about money more than almost any other topic because it reveals what we truly value. “As for the rich in this present age… they are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share” (1 Timothy 6:17–18). Your money is not ultimately yours, but it is a tool entrusted to you by God.

You Are a Steward of Your Abilities

Every talent, skill, and opportunity you have is given by God. “As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace” (1 Peter 4:10). God gave you abilities so you could serve, not to be selfish. Some have the ability to teach, others to encourage, or lead, or give. And all are expected to use what they’ve been given.

You Will Give an Account

This is what makes stewardship so serious.“Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found faithful” (1 Corinthians 4:2). One day, every Christian will stand before God and give an account of how they managed what He entrusted to them. Jesus told parables about this (Matthew 25:14–30). The master returns. The servants report. And faithfulness is rewarded.

You are not the owner of your life, you are the manager of it. And one day, the Owner is coming back. If God evaluated your stewardship today, your time, your money, your abilities, your life, what would He say “Well done, good and faithful servant”?

Or, “Why did you waste what I gave you?”

Books by the Pollards

A Tiny Spark Snail Mail Club (Kathy Pollard)

Waiting For Heaven’s Arrows

Gary Pollard

The status quo on this earth (including here in the USA) is deeply flawed. It can seem like most people are stuck in their own bubble and lack anything approaching self-awareness. Most people seem to be incapable of reason. It seems like all of our leaders are starving for war. The economy is not great, despite what some wish-casters would have us believe. It’s near-impossible to find a decent job. Most corporations are evil beyond comprehension. We have to doubt everything we see, hear, and read because AI has made sophistry available to the masses. The average person is burnt out, hopeless, oscillating between apathetic and angry, agnostic in all things, and overall done with reality. 

Christianity acknowledges that evil controls this world. It outright prohibits violence as a means to rectify this evil, preferring instead to wait for Jesus to return bringing rescue to us and justice to them. This is especially hard to do when greed and corruption affect us personally, but Christianity calls its followers to focus on personal moral growth and altruism. We can only control what we do individually, though never perfectly and with often-herculean effort. Our responsibility toward other people is to meet their needs to the best of our ability. 

Everything is scarier now as a parent. I don’t want to wait. I don’t want to be patient with other peoples’ lack of self-awareness. I don’t want to pray for the powerful whose self-serving decisions make life harder and the future bleaker for my son. To list all of the things I don’t want to do would take up several paragraphs. None of us want to do those things if we’re honest with ourselves. This may be why Jesus had to suffer as much as he did. Unlike us, he didn’t deserve any of what he went through — so he has the right to tell us to love other people, and to do all of those things we don’t want to do. 

I’m not holding my breath for conditions to improve on this earth. The cat’s out of the bag and nothing short of Jesus’ return will fix it. He promised that people who believe in him and who follow his teachings will enjoy immortality on a perfect place (whatever that looks like) when he returns. This earth and its abuses (and those who do the abusing) won’t even be a memory in the paradise he’s prepared. Since our consciousness will be expanded (cf. I Jn 3.1-3; I Cor 13.12), I’d assume our capacity to explore (and the limits of exploration) will also be expanded. We won’t be capable of doing wrong, we won’t live in fear of judgment, we won’t have to work to survive, and we won’t have to worry about anything at all. There will be nothing but genuine, unforced, natural positivity. If there was ever a time to start taking our faith seriously, it’s now. Our greatest and only hope is in the Creator of this world, the visible image of God, the one who paid our existential debt, and the one who will rescue his global family when this earth burns. 

Books by the Pollards

A Tiny Spark Snail Mail Club (Kathy Pollard)

Be Fearlessly Fervent

Dale Pollard


It takes a special individual of both breed and brand to truly impact the world. The fact is, many will live their lives comfortable and content to never break any molds or “step outside the box,” as they say. Most believers understand that God has called us out of this world to be lights and to be different, but that means being uncomfortable (James 1:2-4). We don’t like that aspect of faithful walking and at times the fire inside us and the will to go on is at the verge of being snuffed out. On every side we are surrounded by a raging current of mainstream ideologies and beliefs that drown the masses sweeping them closer towards eternity—unprepared. That familiar and depressing reality can discourage and frustrate us to the point of tears. Preachers, elders, and leaders are constantly fighting these feelings as they huff and puff under the weight of it all.

Christian fathers and mothers anxiously worry about that painfully uncertain future their children will battle. Young people are plagued with convincing thoughts that a faithful life is all but impossible today. How can we make an impact? You may wonder what difference you could possibly make as you observe such a powerful and evil force.

Here is the bad news, it’s hard. But here is the wonderful news, it’s worth it! God has given us an instruction manual on how to become mighty misfits in a culture that rejects righteousness. There are permanent footprints left by the feet of godly men throughout history, and their tracks lead to victory for those that choose to follow them.

For example, there is the trail blazer and zealous disciple, Paul. He serves as an inspiring nonconformist when he abandons his previous life of riches, respect, and comfort. His courage, faith, and determination can produce a powerful stirring in our spirits. If that man with the thorn can overcome fear and defeat the devil’s endeavors, despite his own weakness, then by the grace of God we can too. Our lives can leave an impact and they can serve as beacon of light for generations to come.

Notice how Jabez demonstrates this point in 1 Chronicles 4:9-10. Within a lengthy list of family lines that make up the sons of Judah, Jabez breaks the mold. While numerous names are given, there is something more to be said of Jabez. He stands out as one who was “more honorable” than those who were before him in verse nine. Though his name means “son of my sorrow,” a label associated with affliction, he refuses to let this name define his future. The key to his success is given in the following verse which says, “Jabez called upon the Lord saying, ‘oh that you would bless me, your hand be with me, and that you would keep me from harm so that it might not give me pain!’ And God granted what he asked.” That verse is loaded with valuable lessons for this age and every age to follow.

Lesson one, don’t interpret your future by looking at your past. It doesn’t matter what family you were born into or how you were raised. We all have been given at least three common blessings. If you are made in the image of God, and you are, then that means you have talent, opportunity, and a life. The amount of talent, number of opportunities, and quality of that life is irrelevant. You have everything you need to succeed which is precisely what our Father desires.

Lesson number two, only God can grant you gainful glory. Jabez established his lasting legacy and was victorious because he understood one thing. God is the God of impartiality. He offers a heavenly hand to help the stereotypically weak and sinful human break the stereotype. The cards of life you hold in your hand mean little to the God who owns the deck. Jabez, Paul, and many faithful others understood the weakness of humanity. Their lives are a statement and a confession— God can help anyone rise above the crowd. He can help you achieve the only recognition that counts and give you the precious gift of a future with certainty.

The path to victory is a narrow one according to Matthew 7:14. Few have found it and few have finished it, but with the right Guide it can definitely be done. Are you unsure of your current location? Look down at the tracks you are following, and the guide walking with you. If you are holding the hand of the Savior— you can be sure you’re going in the right direction. Allow that comfort to strengthen you and break out of whatever mold you are in. Let God use your weakness and failures to leave an eternal mark on a world that needs it. There is no congregation that can’t grow, no Christian that can’t improve, and no unsaved person that doesn’t deserve the chance to hear that life changing message of the cross. There’s a great day coming, and that should provoke some excitement as well as motivate us all to diligently and fearlessly work until then.

God Chose the Borderlands to Reveal the Light: Why Jesus Began in Galilee Instead of Jerusalem

Brent Pollard

If we had been given the pen, we would have written the opening scene in Jerusalem.

And who could blame us? Jerusalem had the temple, the priesthood, the scholars, and the gravitas of Zion. Every instinct of human religion would place the Son of God at the summit of sacred visibility—announced among the powerful, certified by the impressive.

But when Jesus begins His public ministry, He does not begin in Jerusalem, but in Galilee.

And that is not a footnote. It is a sermon before the sermon has started.

The Prophecy Behind the Place

Matthew tells us that after John was imprisoned, Jesus withdrew to Galilee. He left Nazareth and settled in Capernaum, “by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali,” so that Isaiah’s ancient word would find its landing place:

“The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.” (Matthew 4.15–16, KJV)

That phrase—Galilee of the Gentiles—is dense with meaning. It tells us immediately that the ministry of Christ did not begin at the nation’s polished religious center. It began in a borderland.

God, who arranges all things according to the counsel of His own will, chose that soil for this seed. Before a single parable was spoken, before the first leper stretched out his hand, the geography itself was preaching. The location was already the lesson.

A Region Marked by History

Galilee was Jewish, yes—but it was a Judaism that had lived for centuries under a foreign shadow. Invasion, deportation, and the slow encroachment of Gentile presence had left their mark on the land like old scars on a workman’s hands.

Jerusalem represented sacred centrality—the throne room, as it were, of the covenant.

Galilee represented the bruised periphery—the room in the house nearest the street, where the noise of the wider world could always be heard through the walls.

And God, who might have started anywhere, chose the periphery.

Light Came First to the Scarred Places

This should not surprise us, though it nearly always does.

The regions of Zebulun and Naphtali had known humiliation long before they knew healing. When Assyria came sweeping into the north, Galilee was among the first territories swallowed—one of the first places darkened by conquest, one of the first to feel the ground of identity shift beneath its feet.

And then, centuries later, Isaiah declared that this same region would one day see a great light.

Here is the pattern of grace, and God repeats it constantly:

The place most associated with darkness becomes the first stage of dawn.

God does not begin where men would place the spotlight. He begins where the wounds are oldest. That is not inefficiency. It is theology. He will plant the first flame wherever the darkness is thickest, because that is where His character will be seen most clearly.

Jesus Did Not Start at the Top

Make no mistake: Jesus would go to Jerusalem. He would teach there, weep there, overturn tables there, bleed there, die there, and shatter the grip of death there. Jerusalem was woven into the very fabric of redemption.

But His public ministry did not begin in the city of religious prestige.

It began among fishermen mending their nets, village families drawing water, laborers and ordinary synagogue-goers in the north—people whose names would never have appeared in the religious directories of the capital.

He did not begin by climbing the tallest tower of visible religion. He began by walking the roads of the overlooked.

Something in us—something trained by the world’s value system—wants the Messiah to start with a press conference, not a fishing boat. We want credentials before compassion. We want the throne room before the lakeshore.

But God is not subject to our marketing instincts.

The Gospel Is Not Bound to Prestige

This tells us something essential about the kingdom of God—something we must either receive or stumble over, because there is no middle ground.

The Messiah did not come merely for the polished center. He came for the margins too. His ministry did not unfold according to human assumptions about status, visibility, or reputation.

Men are impressed by the center stage. God is not.

That single fact has been unsettling religious people for two thousand years, and it has not yet finished its work.

Why Galilee Was the Perfect Starting Point

Galilee was not merely adequate for the opening of Christ’s ministry. It was ideal—chosen with the kind of precision that marks everything God does.

It was Jewish enough that Scripture, synagogue life, and messianic expectation were alive and recognizable. A rabbi could open a scroll of Isaiah, and every ear in the room would lean forward.

But it was also exposed enough—close enough to the traffic of nations, marked enough by the long overlap of cultures—to carry the air of the wider world.

That made it a fitting stage for the One who came first to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, yet whose mission would ultimately gather in every tribe, tongue, and nation.

Galilee stood between worlds. And Jesus began there because He Himself stood between worlds: fully rooted in the promises made to Israel, yet coming as the Savior of the whole earth.

It is almost as though God placed the lamp where both the house and the street could see it—where covenant and mission stood close enough to be illuminated by a single flame.

God Often Works in Our “Galilee” Places

Now here is where the text turns its eyes on us and will not let us look away.

Many of us assume that God’s clearest work ought to happen in the “Jerusalem” parts of our lives—the polished parts, the strong parts, the areas where we feel established and respectable.

But often the Lord begins His most visible work in our “Galilee” places instead. He begins in the area of life that feels messy, in the place where we feel less refined, in the part of our story touched by confusion, sorrow, or old humiliation—the chapter we would rather skip when telling others about ourselves.

We would choose the impressive platform. God often chooses the scarred borderland.

Why? Because He is not merely displaying glory. He is redeeming territory.

A God who only displayed glory might reasonably begin with the most spectacular venue. But a God who redeems begins with the place that most needs redemption. He goes to the wound before He goes to the banquet hall. That is not a weakness. That is the very heartbeat of the gospel.

Grace Is Not Afraid of Mixed Soil

God is not intimidated by complicated places.

Galilee was not pristine. It was not sealed off from outside influence in some antiseptic spiritual quarantine. It carried a long memory of fracture and mixture. Its religious life was real, but it breathed the same air as a dozen pagan influences.

And yet none of that disqualified it from becoming the first major theater of the Messiah’s ministry.

That should encourage anyone who has ever looked at the landscape of his own life and thought, Surely God would choose somewhere cleaner than this.

No. He often chooses precisely there. Not because darkness is good—we must never sentimentalize it—but because His light is greater. The gospel is not fragile. Christ does not require ideal conditions to begin His work.

A candle that can only burn in a sealed room is no great candle. But a light that blazes in the open wind, in the very teeth of the darkness—that is a light worth trusting.

Galilee Was a Preview of the Kingdom

When Jesus began in Galilee, He was doing more than fulfilling an old prophecy. He was previewing the shape of His kingdom.

His kingdom would not be confined to the prestigious, monopolized by the religious elite, or limited to one social center. It would reach fishermen pulling wet nets from the sea, tax collectors despised by their own neighbors, women with painful histories, Roman outsiders, Gentile seekers, and eventually—gloriously—the uttermost ends of the earth.

Galilee was the right opening note because it already carried the hint of that wider horizon. It was Jewish, yet Gentile-adjacent. Covenantal, yet cosmopolitan. Rooted, yet restless.

The Messiah did not begin in a closed room. He began in a doorway. And every doorway, if you stand in it long enough, faces two directions at once.

A Word for the One Living in “Galilee”

Some Christians feel as though they are living in Galilee—not geographically, but spiritually. They are not in the tidy center. Their lives feel marked by old invasions of sorrow, by disappointments that never fully healed, and by a lingering sense that things are not as whole as they ought to be.

If that is you, then Matthew 4 is not merely history. It is hope with your name written in the margin.

Jesus began in Galilee. He has always had a habit of walking into regions others would write off as secondary, making them the very places where His light is first seen.

Your scarred places are not automatically abandoned places. They may, in fact, be exactly where dawn begins.

Conclusion

Why did Jesus begin in Galilee instead of Jerusalem?

Because God was making a point from the very first scene of Christ’s public ministry—a point so important that He wrote it into the geography itself:

The light of the kingdom does not shine only on the polished center. It shines on the bruised edges, too.

He came for Jerusalem, yes. But He did not come only for Jerusalem.

He came for Galilee.

And thank God He did—because most of us, if we are honest enough to say it plainly, have far more Galilee in us than Jerusalem. And the gospel meets us there, not with disappointment, but with light.

Cut Flowers Die

Carl Pollard

There is something beautiful about cut flowers. For a little while, they still look alive. Their color remains, and their shape stays intact. But everyone knows the same thing about cut flowers, they are dying. Why? Because they have been separated from their source of life.

Isn’t that a fitting picture of morality without God? A person can cut off the flower and still admire it for a while. And in the same way, a society can cut itself off from God and still hold on to certain moral values for a time. People may continue speaking about honesty, kindness, fidelity, justice, compassion, and decency. Outwardly, the flower is still there, but cut flowers die.

If morality is the flower, then God is the root. If righteous living is the fruit, then God’s word is the seed. Once people sever morality from the authority of Scripture, they may preserve the appearance of goodness for a generation or two, but it will not last! Morality can’t survive long when it’s disconnected from the One who defines what is good.

God Is The Source Of What Is Good

The Bible doesn’t present morality as something man invented. Goodness doesn’t begin with culture, education, public opinion, or human consensus. It begins with God! 

Psalm 119:68 says, “You are good and do good; teach me Your statutes.” Good is rooted in God’s character. He is the standard.

James 1:17 says, “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights.” If every truly good gift comes from above, then moral truth does too. Man doesn’t discover morality by looking within himself. He learns morality by reading the Word of God. Micah 6:8 says, “He has shown you, O man, what is good.” Micah doesn’t say man figured out what is good, he says God has shown him. Moral truth is revealed truth! 

Morality Without God Cannot Stand

Many people want the flower without the root. They want the benefits of biblical morality without submission to biblical authority. They want strong families without God’s design for the family. They want justice without acknowledging the Judge of all the earth. They want dignity, value, love, sacrifice, and truth, but they don’t want the God who gives those words meaning.

But once morality is detached from God, it becomes unstable. Why is honesty good? Why is murder wrong? Why is sexual purity honorable? Why should someone sacrifice for another person? Why should the strong protect the weak? Why should truth matter more than desire?

If theres no God, then those questions have no fixed answer. Morality becomes preference, tradition, social convenience, or majority opinion. And what one generation calls virtue, the next generation may call oppression. What one culture honors, another may reject. Without God, morality becomes negotiable! 

Judges 21:25 describes the chaos that results when God’s rule is cast aside,

“Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.” That is the natural end of morality cut loose from God. When man becomes his own standard, he doesn’t gain freedom, he finds confusion. 

Proverbs 14:12, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.” What “seems right” isn’t enough. Human instinct isnt a trustworthy moral compass. Feelings change, cultures drift, and hearts deceive.

Jeremiah 10:23 says, “O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his own steps.” Man can’t author a lasting morality because he was never meant to be his own god.

Cut flowers are beautiful, but eventually they whither and die. Moral decency without God is doomed to fail. 

Sorry, Chase! (Part 4)

Gary Pollard

The second universal observation, as posited in the otherwise excellent research presented by Chase Hughes (The ancients decoded reality), is mostly spot-on! “Fear is an illusion, and love is the truth.” And, “Fear is the greatest lie ever told. Love is the only thing that’s real.” He cites the bible first, and it is in this citation where (as far as I can tell) his only error, from a Christian’s perspective, is.  

He says, “The most quoted phrase in the entire bible is ‘be not afraid.’” Some variation of this command, according to the infallible internet, is indeed one of the most quoted in the entire bible. But then he says, “A quote from Jesus, ‘Perfect love casts out fear.’” Most of you have already spotted it! The error is a minor one, and he more than likely misspoke. I point it out only because it’s a well-known passage written by John, spoken by John (I Jn 4.18). If God’s love is fully matured in us, we can be without fear on the day when God judges the world. We will be without fear, because in this world we are like Jesus. No fear exists with love. None, because matured love throws fear away. This fear is of punishment! Anyone who is always afraid has not been made mature in their love.

So his overall point stands, if misattributed. In this case, though, that fear helps us know where our love is in the maturing process. If we’re still afraid (of death or of judgment), our love has not matured enough. So in the passage he cited, fear definitely means that something is wrong! 

From a Christian perspective, one kind of fear is critical to maintain: of the power, presence, and holiness of God. Better words for this kind of fear may be sublime (delightful horror) and awe (admiration and fear, reducing feelings of self-entitlement). Our motivation to follow God transitions from fear to love as we mature. It’s impossible to see something large and powerful (like a tornado or hurricane or comet) and not feel at least a little something in the pit of your stomach. Those are tiny manifestations of his power — a healthy fear/awe of the power behind those phenomena is not a bad thing. It keeps our view of self properly calibrated. Some variation of “fear God” is found about 300 times in scripture, which is as much or more than “be not afraid”. 

It is interesting that love is so powerful a discipline that every culture in antiquity praised it. Chase cites the following: 

  1. Buddhism:  “Hatred does not cease by hatred. By love alone is hatred healed.”
  2. Bhagavad Gita: “The path of devotion, love, leads to liberation. The path of ignorance, fear, leads to suffering.” Yoda apparently read the Bhagavad Gita. 
  3. Tao Te Ching: “Courage comes from love. Paralysis comes from fear.” 
  4. Dhammapada: “The mind is everything.” (This is explained further in his video)
  5. Sufi: “Your job is not to seek for love, but to find and remove the barriers you built against it.” 

Finally, “Fear is an illusion that keeps us asleep. Love is the frequency or the thing that wakes us up. Fear shrinks the self, love expands the self. Fear breeds ego, and love dissolves it. Fear isolates you, and love reminds you [who] you actually are. Fear makes you chase approval, validation, money, control; it makes us compare ourself to everybody else. Fear makes us live like something is missing — love, in the ancient sense, isn’t romantic. It’s oneness, alignment, essentially the recognition that we’re made of the same stuff… That’s why fear feels bad, because it’s biologically incompatible with what you actually are. Every mistake you’ve ever made, every relationship that blew up, every regret you carry, every time you sabotage your own potential, that’s all fear. Every ancient teacher: you’re suffering because you believe a lie. The moment you drop fear, you don’t just…find love. You don’t find love, you return to it. It’s why you’re born with it.” 

As you can see, his observations are mostly excellent! But if the observations imply universal compatibility between faiths, we have a problem. What videos like this do for us, though, is encourage us to return to a healthy interest in the esoteric aspects of scripture. Paul, John, Clement, and Origen (and many others) were no strangers to the esoteric. We have long abandoned its pursuit, perhaps because it was hijacked early on by Gnostics and other odd groups. Armed with only reaction, we’ll always be two steps behind. The difficulty lies in approaching the esoteric with a proper framework. There’s no shortage of esoterism and symbolism in scripture, we just tend to gloss over it or dilute it with reductionistic literalism. We are left, then, with only secular (often pagan) resources to tackle biblical esoterism. This is obviously dangerous! Whether we like it or not, it’s in the Zeitgeist. And because we’ve largely abandoned it, Gnosticism is now touted as being the earliest form of Christianity. What’s a seeker or curious believer to do in the face of these complex, often-convincing arguments without a mature framework to bring to the study of esoterism? Building such a framework would be an invaluable project for a group of Christian scholars to tackle! 

DYING OF FRIGHT WOULD BE HORRIFYING 

Dale Pollard

Charles Walton was a guy who lived in rural England back in the day (1890s). His death was a mysterious one and over the years the details have become a little blurry. Here’s the quick and skinny version.

Walton reportedly believed he had been cursed by a local witch after a dispute in his village. According to accounts recorded by local investigators and later writers of English folklore— he became increasingly terrified that supernatural forces were after him. One night he was found dead in bed with no obvious physical cause of death. The local doctor reportedly suggested that extreme fright and stress may have caused heart failure.

Cases like this are sometimes explained medically through what modern doctors recognize as “stress-triggered cardiac events,” such as Takotsubo cardiomyopathy or sudden cardiac arrest brought on by intense fear. The author admits his inability to pronounce any of that correctly or with confidence. 

PAGANS & JEWS & ROMANS— OH MY!

The Bible gives the perfect case study on the negative effects that fear has on us spiritually by providing insight into Timothy’s mind. 

On the outside he faces pagan people, jealous Jews, and the sword swinging soldiers of Rome. On the inside, the Christians who make up this young congregation are being led and taught by a young man— Timothy. He battles self doubt and a lack of confidence in his own abilities. To top it off, his mentor is in prison. 

Paul perfectly pens the inspired words that would lift young Timothy’s spirit by reminding him that the human spirit was designed to handle and persevere under such daunting circumstances. Paul writes (from a cell), 

“God did not give us a spirit of fear but of power, love, and a sound mind.” 2 Timothy 1.7

The spirit (πνεῦμα) referred to here is not the Holy Spirit, but it’s the “disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of any one” (Strong, G4154). 

God did not give us the spirit of skittishness so that we’d cower under confrontation or burn out under prospects of suffering.

Holiness amidst hostility is an ability that comes standard on the base model human spirit. It’s not a possibility, it’s a guarantee. So if we weren’t originally given a spirit of fear, what do we have? 

THREE GOOD WORDS 

Each key word in the verse gives the reader a little more when they’re dissected— check them out. 

Power

We’re equipped with power (δύναμις) that is, “inherent power, power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature” (Strongs, G1410). 

Love 

That aggressive strength is powerfully combined with love (ἀγάπη). In this case the word refers to an affection or good will towards others. The God given spirit is not heartless. We have the power to show affection yet some chose to pretend as if their personalities are simply not capable of showing this attribute. 

Self-control 

A sound mind (σωφρονισμός) is simply the ability to control yourself (Strong, G4995). 

WE’RE PROGRAMMED TO WIN 

We share a commonality with Paul’s protégé — (the reader would be shocked at the many attempts made trying to spell pro-toe-Shay). 

Like Timothy, we’ve been fashioned in the image of an eternal Being and our spirits drive an immortal soul. We aren’t designed to live in a constant state of timidity, we’re creations of courage. 

Courage is not the absence of a fearful feeling but it’s the ability to face that fear— and move forward.  

The Tongue, The Truth, And The Tangled Web:

Why Honesty Is Not Just A Policy But A Posture Of The Soul

Brent Pollard

Sir Walter Scott warned us well: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” There is a reason this line has endured for two centuries. It endures because it is true, and truth has a way of outlasting the cleverest fabrication. A lie is not a single act; it is a seed that demands constant tending. The deceiver must water it with more lies, fertilize it with half-truths, and build an ever-expanding greenhouse of falsehood to keep the fragile plant alive. And yet, for all this labor, the harvest is always the same—exposure, shame, and broken trust. The liar works harder than the honest man, and his wages are ruin.

The Anatomy of Deception

We must be honest about dishonesty. People lie for different reasons, and those reasons matter—not because they excuse the lie, but because understanding the disease helps us apply the remedy. Some lies are born of cowardice. Others spring from vanity. Still others are calculated instruments of plunder.

Consider the pathological liar—a person so enslaved to falsehood that he fabricates elaborate stories without any discernible motive. Clinically, this pattern must persist for more than six months to warrant the label, though we are tempted to apply it more liberally. The pathological liar is not scheming for profit; he is performing for an audience that exists largely in his own mind. He seeks to appear grander, more interesting, more worthy of attention than reality permits. His is a pitiable bondage—chained not to external gain but to an internal compulsion that even he may not fully understand.

The scammer, by contrast, is coldly deliberate. While the pathological liar deceives from compulsion, the scammer deceives from calculation. His target is your wallet, your identity, your trust—anything of value he can extract and exploit. He is the wolf who has studied the sheep’s gait and practiced the sheep’s bleat. One thinks of the elaborate call-center operations where criminals masquerade as computer technicians, preying on the elderly and the trusting. The scammer’s lie is a tool, sharpened and wielded with precision, and it is wielded without conscience.

The Colors We Give Our Lies

It is a curious thing that our culture has developed an entire color wheel for deception, as though assigning a shade to a lie could soften its edges. The “white lie” lubricates the gears of social interaction—a small, supposedly harmless falsehood meant to spare another’s feelings. The “black lie” is its dark counterpart: intentional, exploitative, and universally condemned. Between these poles lie “gray lies,” told for mixed motives—partly to help another and partly to help oneself. These are said to be the most common variety, and perhaps the most insidious, because their ambiguity allows us to excuse them.

Then there is the “blue lie,” told to benefit a group—covering a colleague’s mistake, protecting the team’s reputation. And the “red lie,” which is deception as a weapon, driven by spite so consuming that the liar will injure himself if it means injuring his enemy. This last variety reveals the darkest truth about lying: it is not merely a moral failure but a spiritual sickness. A man so enslaved to vengeance that he will set fire to his own house to burn his neighbor’s—that is a soul in desperate need of deliverance.

But here is the point we must not miss: this spectrum of color is a human invention. God does not grade our lies on a curve.

What God Says About Lying

Scripture treats deception with an unsparing directness that should arrest every honest reader. Solomon declares that “lying lips are an abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs 12.22, ESV). That word—abomination—is not casual disapproval. It is visceral revulsion. It is the word used for the most grievous offenses against the holy character of God. And John, writing from Patmos, places liars in the company of the cowardly, the faithless, the murderers, and the sexually immoral, all of whom face the lake of fire (Revelation 21.8). There is no footnote exempting the “white” variety.

The reason is not arbitrary. Lying is an assault on the very nature of God. He is truth (John 14.6). He cannot lie (Titus 1.2). And the devil, that ancient serpent, is identified as the “father of lies” (John 8.44)—the original architect of deception whose native tongue is falsehood. Every lie, however small, however well-intentioned, speaks a word in the devil’s language. Every lie, to some degree, allies itself with the one who deceived Eve in the garden and who continues to deceive the nations.

And yet Scripture does not categorize lies by color. It categorizes them by function. Bearing false witness perverts justice and destroys the innocent (Exodus 20.16). Hypocrisy dons a mask of righteousness to conceal a rotting interior (Matthew 23.28). Flattery deploys smooth words as instruments of manipulation (Psalm 12.2). And self-deception—perhaps the most dangerous of all—convinces us that we have no sin, thus cutting us off from the very grace that could heal us (1 John 1.8).

When Survival Demands the Impossible

We would be dishonest ourselves if we did not acknowledge the hard cases. Rahab lied to protect the Israelite spies at Jericho (Joshua 2.4ff), and James commends her for her actions (James 2.25). Certain Germans during the Second World War—Oskar Schindler, Karl Plagge, and others—lied to the SS to rescue Jews from the gas chambers. These are the extreme edges of moral experience, where the preservation of innocent life collided with the command to speak truth.

But we must be careful not to build a theology of exceptions from a handful of extraordinary moments. Most of us will never face the Gestapo at our door. Most of our lies arise only to spare someone’s feelings or shield us from inconvenience. When survival is genuinely at stake, we may find ourselves trusting in God’s grace to cover what necessity demands. But we must never mistake that trust for permission, nor should we pretend that a lie ceases to be a lie simply because the motive was noble. Even in the direst circumstance, we are speaking a falsehood—and we do so in the sober awareness that we need mercy, not congratulations.

Practical Disciplines for Truthful Living

Practice the discipline of silence. The simplest way to reduce the frequency of our lies is to reduce the frequency of our words. Solomon understood this. Even a fool, he observed, can pass for wise if he keeps his mouth shut (Proverbs 17.28). And again: “When words are many, transgression is not lacking” (Proverbs 10.19, ESV). James echoes this counsel with an urgency that suggests the early church needed the reminder as badly as we do: “Let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak” (James 1.19, ESV). When Elijah stood on Horeb, God was not in the wind, the earthquake, or the fire—He was in the still, small voice (1 Kings 19.12). There is something about silence that makes room for God to speak. Words are powerful, and power must be handled with care. The man who speaks less has fewer opportunities to sin—and more opportunities to listen, which is where wisdom begins.

Cultivate a radical simplicity of speech. Elaborate explanations are the breeding ground of exaggeration. Complex oaths are the refuge of the uncommitted. Jesus cut through all of it with surgical precision: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’” (Matthew 5.37, ESV). In His day, men would swear by the temple if they wanted an escape clause, but swear by the gold of the temple if they actually intended to keep their word (Matthew 23.16–22). Jesus condemned the entire charade. Our speech should be so plain, so dependable, that oaths become unnecessary. Solomon warned that there is more hope for a fool than for a man who is hasty in his words (Proverbs 29.20). Let us, then, be deliberate. Let our yes mean yes and our no mean no, and let us leave the embellishments to novelists.

Guard the heart from which your words flow. Jesus warned that the mouth speaks from the overflow of the heart (Matthew 12.34). If the well is poisoned, it does not matter how fine the cup—the water will still be toxic. Truthful speech begins not with technique but with character. It begins with the prayer of the psalmist: “Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts! And see if there be any grievous way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting!” (Psalm 139.23–24, ESV). It continues with the daily plea: “Set a guard, O Lord, over my mouth; keep watch over the door of my lips!” (Psalm 141.3, ESV). The man who invites God to search his motives will find that honesty becomes less of a discipline and more of a disposition.

Establish a practice of immediate confession. When a lie escapes—and it will, for we are fallen creatures—the remedy is swift confession. Confess to God, who is faithful and just, to be forgiven (1 John 1.9). Confess to the person wronged, for healing comes through the honesty we should have practiced in the first place (James 5.16). Immediate confession prevents a pattern from forming. It breaks the cycle before the web can be woven. And it must be paired with the commitment to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4.15)—for honesty without love is cruelty, and love without honesty is sentimentality. Neither one honors the God who is both perfectly true and perfectly kind.

A Posture of the Soul

Honesty is not merely a policy. Policies can be revised, suspended, or abandoned when they become inconvenient. Honesty is a posture of the soul before a God who cannot lie and who will not be mocked. It is the daily, deliberate alignment of our words with reality, which is to say, the alignment of our words with the character of the One who created reality and sustains it by the word of His power.

In a world that grades deception by color and excuses it by circumstance, we are called to a higher standard—one rooted not in social convention but in the very nature of our Creator. Let us, then, be people whose words need no footnotes, whose promises require no collateral, and whose speech reflects the One in whom there is no shadow of turning. For when we commit ourselves to truth, we do more than avoid sin—we bear witness to the Father of lights in a world darkened by the father of lies.

How To Handle Anxiety

Carl Pollard

Anxiety is one of the most common struggles people face today. Worry about finances, family, health, and the future can weigh heavily on our minds. While modern culture often treats anxiety purely as a psychological problem, Scripture addresses it as a spiritual battle of trust and perspective. The Bible doesn’t ignore anxiety, it provides a clear path for confronting it through faith.

One of the most direct teachings on anxiety comes from Philippians 4:6–7, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”

The Command: Reject Anxiety

Sounds pretty straight forward, but Paul begins with a clear instruction: “Do not be anxious about anything.” The Greek word for anxious (merimnao) literally means “to be pulled in different directions.” Anxiety divides the mind between trust in God and fear of circumstances.

This command doesn’t deny that life contains real problems. Instead, it teaches that Christian’s aren’t meant to carry those burdens alone. Anxiety often grows when we try to control what only God can control. And we feed it constantly by trying to be in control! 

The Exchange: Prayer Instead of Worry

Paul replaces anxiety with a specific practice, prayer. Notice the progression in the verse:

  • Prayer, general communication with God.
  • Supplication, specific requests for help.
  • Thanksgiving, gratitude for what God has already done.

Thanksgiving is especially important. Gratitude shifts the focus from what might go wrong to what God has already proven faithful to do. When we intentionally bring our concerns to God, anxiety is exchanged for dependence.

The Result: God’s Guarding Peace

Paul promises that when we practice this pattern, the peace of God… will guard your hearts and minds. The word guard is a military term describing soldiers protecting a city. God’s peace stands guard over our inner life, protecting the heart (emotions) and the mind (thoughts).

Notice Paul says, this peace surpasses understanding. This doesn’t mean every problem disappears. Instead, God gives a calm confidence even when circumstances remain uncertain.

Jesus addressed anxiety in Matthew 6:25–34. Three times He tells His listeners do not worry.” His reasoning centers on God’s care. God feeds the birds of the air. God clothes the lilies of the field. Humans are far more valuable than either! 

Jesus concludes in Matthew 6:33, “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.” The biblical solution to anxiety isnt control of circumstances but proper priority. When life is centered on God’s kingdom, daily needs fall into their proper place.

Scripture gives several practical steps for dealing with anxiety. 

1. Identify the source of worry. Anxiety often grows from fear of the future or loss of control.

2. Replace worry with prayer immediately.

Instead of rehearsing problems mentally, bring them to God. If you’re already thinking about them, think about it with God. 

3. Practice intentional gratitude. Remembering God’s past faithfulness strengthens trust for the present.

4. Focus on today.

Jesus said, “Do not worry about tomorrow” (Matthew 6:34). A lot of anxiety comes from imagining problems that haven’t happened yet. 

The Bible doesn’t promise a life free from stressful circumstances, but it promises something better, the peace of God. Anxiety shrinks when we remember who God is, trust His care, and continually bring our concerns to Him in prayer.

When the heart learns to surrender control to God, worry gives way to confidence, and fear is replaced with peace.

Sorry, Chase! (Part 3)

Gary Pollard

At long last, we’re going to look at the five pillars — the main observations of Hughes in his video The ancients decoded reality. In case this is the first article you’re reading in the series, a brief explanation is in order. This content creator clearly spent a great deal of time and effort in studying all of these ancient texts and looking for similarities between them (over 180 sources spanning multiple cultures, epochs, languages, and religions). Most of his observations are excellent and intellectually stimulating! Some of his conclusions, where Christianity is concerned at least, are erroneous. Because (reference the first article) he posits cross-compatibility between all religions, this would make Christianity just another in an ocean of faiths. Jesus, in this framework, would be just another wise man, no different from Siddhartha Gautama or Lao Tze or Solon. The problem, from a Christian’s perspective, is that this denies Jesus’s status as God-man. No message is from God if it doesn’t acknowledge Jesus as coming from God. It comes from the enemies of Christ, the ones you heard were coming and are in the world right now (I Jn 4.1-3). 

I don’t for a second believe that Mr. Hughes is intentionally leading the Christians in his audience away from truth. He seems to be wholly genuine and has provided helpful (even life-changing) material for millions of people. But if the foundation isn’t solid, the message will be flawed. Whether with intent or as a result of ignorance, the potential for damage to a Christian’s faith is the same. Ironically, he quotes a passage from I John in the video in the same short chapter as the verse quoted above. 

Anyway, the first main observation is this: “You are not separate. You never were, you never could be.” He cites: 

  1. Upanishads: “You are that” (not connected to it, not loved by it, you are the thing itself.  Jesus said, “The entire kingdom of God is within you, not in a building or a book, in you”)
  2. Sufi texts: “You are not a drop in the ocean, you are the entire ocean in a drop.” 
  3. Hermetic texts: “All is one” 
  4. Taoism: “Everything is the Dao, expressing itself in ten thousand forms” 
  5. Popul Vuh: “Heart of sky, heart of earth” 
  6. Buddhism: “There is no separate self” 
  7. Kabbala: “Creation is one emanation divided only in appearance” 

On the face of things, this argument is not a bad one — and it certainly contains elements of truth. Jesus very often quoted from the ancient texts of the Jews, and used the ίερα γράμματα to establish eternal principles. Yes, the kingdom of God isn’t in any building or exclusively contained within any book. But his kingdom is also not comprised of all people allowing reality to experience itself through their eyes. Multiple times in the gospels he clearly taught that some will inherit that kingdom, and some will not. He told one teacher of the law, “You are close to God’s kingdom” (Mk 12.34). 

According to Mt 3.2 and 4.17, personal changes have to be made to be accepted in God’s kingdom. 

In Mt 5.3, that kingdom belongs to certain people (poor in spirit, persecuted because of faith). 

In 5.20, anyone who isn’t morally better than the Pharisees is barred from God’s kingdom. 

In 7.21, not everyone who claims to serve him will enter the kingdom. 

Multiple times, he says that God’s kingdom is “almost here” (3.2, 4.17, 10.7), and instructed his followers to pray that God’s kingdom would come (6.10, 33). If it existed exclusively within them (and/or within all people), how would some be excluded and some not? Why pray for and anticipate its arrival if it was already within them? We know it was something tangible because he said, “Some of you will still be alive when they see the Son of Man come with his kingdom” (Mt 16.28). 

God’s kingdom ≠ The Universe expressing itself in ten thousand forms. It is the new, someday-perfected, ideal form of personal and cultural identity. This is an identity that won’t be realized fully until Jesus returns (and is today made up of his followers). It transcends national borders, cultures, languages, and any other barrier that historically has prevented people separated by these things from playing nice with each other. It’s a return to the relationship we had with each other and with him before humanity fell. 

Besides this (critical!) aspect, the rest is good general advice — isolation is not fundamentally real, obsession with self leads to unethical behavior, etc. We are not, however, one field of consciousness expressing itself through billions of different viewpoints. The extreme emphasis in the New Testament on others-above-self calls for more concrete distinction between individuals than this worldview allows. We are truly, though, one. Not by our very nature, but because Jesus made it possible for everyone to be unified through his name, by his power. This means that there are, unfortunately, people who will not be one with him. Our hope is that by doing for others what we want them to do for us, we can lead them to the Source who is Truth and who will unify all of creation in himself when earth’s number is up. 

 Gideon: When the Deliverer Becomes the Danger

Brent Pollard

Few stories in Scripture trace spiritual decline more vividly than Gideon’s. Here was a man summoned from obscurity by the voice of God Himself. He was fearful, hiding grain from Midianite raiders in a winepress. Yet God called him a “mighty man of valor” before he had drawn a sword (Judges 6.12 ESV). Through divine power—not human strategy—Gideon led three hundred men to scatter an army beyond counting.

He had torn down his father’s altar to Baal. He had cut down the Asherah pole. He had obeyed when obedience was costly.

But the final chapter of his life tells a different story. It is the kind every Christian needs to hear, because its warning is not aimed at the faithless. It is aimed at those who have tasted victory and grown comfortable in its shadow.

The Dangerous Moment After the Battle

When Gideon returned from defeating Midian, Israel greeted him with a stunning proposal:

“Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also, for you have saved us from the hand of Midian” (Judges 8.22 ESV).

Notice the fatal error buried in the compliment: “You have saved us.” Not God. Gideon.

This temptation is ancient and persistent. Whenever God works through a man, there is always a crowd ready to worship the instrument rather than the Hand that wielded it. Israel looked at the victory and saw a hero. They should have looked at the victory and fallen before God.

To his credit, Gideon refused.

“I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the LORD will rule over you” (Judges 8.23 ESV).

In that moment, he spoke a profound truth: God does not share His throne. He does not delegate sovereignty to human dynasties. He is King—not merely as a title but as an unalterable reality (1 Samuel 8.7; Isaiah 43.15; 1 Timothy 6.15).

There are no great men of God—only men of a great God. Reverse that order, and the fall has already begun.

A Nation Looking for a King It Already Had

Israel’s request was more than flattery; it was bad theology. They wanted a hereditary monarchy: Gideon, then his son, then his grandson.

But God had already defined their identity:

“You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19.6 ESV).

Their king was not meant to sit in a palace. Their king spoke from Sinai. He led them through the wilderness as a pillar of cloud and fire (Exodus 13.21) and promised to drive out their enemies if they remained faithful (Exodus 23.20–33; Deuteronomy 7.17–24).

Israel wanted something visible, permanent, and human. God offered something invisible, eternal, and divine. The tragedy of the human heart is that it often prefers the former.

The same impulse appears in every generation. People long for a leader they can see rather than a God they must trust. When the church looks to personalities rather than Christ, it has already taken the first step toward Gideon’s error.

Gold in the Wrong Hands

Although Gideon declined the crown, he did not decline the gold.

He asked each soldier for a gold earring from the Midianite plunder. The request seemed modest, and the soldiers gladly complied. They spread out a garment and tossed in their share.

The total reached seventeen hundred shekels—roughly forty to seventy-five pounds of gold—along with ornaments, pendants, royal garments from Midian’s kings, and camel collars (Judges 8.26).

It was a fortune. And fortunes have a way of bending the soul.

The issue was not the amount but what Gideon did with it. Wealth itself is not condemned in Scripture, but it always tests the heart (1 Timothy 6.9–10; Proverbs 30.8–9; Matthew 6.21).

The real question is never what we possess, but what possesses us.

The Ephod That Became an Idol

Gideon used the gold to make an ephod and placed it in his hometown of Ophrah.

In its proper setting, the ephod was a priestly garment associated with worship and divine inquiry. The high priest wore one described in Exodus 28.6–14, and simpler versions were worn by Samuel (1 Samuel 2.18) and David (2 Samuel 6.14).

But during times of spiritual confusion, the ephod could be used in false worship. In Judges 17–18, Micah’s household shrine included one alongside carved images. Hosea later listed the ephod among the religious symbols Israel would lose in exile (Hosea 3.4).

What Gideon intended is uncertain. Perhaps it was meant as a memorial. Perhaps it was intended as a means of seeking God’s will.

But the result was devastating.

“And all Israel whored after it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and to his family” (Judges 8.27 ESV).

The irony is painful. The man who destroyed Baal’s altar created something that led Israel into spiritual adultery. The destroyer of idols became the maker of a new one.

The danger did not come from outside. It came from within—from the very victory that should have driven him closer to God.

When Good Things Become Ultimate Things

The language of Judges 8.27 is deliberately shocking. Israel “whored after” the ephod. Throughout the Old Testament, idolatry is described not merely as error but as adultery—the betrayal of a covenant relationship (Ezekiel 16.15–34; Jeremiah 3.6–10; Hosea 2.2–5).

God had delivered Israel from oppression and scattered an innumerable army with three hundred men. Yet Israel redirected its devotion toward a golden garment in a small town.

The pattern is ancient and ongoing. God acts. Man receives. Man then worships the gift rather than the Giver.

Israel did this with the bronze serpent Moses made until Hezekiah destroyed it because people burned incense to it (2 Kings 18.4). They trusted in the temple building rather than the God who dwelt there (Jeremiah 7.4).

Any good thing—a tradition, a practice, a religious symbol, even memories of past faithfulness—can become a substitute for the living God. The most dangerous idols are often the most religious-looking ones.

A Private Life That Told the Truth

The closing verses reveal a man whose private life contradicted his public words.

Gideon had many wives and seventy sons. He also kept a concubine in Shechem who bore him a son named Abimelech—“my father is king” (Judges 8.30–31).

Read that name again. Gideon publicly refused the crown, yet he named his son “my father is king.”

His mouth said one thing. His life said another.

Spiritual compromise rarely announces itself. It grows quietly through private choices until the consequences can no longer be hidden. Gideon’s household increasingly resembled that of a ruler rather than a servant.

Scripture repeatedly warns that the heart is deceitful (Jeremiah 17.9). A man may refuse a crown with his lips while building a palace with his life.

What Happened After the Funeral

When Gideon died, the collapse was immediate.

“As soon as Gideon died, the people of Israel turned again and whored after the Baals and made Baal-berith their god” (Judges 8.33–34 ESV).

They forgot the LORD who had delivered them. They also failed to show kindness to Gideon’s family (Judges 8.35). Soon, his son Abimelech would drench Shechem in blood while seizing the power his father had publicly declined (Judges 9).

This is what happens when faith depends on a man rather than God. When the man dies, the faith dies with him.

Israel’s devotion to the Lord lasted exactly as long as Gideon lived. That is not faith. It is borrowed conviction—and borrowed conviction always comes due.

Every generation must choose for itself whether it will serve the Lord (Joshua 24.15; Deuteronomy 6.6–9).

Five Warnings from Gideon’s Decline

Gideon’s early chapters inspire courage. His final chapter demands self-examination.

First, no past victory guarantees future faithfulness. Gideon defeated Midian but could not defeat the pride that followed the battle (1 Corinthians 10.12; Philippians 3.13–14).

Second, leaders must point beyond themselves. When people credit the preacher rather than the Lord, something has gone wrong (John 3.30; 1 Corinthians 3.5–7).

Third, religious traditions can become traps. The ephod itself was not evil, but devotion to it became a snare.

Fourth, private compromise eventually produces public consequences. The hidden life always surfaces (Luke 12.2–3; Numbers 32.23).

Fifth, faith must be personally owned, not merely inherited. Secondhand religion cannot survive the loss of its human source (2 Timothy 1.5; Deuteronomy 4.9).

The Reign That Never Fails

Gideon began as a hesitant servant who trusted God and obeyed His call. Through him, the Lord delivered an entire nation from oppression.

But his story reminds us that the battle for faithfulness does not end with a single victory. It continues every day until we stand before God.

Even those who have torn down altars can build new ones without realizing it.

In the end, Gideon’s greatest words remain his truest legacy:

“The LORD will rule over you” (Judges 8.23 ESV).

Not Gideon. Not any man. The Lord.

And when God truly reigns—over a heart, a home, or a congregation—His people remain secure. Not because they are strong, but because He is.

“The LORD is king forever and ever” (Psalm 10.16 ESV).

That is the only throne that never topples. That is the only reign that never ends.

The Invitation

Carl Pollard

Revelation 3:20, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

This verse is one of the most well known invitations in Scripture, but it is often misunderstood. Many assume Jesus is speaking to unbelievers about initial salvation. While the principle certainly applies, the context shows that Jesus is actually speaking to Christians who have grown spiritually indifferent.

Revelation 3:20 is part of Jesus’ message to the church in Laodicea (Revelation 3:14–22). The Laodiceans believed they were spiritually healthy. They said, “I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing” (Revelation 3:17). Yet Jesus exposed their reality they were, “wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked.”

Their problem was lukewarm faith (Revelation 3:16). They were not openly hostile to Christ, but they were not passionately devoted either. They had allowed comfort and self sufficiency to push Jesus to the margins of their lives.

Jesus uses a powerful image, He is standing outside the door knocking. The church belonged to Him, and yet He was outside.

This idea is one of patient persistence. Jesus isn’t breaking the door down. He’s knocking and calling. The responsibility rests on the individual, “If anyone hears my voice and opens the door.” Faith is personal. Each person must respond.

Jesus promises something beautiful, “I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.” In the first century, sharing a meal represented fellowship, acceptance, and relationship. Jesus is offering restored intimacy.

The Laodiceans had religion without love. Christ was offering them the very thing they lacked, true communion with Him!

This verse forces an uncomfortable question, Is Jesus really at the center of our lives, or have we pushed Him outside? It’s possible to attend church, know the Bible, and still live spiritually distant from Christ. Like the Laodiceans, we may feel self sufficient while our relationship with Him grows cold.

But the good news is that Jesus still knocks. He calls us back through His Word, through conviction, and through moments that soften our hearts. When we respond, He doesn’t reject us, He restores us.

Christ doesn’t want our attendance or routine. He wants our fellowship! The door only has one handle, and it’s on the inside. The question is simple, Will we open it?

The Power Of A Name

Dale Pollard

An angel appeared to Gideon while he was threshing wheat in winepress to hide from the Midianites, calling him a “mighty warrior” (Judges 6:12).

Gideon initially doubted his ability, noting how his clan was the weakest in Manasseh and he was the least in his family.

God instructed Gideon to reduce his army from 32,000 to only 300 men to ensure the glory was given to God, not human strength.

So, using only trumpets, jars, and torches, Gideon’s small force caused the Midianite army to panic and flee.

To this day he’s remembered as the judge who brought 40 years of peace to Israel, overcoming his own fear to act with God’s strength. 

Rachel was dying during childbirth on the way to Ephrath (A.K.A. Bethlehem).

Before she dies, she names her son Ben-oni, which means “son of my sorrow” or “son of my pain.” A boy would struggle in many ways if he was forced to grow with a name that marked him as a bringer of pain and served as a constant reminder of grief.

Thankfully, his father, Jacob, changes his name to Benjamin; meaning “son of my right hand.” A name change that no doubt shaped his life growing up for the better.

It’s interesting how names or nicknames can shape our identities from a young age. When children are trying to find out who they are or what their place is in the world, they often internalize observations about themselves given by those they’re closest to. 

God has allowed us to wear the Name of Christ (Romans 13.14)– an unbelievable honor. Anybody carrying His name has a future brighter than the rest. 

When Good Things Become God

Carl Pollard

Tradition is not the enemy. In fact, Scripture speaks positively about certain traditions. Paul wrote, “Stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us” (2 Thess. 2:15). The early church passed down apostolic teaching, patterns of worship, and faithful practices. In that sense, tradition can be a gift, a guardrail that keeps us rooted in truth. Tradition in this sense was truth handed down by Christ to the apostles (John 16:13).

But there is a difference between biblical tradition and traditionalism. I once heard it described as, “tradition is the living faith of the dead. Traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.”

The clearest warning comes from Jesus Himself. In Mark 7:8–9, He rebuked the religious leaders: “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” They weren’t condemned for having traditions but for elevating them above God’s Word.

The Pharisees believed they were preserving holiness. In reality, they were nullifying Scripture. Their traditions became filters that distorted God’s intent. Whenever our customs carry more authority than the Bible, we step into dangerous territory.

Traditionalism says, “We’ve always done it this way.” “That’s just how church is supposed to be.” And, “If it changes, it must be wrong.” Scripture tells us, “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thess. 5:21).

Traditionalism often confuses preference with principle. Worship location, order of service, dress expectations, building designs may be wise or meaningful. But when we bind them where Scripture does not, we risk adding to God’s Word.

In Colossians 2:23, Paul warned about man-made regulations that “have indeed an appearance of wisdom” but lack true spiritual power. Human systems can look holy while missing the heart. Traditionalism tends to resist biblical correction. It fears cultural engagement. It can prioritize comfort over mission. Ironically, many traditions that feel “ancient” are only decades old.

Traditionalism becomes especially harmful when it alienates younger Christians. When faith is presented as a rigid preservation of forms rather than a relationship with Christ, it breeds either rebellion or apathy.

The church is called to guard the gospel, not freeze cultural expressions in time. The message must not change. The methods often must.

At the same time, we should guard against the opposite end of the spectrum, novelty for novelty’s sake. Not all change is healthy. Scripture calls us to contend for “the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Stability matters. The accumulated wisdom of the church matters.

The solution isn’t to abandon tradition but to submit every tradition to Scripture. Does this practice clearly flow from the Bible? Does it help us glorify God and reach people? Or are we defending it simply because it’s familiar?

Traditionalism becomes sin when it binds where God has not bound. It divides over matters of preference (or conscience). It replaces obedience with ritual. It protects comfort over Gods mission.

Jesus didn’t die to preserve our customs. He died to redeem people. Faithfulness isn’t measured by how tightly we cling to the past, but by how fully we submit to Christ in the present. May we cherish biblical tradition, reject human traditionalism, and build churches shaped not by nostalgia, but by the Word of God.

“Absolute Truth”

Gary Pollard

This week we’ll look at the problem of Language, continuing our criticism of aspects of the video The ancients decoded reality by Chase Hughes. I want to reiterate here that Mr. Hughes is an excellent researcher and has provided valuable information in his work. I believe his conclusions are flawed where Christianity is concerned, however. Similarities between writings and observations do not constitute universal compatibility, as will hopefully be demonstrated in this series. 

After positing that Truth exists in every tribe myth and scripture (04:12), he says, “We got lost in the arguments, differences, translations, rituals, politics, and fear. We started defending our favorite books, rather than noticing what they were all trying to say.” 

To some extent this is true. “Die for Christ, die for Allah, die for Jerusalem, die for Torah; father and son, marching in rhythm, firing bullets through the skulls of the children. Holy war, mortars and martyrs; holy war, unholy followers.”1 Religion weaponized is a potent plague, always leaving millions dead in its wake. The brilliance and beauty of Jesus’s teachings — when they’re actually followed without human interference — is their non-compulsion and self-sacrificing love. There is only one way to truth: Christ. “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life — no one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). But it was never to be forced upon anyone, and personal death was always demanded over the use any kind of violence. “To me, the only important thing about living is Christ. And even death would be for my benefit” (Php 1.21). 

Since Chase says, “…rather than noticing what they were all trying to say,” we have to point out that many of these religions are mutually exclusive — at least in their current form. Most of the ones predating Christianity seem to have been based on genuine, profound observations of reality in their original forms. But these were corrupted over time, with personified forces of nature eventually venerated as gods and goddesses. The original meaning of their symbolic language devolved into rituals and often-dysfunctional forms of worship. Jesus came to earth at “just the right time” to bring Truth back to the world for good (Gal. 4:4). But in their current forms they are not compatible. 

Where Christianity will most fundamentally disagree with Mr. Hughes: Truth (with a capital T) is not fully knowable in this body; at least, not the kind of Truth he’s talking about (universal knowledge and enlightenment). I Corinthians 13 says, “Now we see God as if we are looking at a reflection in a mirror. But then, in the future, we will see him right before our eyes.” Chase correctly points out the severe limitations of our ability to capture and delineate the infinite using human language. This is the core of today’s look at his video. 

He correctly and eloquently describes language as “a net with holes too large to capture the infinite.” He cites Lao Tzu, “The dao that can be spoken is not the eternal dao.” Then he says, “The moment you try to describe ultimate truth, you’ve already distorted it, filtered it, and tried to contain it.” This is precisely why Truth is personified in Christianity. Truth is Jesus, and Jesus is Truth. We won’t be able to digest what that means until he returns (I Jn 3.1-3), but we can at least understand that he is the embodiment of universal Truth, an exact reflection of the nature of God. 

Chase says, “Knowledge was hidden, but not the way we think and not for the reasons we think. It was hidden because they were trying to describe the indescribable, and the human brain was not designed to handle these truths. Language is the core problem” (05:40-06:15). I’m writing this series in large part because of these next lines: “Jesus understood this [problem of language’s limitations]. He told his disciples, ‘I speak to them in parables because most people aren’t ready to comprehend the Truth directly.’ They didn’t have language for quantum physics or non-duality or consciousness models like we have today, in our still-infantile language. They had to compress the infinite into words” (07:02-07:14). There are a few problems with this. 

  1. Jesus wasn’t talking about quantum physics or non-duality. Even through a modern lens, this interpretation stretches the text beyonds its limits. Jesus spoke in parables to filter out true seekers. He even spoke in parables to his own followers because they weren’t spiritually mature enough to understand why he was there. He gave them the job of spreading everything — his parables AND his plain, uncoded teachings — to the world through their writings after his ascension. His teachings give us the path to enlightenment, but make it clear that that is something only fully realized in the expanded consciousness of our resurrected bodies. That path is selfless love, self discipline, loving God and helping people as often (and covertly) as we can. 
  2. The ancients’ view of consciousness is one that resonates even today. Origen argued in favor of non-local consciousness in Peri archon, and suggested the possibility that genetics influenced this in some way (Traducianism). The concept of soul in the New Testament has more in common with a consciousness model than we might think (or teach). We still use the transliterated form of this word today: psyche. The ancient Egyptians expressed this through concepts like ka and ba. It was understood that our bodies are powered by a life force (spirit/breath) that came from God, and returns to the Source after death. They understood that our consciousness is what makes us the “image of God”. They knew that death only expands this consciousness and its capabilities, and those who follow God will enjoy the benefits of this in an upgraded, indestructible body of some kind. We’re the ones lagging behind the ancient understanding of consciousness, not the other way around. 
  3. Few, if any, modern languages are improvements on their ancient ancestors. English is one of many well into its declining stage. West, Schwaller, and others like them convincingly demonstrated the superiority of ancient symbolism over modern scientific jargon, which is often used to obfuscate ignorance. Look at the opening lines of John’s gospel (“in the beginning was the Word…”), and compare that to how we might express the same in modern language.2 Our ability to grasp the infinite has degraded over the centuries, not improved. 

Finally (for today), Chase says, “All ancients hit the same wall. How do you describe an experience bigger than thought itself, using a language that’s built out of thought? How do you describe God, Unity, Infinity, Consciousness with a vocabulary built for farming and weather and trading spices and chickens with each other? How do you tell someone the universe is One before they understand atoms or galaxies or even their own mind? You can’t. So [the ancients] spoke in metaphors and symbols and myths and stories and poetry and parables and riddles — and sometimes silence. They didn’t do this to hide the Truth; the Truth was just too large to fit through the doorway of our primitive little language” (07:23). 

He makes several good points! Language is wholly inadequate to express the infinite, and symbolism is the best way to express the “eternity written on our hearts.” But symbolism is not accessible to the masses, and still falls short of actually capturing the infinite. Jesus presented Truth (or the path to it) to the masses using those stories and parables and mysteries. The early church recognized the multi-layered nature of Christ’s teachings — accessible to the masses on its surface level, while giving the esoterically-minded something to really chew on at its deeper levels of meaning. We do the text disservice to stop at a literal reading (derived through exegesis) to the neglect of any symbolic, allegorical, or spiritual teachings that may also be present. 

So while I think we would generally agree with his statement, there are some problems as well: 

  1. Knowledge of atoms, galaxies, etc. does not impact anyone’s capacity for spiritual understanding.3 Much of that is intuitive anyways, which he would likely agree with! Anyone with physical senses mostly intact can understand that reality is composed of parts and wholes, ascending to an ultimate unity, the one God and Father of all who is above all, through all, and in all things (Eph 4.6). 
  2. As stated earlier, it is not the purpose of this life to fully understand Truth (all there is at the universal scale). Our potential for understanding Truth will only be realized in our new bodies. 
  3. Language does not seem to have been originally designed for “trading spices and chickens”. The ancient Aymara language (still spoken today, but dates to pre-Incan times), for example, is so computer-program-like that it was used as the bridge language for translation software for decades. My point in nitpicking this is that our modern understanding of the world and our cosmic environment — and the ancients’ different understanding of the world and our cosmic environment — have little bearing in the grand scheme on our capacity for spirituality. Civilizations rise and fall, and we are very likely not the most advanced to have existed on this earth. 

As for the last statement (“they didn’t do this to hide the truth”), I would point to the ancient Egyptian practice of guarding secret knowledge. In the Old Kingdom, it was accessible only to kings. In the Middle Kingdom, non-royal elites (also Moses, cf. Acts 7.22) were included. The later Pythagoreans (who got everything from Egypt) were said to have guarded aspects of their knowledge with deadly force. Secret societies have existed in some form for all of human civilization. Jesus differs from the ancient esoteric traditions in that he made it available to everyone with eyes to see and ears to hear. Truly complete knowledge isn’t possible in this life, but we will enjoy that benefit in our new bodies. 

1 Holy War, Thy Art is Murder

2 ”Today, in modern terminology, we can say: at the incomprehensible and, by human faculties, unimaginable but nevertheless expressible and logically necessary instant of the Primordial Scission, the absolute being conscious of itself, created the manifest universe, whose fundamental formative aspect is vibration, a wave phenomenon characterized by movement of variable frequency and intensity between oppositely charged poles. This movement is not to be considered as separate or distinct from the poles but rather as that which by its existence produces or compels the significance of the respective poles, since negativity and positivity require an underlying concept of opposition/affinity in order to render them meaningful; the three aspects or forces thereby are assumed as inherent within the original Unity, which is the Absolute or Transcendent cause. This may not be an improvement upon St. John.” — West, J. (1979). Serpent in the sky. The Julian Press, Inc.p. 81

3 Atoms were posited by Democritus in the fifth century BC; inside Sepi III’s coffin (1900 BC) is the Vignette of Re, likely a depiction of a heliocentric solar system — with its planets — long before modern rediscoveries of this fact. These observations don’t seem to have impacted their ability to discern truth in positive or negative ways. 

What The World Needs Now: The “Unnatural” Love Jesus Commands

Brent Pollard

Why Jesus Commanding Love Strikes Us as Odd

There is something that stops us cold when we first read John 15.17. Jesus commands us to love. We instinctively resist this. Love, we have been told since childhood, is something that happens to us—a feeling that comes unbidden or not at all. And yet there it stands in the plain Greek of the New Testament: a command. An imperative. Not a suggestion, not an aspiration—a command.

The love Jesus commands does not bubble up from the wellspring of natural affection. It does not depend on the worthiness of its object. It is a love that originates not in the heart but in the will. This is what makes it unnatural—not aberrant or disordered, but swimming against the powerful current of a fallen nature that has always reserved its warmth for those who return it.

What Made Jesus’ New Commandment Truly New

The Jews of Jesus’ day already had a command to love their neighbors (Leviticus 19.18). But centuries of theological trimming had quietly reduced the definition of “neighbor” to a comfortable radius of like-minded, like-blooded individuals. This is precisely why Jesus told the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10.25–37)—a story so deliberately unsettling that it practically demanded a verdict.

Then, in the upper room on the night of His betrayal, Jesus issued a new commandment: “Love one another, even as I have loved you” (John 13.34, NASB95). The newness lay in its standard and scope. The measure of this love was no longer the mirror of self—it was the cross. And the cross looks like a man hanging between criminals, praying, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 22.34, NASB95). That is the standard.

Agapē Love: What the Greek New Testament Reveals About Loving Like Christ

Koine Greek—the common tongue of the first-century world—distinguished at least four varieties of what we flatten into one English word. Phileō was friendly affection. Storgē was a family bond. Erōs was romantic desire. And rising above them all stood agapē—sacrificial, unconditional, self-emptying love. Kindness is extended when kindness is not deserved. Forgiveness is given when the wound is still fresh. Service rendered without expectation of return.

You do not feel your way into agapē. You choose your way into it. The natural loves are genuine goods, gifts from God’s hand—but left unchecked, they curl inward. The love of family becomes contempt for the stranger. The tribe’s love becomes hatred of the outsider. Agapē redeems and elevates these natural loves, rightly orienting them. It is not human morality at its finest—it is participation in the divine nature, the love of God shed abroad in human hearts by the Holy Spirit (Romans 5.5). You cannot manufacture it. You receive it, and then choose to deploy it.

Agapē, in its fullest sense, is the deliberate choice—empowered by God—to seek another’s genuine good at personal cost, because that is precisely how God in Christ has loved us.

“Othering” in Modern Culture and the Ancient Problem It Represents

Hal David, moved by the turmoil of the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War, wrote words that Jackie DeShannon made famous: “What the world needs now is love, sweet love.” Were David writing today, surveying our present moment, the pen would move with the same urgency.

We live in a time of othering—the process by which human beings made in God’s image are reduced to caricatures and assigned to an outgroup whose humanity can be safely disregarded. The Nazis did not begin with gas chambers. They began with names, with the slow rhetorical work of placing people outside the boundaries of moral concern. Today, the preferred weapons are different—”Nazi,” “fascist,” “bootlicker,” “communist”—but the intent is identical: to frame opponents as a them against whom any response is justified. The summer of 2020 saw politically motivated murders amid the George Floyd protests. January 2026 has already recorded two deaths connected to ICE enforcement protests. Solomon was right—there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1.9). Human fallenness finds new costumes for old sins.

How the Cross Teaches Christians to Love Their Enemies

The command of Jesus is not an antiquarian curiosity. It is addressed to this fractured, furious moment. The temptation—and we should name it honestly as a temptation—is to reserve our warmth for the in-group and feel entirely justified in our contempt for ideological enemies. But the One commanding our love is the same One who prayed forgiveness over the men who drove the nails.

The decision to love precedes the feeling of love. We choose to pray for those who despise us. We choose to speak with dignity about those whose politics make our blood simmer. And grace, practiced in genuine submission to God’s Spirit, reshapes not just our behavior but our hearts.

Jesus said the watching world would know His disciples not by their doctrinal precision or political affiliations, but by their love for one another (John 13.35). The church, in an age of othering and outrage, is called to be a visible demonstration that another way is possible—that the love of God in Christ is not a theological abstraction but a living reality.

The command is given.

The standard is the cross.

The power is the Spirit.

And the world is watching.

The Sin Of Self-Reliance

Carl Pollard

There’s a quiet danger that often hides beneath ambition, discipline, and hard work. It doesn’t look rebellious, and it doesn’t sound arrogant. In fact, it’s usually praised! That danger is self-reliance.

We live in a culture that celebrates independence. From childhood we are taught to stand on our own two feet, chase our goals, and depend on no one. Strength is admired. Neediness is frowned upon. The message taught is if you want something done right, do it yourself.

While responsibility and initiative are good qualities, they can quietly evolve into something spiritually destructive. Self-reliance becomes sinful when it replaces dependence on God.

Scripture consistently reminds us that human strength is limited. Proverbs 3:5 is a verse we have been teaching Rich and Amara to memorize. It is simple, but so important. Solomon warns, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.” That command assumes something important, our understanding is not sufficient. We dont see the full picture. We are finite, while God is not.

The problem with self-reliance isn’t that we work hard. The problem is that we begin to believe our effort is the ultimate reason for our success! Prayer becomes optional, and our gratitude weakens. Decisions are made without seeking God’s wisdom. We may still attend worship and read Scripture, but practically speaking, we operate as if everything depends on us.

This mindset produces pressure. When life rests entirely on your shoulders, anxiety naturally follows. Every outcome feels personal. Every failure feels final. But Scripture paints a different picture of strength. In 2 Corinthians 12:9, Paul writes that God’s power is made perfect in weakness. Weakness isn’t something to hide, it is the doorway to dependence! 

Self-reliance can also damage relationships. When we refuse help, resist accountability, or struggle to admit fault, pride quietly takes root. Dependence on God cultivates humility. It reminds us that every breath, every opportunity, and every blessing ultimately comes from Him.

There is freedom in surrender. When we acknowledge our limitations and actively trust God, the weight shifts. We still work. We still plan. But we do so prayerfully, recognizing that outcomes belong to Him.

True strength isnt found in proving we can handle everything alone. It’s found in trusting the One who already holds everything together!

The Truest Valentine: Love Written in Blood

Brent Pollard

The Forgotten Man Behind the Holiday

Saturday brings us once more to Valentine’s Day, that peculiar fixture of the modern calendar in which chocolate and sentiment have almost entirely buried the bones of a third-century martyr. The holiday bears the name of a man who bled for Christ, yet we have dressed his memorial in pink and red and made it an occasion for romance. One suspects that if Valentine himself could survey what has become of his feast day, he would be bewildered—and perhaps grieved.

Who was this man? The historical record is thin. Multiple martyrs bore the name Valentine in the second and third centuries. Still, tradition has settled on a Roman priest—sometimes identified as a bishop of Terni—who was executed under Emperor Claudius II around 269 AD. The legends are familiar: that he secretly performed Christian marriages, that he penned a farewell note signed “From your Valentine.” These details are charming, but the earliest sources contain none of them. What we do know is this: Valentine was a minister of the Gospel. He was martyred for his allegiance to Christ. The early church honored him as a witness—a martyr in the original Greek sense of the word—to the lordship of Jesus. Everything else was embroidered into the story during the Middle Ages, much as the legends of Christmas accrued around a manger that, in its original hour, was far more stark and dangerous than any Nativity scene suggests.

In 496 AD, the Catholic Church established the Feast of Saint Valentine on February 14th as a liturgical commemoration—not of romance, but of Christian fidelity under persecution. If love was to be associated with the day at all, it was the love described in John 15:13: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.” The connection to romantic love did not emerge until after 1382, when Geoffrey Chaucer wrote in his Parliament of Fowls: “For this was on Saint Valentine’s Day, when every bird comes there to choose his mate.” From that poetic seed grew a cultural vine that, over the next several centuries, would entirely obscure the root.

By the 1500s, European nobles were exchanging Valentine’s notes. Romantic pairings became the dominant association with February 14th. What was forgotten—quietly, gradually, and almost completely—was that a man had forfeited his life for his faith in Christ. What follows is a pattern we observe repeatedly in history: a religious observance is absorbed by commerce, reshaped by local culture, and re-exported globally in its modified form.

A Holiday Remade by Commerce and Culture

Consider Japan. There, Valentine’s Day has become a Sadie Hawkins affair. Women give honmei-choco (“true feeling chocolate”) to romantic interests and giri-choco (“obligation chocolate”) to coworkers and superiors. Japanese confectioners, not content with a single commercial holiday, invented “White Day” on March 14th, when men reciprocate with gifts worth two to three times what they received. As Japan grows more progressive, a growing pushback among women seeks to eliminate giri-choco, which may eventually nudge Japan toward the Western model of Valentine’s Day as a lover’s holiday.

Korea adds an even more inventive wrinkle. Koreans observe both Valentine’s Day and White Day in the Japanese fashion, but they have appended a third occasion: “Black Day” on April 14th. On Black Day, those who received nothing on either holiday gather to eat jajangmyeon (black bean noodles) and commiserate over their single status. One cannot help but note the irony—that a day once consecrated to the memory of a man who died for the highest love has been culturally refracted until it produces a holiday devoted to lamenting the absence of the lowest.

This trajectory is instructive. It reveals something about the nature of human culture: left to its own devices, the world will always trade the costly for the comfortable, the cruciform for the commercial, the eternal for the ephemeral. It has done so with Valentine’s Day. It has done so with Christmas. It will do so with any truth that demands something of us, unless we are vigilant to remember what the truth actually requires.

Love Detached from Sacrifice

Here we must make a spiritual observation, for our purpose is devotional rather than merely cultural. When love is detached from sacrifice, it becomes fragile. This is not a sentimental claim. It is a theological one, rooted in the very nature of God and the pattern of His self-revelation.

Examine every major New Testament articulation of love, and you will find that love is never defined primarily by emotion. It is demonstrated through surrender, not sentiment. God did not merely feel affection for the world; He gave:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3.16, ESV)

“Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” (Ephesians 5.25, ESV)

“Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15.13, ESV)

Do you see the verb that anchors each of these texts? It is not “felt.” It is not “enjoyed.” It is “gave.” Love, as Scripture reveals it, is not the warm feeling that overtakes us when conditions are pleasant; it is the deliberate act of self-expenditure when conditions are agonizing. The cross was not a gesture of sentiment. It was the ultimate act of will, the most purposeful decision in the history of the cosmos—the Son of God choosing, in full possession of His faculties and full awareness of the cost, to absorb the wrath His people deserved.

Strip sacrifice from love, and what remains? Affection. Enjoyment. Personal fulfillment. Preference. These are not worthless; however, they are not durable. A love built on enjoyment will fracture the moment enjoyment fades—and enjoyment always fades. A love sustained by emotion will collapse the moment emotion shifts—and emotion always shifts. Only a love anchored in the deliberate, costly, daily decision to give of oneself can endure the pressures that this fallen world relentlessly applies.

The Architecture of Love

Perhaps an analogy will help. Think of love as a building. Sacrifice is the foundation and the structural steel. Romantic attraction is like paint—it beautifies, but it bears no weight. Shared interests are the furnishings—they make the space enjoyable, but remove them, and the building still stands. Emotional chemistry is like lightning—it illuminates brilliantly for a moment, but you cannot wire a house with it.

Without sacrifice, marriage collapses under duress. Friendships dissolve under inconvenience. Church unity disintegrates under disagreement. Why? Because sacrifice is the only form of love that says, “I will stay when it costs me.” And make no mistake—it will cost you. The question is never whether love will be tested, but whether your love is the kind that can survive the test.

Consider Paul’s inspired description in 1 Corinthians 13. Love is patient. It bears all things. It endures all things. It does not seek its own. It never fails. We must remember the context: Paul was not composing a wedding homily. He was addressing a fractured congregation riven by pride, division, and the competitive misuse of spiritual gifts. When he wrote that love “does not seek its own” (1 Corinthians 13:5, NASB95), he was describing cruciform love—love shaped like the cross. This is not the love of Hallmark cards. This is the love of Gethsemane and Golgotha.

If Love Is What We Feel, It Will Fail

Here is the great dividing line: if love is what we feel, it will fail; if love is what we choose, it will endure.

Paul could describe this perfect love in 1 Corinthians 13 because he had seen it incarnate in Christ. Jesus did not withdraw when obedience brought the hematidrosis of Gethsemane—that dreadful sweating of blood that Luke, the physician, records with clinical precision (Luke 22.44). Jesus did not retreat when loyalty to the Father brought Him the agony of Calvary. He stayed. He chose to stay. And His staying was not passive endurance but active, purposeful self-giving for the glory of the Father and the redemption of His people.

This means that 1 Corinthians 13 is not idealism. It is not the wistful poetry of a romantic who has never suffered. It is the testimony of a man who watched his Lord die and who understood that the pattern of that death was now the pattern for all Christian love. It is imitation, not imagination.

And that is our call. The love Paul describes is not reserved for poets or newlyweds, for the spiritually elite or the naturally affectionate. It is the daily decision of the disciple. It is patience when irritation would be easier. It is kindness when pride demands recognition. It is endurance when quitting would bring immediate relief. It is the quiet, unglamorous, often unnoticed choice to remain faithful when faithfulness is expensive.

The World’s Love and Christ’s Love

The world celebrates love that dazzles. Christ commands love that remains. The world measures love by its intensity of feeling. Christ measures love by its faithfulness under fire. The world asks, “How deeply do you feel?” Christ asks, “How faithfully will you stay?”

We must not be confused about this. The world’s version of love is not entirely wrong—it is merely insufficient. Romantic feeling is a good gift of God. Emotional connection is part of His design. Enjoyment of one another is woven into the fabric of human relationships. But these things are the blossoms, not the root. And when we mistake the blossom for the root, we are devastated when winter comes, and the blossoms fall. The root of love is sacrifice. The root of sacrifice is the will. And the will is strengthened not by feeling, but by faith—faith in the God who first loved us in precisely this way.

John writes: “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers. But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth” (1 John 3.16–18, ESV). Notice the movement of the text. John does not allow love to remain in the stratosphere of theology. He brings it immediately to earth: Do you see your brother in need? Then act. Love is not what you say. Love is what you do when doing is costly.

A Valentine Written in Blood

As the world exchanges cards and chocolates this Saturday, let us remember what Valentine’s Day was intended to commemorate. Not romance. Not sentiment. Not the fluttering heart of a new attraction. It was meant to honor a man who loved Christ more than he loved his own life—and who proved it by dying.

And behind that man stands the One whose love makes all other loves possible: Jesus Christ, who on a Roman cross authored the truest Valentine ever written—not in ink, but in blood. That is the love we are called to imitate. Not merely to admire, not merely to theologize about, but to embody—in our marriages, our friendships, our congregations, and our daily encounters with a world that desperately needs to see love that does not quit.

The measure of our love is not how deeply we feel, but how faithfully we stay. May God grant us the grace to love as Christ loved—with a love that gives, that stays, that sacrifices, and that endures. For that is the love that never fails.