Evangelicalism, Exvangelicalism, and Deconstruction: Why Good Theology is the Answer

00:00 - James Spencer (Host)
What I would encourage you to do is to realign yourself, reorient yourself to the reference point of God's Word and to make sure that, as you're questioning these things, you're allowing God's Word to transform you, to change you. Deconstruction is really only valuable if it leads us closer to the God who is the source of all truth and justice.

00:19 - Speaker 2 (None)
Welcome to PREPPED, the podcast that equips you to live out God's story, not the world's story. Hosted by James Spencer, phd, each episode bridges the gap between academic insights and everyday life, preparing you to understand the Word of God and put it into practice. Whether you're diving into biblical studies, looking for ministry guidance or aiming to deepen your faith, PREPPED empowers you to think biblically and theologically in a world that encourages you not to Ready to get PREPPED. Subscribe now and transform the way you bring God's story into the world.

00:52 - James Spencer (Host)
Hey everyone welcome to PREPPED, the podcast where biblical and theological insights meet practical ministry preparation. I'm your host, dr James Spencer, and today we're tackling a topic that's deeply relevant to the modern church the rise of Dr James Spencer. And today we're tackling a topic that's deeply relevant to the modern church the rise of exvangelicalism and the phenomenon of deconstruction. And before we jump in, I just want to share a little bit about my own story. I didn't actually grow up evangelical. My faith journey began in a Missouri-centered Lutheran church, far from evangelical subculture. I can remember when I first started getting involved in Campus Crusade for Christ. After I was saved and I moved up to Chicago, somebody mentioned to me Moody Bible Institute or Moody Radio and I had no idea what these things were. I was just so out of touch with anything that would have even resembled the evangelical subculture. I was unaware of Focus on the Family, which was big when I first started coming into seminary. I didn't know anything about the creation evolution debate, whatever those hot button kind of topics were in evangelicalism. I was completely unaware of them and I think over time, as I got more involved, I ended up doing my Master of Divinity at Moody Bible, moody Theological Seminary. It was then Moody Graduate School, I did an MA at Wheaton College and then I did my PhD at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School all of them fairly strongly evangelical schools and I think over time as I did that, I did find myself engaging more deeply with the movement, and I think it has some really profound strengths but also some pretty glaring weaknesses. And today I just want to share what I've learned a little bit and invite you to think critically about how we as Christians should respond.

02:32
So here's the big question why are so many are leaving evangelicalism, their critiques being more widespread than we used to? There's probably an awful lot of reasons for that. I would say number one is just technology. It's much easier to build a movement of people who are a little bit dissident. You can gather people around who have frustrations with a particular movement, and it can become more and more visible in an internet age, and so I think exvangelicalism is definitely benefiting from the technology that we have available to us. How big is the movement? It's really unclear. There's been a fair amount of research on what are usually referred to as the nuns, not the people who wear habits, but the folks who don't affiliate with any particular world religion. When they mark off what is your religious affiliation on a census sheet or something like that, or they're answering questions about demographic, they just say none, and so I think there's probably a growing proportion of those, and I've written on those a couple of times. I'll try to link those in the show notes for you.

03:49
But at the end of the day, I think the real question is why is this becoming so prominent? Why has it become a bigger part of the conversation? I think that deconstruction has a lot to do with that, and so we need to figure out what we mean when we say we're deconstructing the faith. I see Instagram accounts with that, and so we need to figure out what we mean when we say we're deconstructing the faith. I see Instagram accounts with this. I see you know podcasts related to deconstruction, and people talk a little bit about deconstruction.

04:13
I don't think it's really rooted that much into philosophical deconstruction, although it certainly has resonances with it, but I don't think anyone is really reading through Jacques Derrida and then being convinced that deconstruction is the way that they should live their lives. I think, most importantly, though, the question we can ask is how can the church respond? How can those who are seeking to live, and I won't even say evangelicals. I think I want to leave you know sort of, and try to distinguish the language here between evangelicals, ex-evangelicals and those who are truly committed to living under the authority of God's word, and by doing that I don't mean to suggest that either evangelicals or ex-evangelicals aren't trying to do that, but I think it's a helpful distinction for the discussion, because I think this middle one, this sort of those who are seeking to live under the authority of God's word, who are seeking to live under the authority of Christ, that's what we should all be shooting for, and so, do any of us do that perfectly? No, are there always flaws within the institutions that we operate within?

05:22
Of course, and so what I think I see on both sides of these issues, though, and the critical errors that both evangelicals and ex-evangelicals tend to make, is that they stop and this goes back to our last podcast on Cain and Abel they start trying to live life on their own terms as opposed to sitting under the authority of Christ, sitting under the authority of Christ, sitting under the authority of the word of God, and so that's sort of a preview of where we'll be going, and that's how it connects to that last episode on Cain and Abel. If you haven't listened to that yet, I'd encourage you to go back and check it out. The thumbnail sketch is basically that I argue that, instead of jealousy motivating Cain to kill his brother Abel, I believe that it is because Cain thinks that if he can eliminate the competition the competition who is offering God right worship that he'll be able to offer whatever worship he would like to God, and so he'll be able to worship God on his own terms, because there's no one else who can one-up him and give God what he's actually asking for. God will have to accept his worship, and I think that that dynamic, that problem, is evident in most of what we see when we're critiquing broader cultural movements or organizations like an evangelicalism or an ex evangelicalism. So as we dig into these, we're going to look at some theological concerns, we're going to look at some cultural dynamics and we're just going to look at the messy realities of the human community.

06:53
This episode is really for anyone who's wondered what's driving the ex-evangelical movement, or you've heard about it. Maybe you've heard about deconstruction and you want to know how to navigate doubts within the church. You know how do we, how do we go to a particular congregation? How do we see, you know, a variety of scandals that are reported on often and remain faithful? How do we, how do we, retain a certain level of trust and commitment to the body of Christ when we see these more local manifestations of depravity and ruptures in trust? What does that look like? I think it can go from that range all the way down to.

07:34
You know, I'm really wondering about how this particular theological idea works. Maybe I'm questioning God and evil, maybe I'm questioning you know, how is it that? You know, what am I supposed to do with? You know, tithing or something like that? You know you have these various doubts. How does atonement work? You have all these different doubts about basic theological questions, which I think is fine, but it can be a range of that, and this is where we're going to kind of dive in and discuss these things. So, whether you're wrestling with one of those issues or some other issue yourself, or just want to better understand someone who is, I hope this conversation will be both challenging and encouraging.

08:15
So, to start, we probably need to define our terms. So what is evangelicalism? An almost impossible question to answer, and so even the definition that I'm going to give here is going to be very difficult to just sort of lay out as its own. You know, let's treat it as a description as opposed to a definition, shall we? When I think of evangelicalism, here's what I think.

08:39
It's a broad historical movement and it's largely rooted in the Protestant Reformation. It generally holds to the various solas the Protestant Reformation. It generally holds to the various solas of that Reformation. So there's scripture alone, there's faith alone, there's grace alone, there's Christ alone and there is to the glory of God alone. So that would be sola scriptura, sola fide, sola gratia, sola Christus, sola de gloria. And so at its core, I think evangelicalism seeks to emphasize a personal relationship with Christ and the authority of scripture.

09:10
Now, evangelicalism just isn't a theological framework. It's also this sort of big group of churches and institutions that have, I think, started to create a culture and a culture that tries to influence the broader culture. So it's a subculture within Christianity that is also pushing out and trying to influence the broader culture. In the US, it's trying to influence the United States culture. That's what I'm most familiar with, so I may fall into that kind of language, us culture, and I think that's where things get complicated. Over time, I think evangelicalism has become entangled with these cultural and political identities, these cultural and political issues, sometimes at the expense of its theological testimony, and that entanglement often leads to challenges that feel more cultural than theological, and it tends to raise more questions about the movement's priorities.

10:11
And so, for me, my first exposure to evangelicalism was really through Campus Crusade for Christ, now CRU, during college, and it was inspiring to see a really strong emphasis on evangelism and spiritual growth. But as I engaged more deeply, especially in seminary, I began to see the complexities and, frankly, some of the flaws. So, for example, I remember a professor who suggested that wives should never earn more than their husbands. Now, aside from the obvious practical issues most of us were preparing for practical ministry and therefore modest incomes that kind of extra biblical instruction really raised red flags for me. Why weren't more people questioning this? And this is one of those instances among you know the many where cultural expectations seem to override biblical fidelity.

10:58
I also encountered the you know the phenomenon of evangelical celebrity culture. These, especially when I was working at Moody Bible Institute, you know, I'd interact with folks who were big pastors, big names, leaders with enormous platforms, and they had a disproportionate influence, you know. Their moral failures had ripple effects throughout the church. But there were also times when you saw that they could make things move that probably shouldn't move and they had an inordinate influence on. You know, maybe they had a student who was attending you know a college and that student wasn't doing very well, and so they were allowed to call and yell at certain employees. They were able to get in touch with the president fairly easily and have the issue resolved, and so that sort of behavior was also an aspect of the influence that I ended up seeing. Now I didn't see that from everyone. These anecdotes, I think, sometimes are used to paint evangelicalism as strictly problematic.

12:07
What I would say is that we, like every other movement, right, evangelicalism, like every other movement, has its problems with accountability, has its problems with disproportionate influence, and the real challenge is are you ready to check those? How is it that we are as a group, as Christians, as people who are seeking to live under the authority of Christ and God's word? Are we really prepared to address those? Are we prepared to stand up and say it doesn't matter how influential you are, it doesn't matter what position you hold, this behavior is inappropriate. Are we that committed to inappropriate? Are we that committed to truth? Are we that committed to people's spiritual growth, even our leader's spiritual growth? And I think that's the dynamic that's really, you know, we should be concerned with is how is it that these concerns aren't raising more questions about is there sufficient accountability, or are we prioritizing charisma over character?

13:08
But I think evangelicalism, like any other movement, has its strengths and weaknesses. It mirrors other communities in its struggle with power and accountability. But that doesn't make it irredeemable. I don't think it does. It makes these flaws just highlight the need for thoughtful reform rather than outright rejection. And that brings us, I think, to the ex-evangelical movement.

13:29
So let's talk a little bit about the ex-evangelicals, who they are and what they are reacting to. It seems to me that ex-evangelicals are people who have left evangelical Christianity behind or maybe even divorced some aspect of it from their thinking. It's often due to doctrinal or cultural or political disagreements. Blake Chastain, who's one of the movement's key voices, he describes exvangelicalism this way. He says they are, quote, affirming what evangelicalism condemns. In other words, it's this reactionary movement born from frustration and disillusionment. It defines itself as opposite to evangelicals. That's probably a little bit of an oversimplification, because I don't actually think that everything that evangelicals agree with they wouldn't agree with, and I think there's probably a broad range of ex-evangelical voices, just like there are a broad range of ex-evangelical voices, just like there are a broad range of evangelical voices.

14:25
So what I'm trying to do is to suggest that ex-evangelicals have decided that, on these issues that we're looking at, that we disagree with, and evangelicalism has set terms on what this looks like to be faithful and this is how we're going to practice it in our culture. We don't like those terms. We're going to go this direction. The interesting part, I think and I would say this is on both sides is that we have to ask the question is God really the reference point? In other words, when evangelicals making cultural comments, cultural decisions? I've been writing and speaking on politics for the last couple of years.

15:01
Just even as we rolled into this last 2024 election and as I talked with a lot of evangelicals, it became very, very clear that if you aren't voting and if you aren't voting Republican, there was something wrong with that. It wasn't that there was a disagreement and a matter of opinion that we could go our separate ways on. There was something wrong. And those sort of determinations, I think, are part of what ex-evangelicals are sort of reacting to. It isn't simply the doctrine, although that's involved too, but it's also these stronger statements that are very contextual, very hard, and that they tend to define the group by things that aren't exactly biblical, they aren't exactly theological, but they are defining the group nonetheless. And so, all that to say, I think ex-evangelicals do raise some valid critiques.

15:58
I think they point to the entanglement of evangelicalism with political ideologies. I think they point to the entanglement of evangelicalism with political ideologies. Now, on certain things, I think the ex-evangelicals are also a little bit off base, because what they're doing is they're saying well, because evangelicals don't follow the scriptures on these things, or because they're misreading the Bible, or because they're overemphasizing what the Bible says, or whatever it is that that looks like we're going to go the complete opposite way and largely ignore the scriptures. And so we could talk about, you know, more hot button issues, like you know, those related to LGBTQ, or the inclusion of those, or the what I would say, the affirmation that LGBTQ lifestyles are authorized by the Bible, that LGBTQ lifestyles are authorized by the Bible. Those are challenging conversations and ex-evangelicals tend to come down on the side that everything is allowable, and I'm not sure that's the case, and so I won't dive into those real deeply.

16:56
But I would just say that this is an example of where the ex-evangelicals tend to say I am this, and any community who doesn't accept me exactly as I am is not a community I want to be a part of, and so they step away and they live on their own terms. Again, hearkening back to that Cain and Abel narrative, cain's fundamental challenge is I want to live life on my own terms, and so when we do that, we put ourselves really in opposition to God. We're saying that we don't care what God is telling us. We're required to be. We want to be who we want to be, and I think this happens on both sides of these issues evangelicalism and ex-evangelicalism.

17:37
So I'll just say this the other description that Chastain offers is really of evangelicalism, and I think this is a good and apt description of the way ex-evangelicals view evangelicalism. He says it's a quote dense network, and it's this dense network of churches, schools and media that exerts enormous influence while dodging accountability. Okay, so the idea is that love, there's a quote by George Carlin. He he's uh, responding to someone who says he's advancing conspiracy theories and he basically says that, um, look people, there doesn't have to be a conspiracy theory when interests align. Uh, you know, if, if you go to the same schools, if you read the same books, if you have the same professors, if you end up having the same goals, if you, you know you're you're aiming for the same changes, you don't need a conspiracy theory, your interests just converge.

18:32
And he was talking about it in terms of, you know, sort of um, big money and, uh, you know, businesses and CEOs influencing things in government, politicians and that kind of stuff. But I think we can look at that in terms of evangelicalism as well, you know, and arguably ex-evangelicalism, but evangelicalism, particularly when you look at it, you know we've got evangelical publishers, we've got evangelical schools, we've got influential evangelical pastors, and so our interests do tend to converge and I think that's actually appropriate. This is what I would say discipleship does. Discipleship is a coordinating activity. It's what followers of Christ do to learn to be members of the same body together. But I think what Chastain again here is gesturing toward is yeah, okay, I don't know that he would say this, but I would. I would say, you know, to the extent that disciples coordinate together and have shared interests that push them in the same direction. I think that's fantastic. I think the body of Christ should be coordinated in that way.

19:31
But I think what Chastain is pointing to is, you know, as evangelicals have gone on this process to try to influence the culture, there is a lot of energy put forth in that coordinated energy put forth to these influencing the culture and there isn't a lot of accountability associated with that. If the way the culture change, in other words, doesn't go well, evangelicals are largely unaccountable for that, agree or agree with that. But it's just one of those ex-evangelical perspectives that seems a bit more characteristic of the movement. Now, I would say that their critiques don't just stop at specific issues. They also highlight systemic dynamics within evangelicalism, like the lack of transparency, the prioritization of institutional preservation over individual well-being, and I think those critiques resonate with many who feel alienated by an evangelical culture. You know, critics within the evangelical community itself have also drawn attention to these kinds of troubling trends, not exactly the same way as ex-evangelicalism, but you can find articles in the Gospel Coalition and there's one that analyzes evangelical celebrity culture and highlights how charismatic leaders and their platforms can really overshadow theological accountability. I think that's a really important thing to highlight.

20:49
Carl Truman has written on some of these things. He's reflected on what's been called big Eva, big evangelicalism, and he warns of a tendency toward institutional conformity that prioritizes brand and influence over doctrinal rigor. And so he's approaching it's sort of identifying the same problem, but from a very different angle. His solution is not hey, let's form this ex-evangelical community and really try to rail on Big Eva. His is no, let's get back to basics, let's be more deeply theological. That's how we solve this.

21:19
He also wrote in First Things and he's looked at the failures of evangelical elites, noting how their desire for cultural relevance has sometimes led to theological compromise, and I think all of these are appropriate ways to critique that movement. And so it isn't that exvangelicalism is getting everything wrong. It's that exvangelicalism, in highlighting the right problem, I think runs toward the wrong solution. So here's the thing Many of these critiques just resonate with my own observations. But where ex-evangelicalism falters is in its rejection of orthodoxy and its rejection of living under the authority of Christ and of God's word. And by prioritizing moral and religious autonomy, which it does explicitly according to Chastain, it trades theological depth for cultural alignment. It's a pendulum swing that often lands outside the bounds of historic Christianity, and so if evangelicals are guilty of elevating culture over theology, I think ex-evangelicals are also guilty of elevating culture over theology. And so the question then becomes how do we move forward? And so I think there's a few ways we can do that. But in order to sort of move the conversation forward, I want to switch from thinking through how do we move these conversations forward, because I think we'll get to that by the end of the episode, but I want to, before we do that, look at the role of deconstruction.

22:46
What is deconstruction? Why does it matter? De deconstruction is really a method of questioning assumptions and boundaries, and it was, uh, it's often associated with the philosopher jacques derrida, who, uh, distinguished between law and this is a just an example of the way that this might work, um, the way deconstruction might work law, which is our human systems and structures, right, these are things that we've created in service of something else, and justice, an aspiration ideal that tends to transcend those systems. And so what Derrida would tend to argue is that laws can be deconstructed. Justice really can't. Now, that might be a little too firm.

23:26
Jacques Derrida doesn't necessarily his work and his theorizing doesn't exactly lend itself to solid statements like that, but I'm going to go with it because I think at the heart of what he's getting at, there is something important to note is that there are certain things that can change and certain things that have reference points that are more durable. Right, and so if we think about, you know just that, from within a theological context, the reference points that are more durable for us are the things that are related to historic Orthodox Christianity. It's the theology that is derived from God's word, it is God himself, it is the Bible, it's, you know, the conviction that the resurrection is a physical thing. It's all these different aspects. Those are our set reference points and they don't move, they're eternally durable. We might say.

24:20
But the things we draw around them right, how we construct ourselves to go about worshiping or doing discipleship or, you know, communicating these doctrines to the next generation those are human structures, those are human systems and those can change. We can sort of deconstruct those if we want. We can look at those and ask ourselves could we do better? Are there ways that this is actually hindering us from aligning and truing ourselves with these reference points, or are there, you know? Are there things we want to keep? How is all that going to work? And so this distinction that Derrida makes between law and justice, I think is really important. Anyway, at its core, deconstruction challenges us to interrogate the limits of our knowledge and the structures we build to maintain that you know an order, a sense of order, and it questions whether our systems, traditions or even our theology have unintentionally obscured deeper truths. And while I think this can lead to important revelations, it also poses significant risks when untethered from a reliable reference point. Right, I keep going back to that reference point.

25:29
I don't like the language of foundation so much. I know the Bible uses that on occasion, but I think, as we've used it, you know, and it's sort of developed within theology, this idea of foundation speaks more to a fundamentalism and it gets away from hey, the Bible is the, let's say, the foundation for life and faith. It gets away from that a little bit and becomes the way we interpret the Bible, becomes the foundation for life and faith. Our interpretations of the Bible become the foundation for life and faith, and what we have to realize is that, yeah, I mean, I have firm interpretations of what I think various texts mean.

26:08
If you've listened to any of the past episodes, I'm offering those. On some of those episodes I could be wrong. There was a time, for instance, when I read the Cain and Abel narrative just like everybody else did. I saw it as Cain's jealousy for Abel. I've modified that view and so what's reliable, what the reference point is, is not my current understanding yes, that's what orients me toward the reference point. But that current understanding has to be open for revision and the reference point has to be God's revelation to us. So that's the part that has to be enduring. So I try not to use the foundation. I try to use this idea of a reference point and truing ourselves to that reference point.

26:53
Now, on the one hand, I think deconstruction can really highlight some problems. It stems from the brokenness of our world and the inadequacy of our human structures. So, for example, many who deconstruct their faith do so because they see hypocrisy in the church or encounter theological frameworks that fail to address their lived experiences. On the other hand and I think this is really the catch without grounding it in Christ, without having that reference point, deconstruction really just offers critique without restoration. It dismantles but it can't really rebuild, not in a way that is any firmer than what you've just deconstructed. It leaves people in a state of perpetual questioning, untethered from any real grounding or rootedness in truth or hope. And that's where I think theology's negative task comes in.

27:38
Kevin Van Hooser describes it as this work of exposing false beliefs and practices. And theology is supposed to unsettle us. It's not just supposed to affirm us. Dietrich Bonhoeffer talked about reading the Bible against ourselves, as opposed to being enamored with our own ideas. The Bible and theology are supposed to push on us. They're supposed to drive us somewhere. They're supposed to change us and sort of transform us. And so theology unsettles us. It strips away idols and falsehoods so we can be conformed to Christ, and in that sense robust theology makes deconstruction unnecessary.

28:17
Theology isn't just about. It's not about comforting affirmations, right. It's also about disorienting us so that we can reorient toward God. And I think Stanley Hauerwas suggests this. He talks about theology at his best making the familiar strange. It forces us to confront the ways our assumptions may have blinded us to God, and deconstruction reminds us that human structures are provisional, but its ultimate limitation lies in its inability to point to a redemptive solution.

28:52
The church's role is to offer not just critique but hope, and that, I think, is what theology really offers over deconstruction. So what can we learn from deconstruction is the value of humility and self-examination. I think that's crucial, and those are things that when I teach hermeneutics, when I teach theology, I try to instill and suggest that the students practice. However, we do need to do that with an eye toward reconstruction in Christ. Theology never deconstructs us to the point where we lose all hope. It's always rooted in the reality of Christ's resurrection, ascension and glorification, and that our union with him will allow us to be like him at some point. So our faith is not about tearing down for the sake of tearing down, or even tearing down just as an exercise to find something else. It's about building up something enduring on the foundation of God's word. So think of the church as wrestling with its stance on a divisive cultural issue. Deconstruction might reveal where the church's current approach has been shaped more by tradition or political ideology than by scripture.

29:58
But the solution isn't to abandon the scripture or theological conviction. Instead, what the church needs to do is it has to do the hard work of discerning how to realign with God's word, making God's word its reference point, while remaining a faithful witness to a watching world. Now, if you find yourself deconstructing your faith, just ask yourself this what is your reference point? Are you tearing down because you don't feel comfortable with what God's word is telling you to do, what God's word is telling you you are. Are you uncomfortable approaching God on his terms? You want to do that on your terms? If that's the case, I would just encourage you not to deconstruct that way. What I would encourage you to do is to realign yourself, reorient yourself to the reference point of God's word and to make sure that, as you're questioning these things, you're allowing God's word to transform you, to change you. Deconstruction is really only valuable if it leads us closer to the God who is the source of all truth and justice.

31:00
So how should the church respond to all of this? I think there's three key approaches. Number one we can't ignore that reform is needed within the church, and I think reform begins with us. Are we living in obedience with God's word? Are we embodying Christ in our actions and in our institutions? So reform isn't just about appeasing the culture, right. It's not about responding to the various arrows that come in at us and saying, oh, okay. Well, if you want us to compromise our theological convictions in order to make you feel better, we'll absolutely do that. That is not what I'm suggesting. I'm talking about reform that aligns us more closely and more fully with God. These are the things where we reorient to the reference point and we true ourselves to that reference point. That's the sort of reform the church always needs to be doing. That is, the sanctification of the body of Christ. That's what we are supposed to be doing, and we do that on an individual and an institutional level.

31:59
I would also say that we just need to practice discernment and repentance. We need to distinguish between criticism that stems from faithfulness to Christ and criticism rooted in our own failures. Repentance is a sign of strength, not weakness. It's a testimony to the power of the gospel. And finally, I would just say let's be gracious in our engagement.

32:21
Exvangelicals, deconstructionists they aren't our enemies. They're people searching for truth and meaning. Our goal should be restoration, not division. And then I think, finally, we just need to create these spaces for honest questions. Let's not have people who are walking about pretending that they're confident in Christ. Let's actually foster discipleship that addresses doubts and struggles head on, so people can be confident in Christ. You know, exvangelicalism and deconstruction challenged the church, but they also present this fantastic opportunity, and I think they call us, to examine our faith, confront our failures and recommit to Christ.

33:00
If you're wrestling with doubt or deconstruction, let me just encourage you. God is not afraid of your questions. We need to lean into scripture, though. We need to lean into community, we need to lean into prayer. We need to true ourselves to that reference point. Reform is going to start with us, and and and it, and you know, when it starts with us, it's going to lead to him. That's what true reform really does, and so, as we're, as we're closing this up, what I would just say is um, we often talk about change, we often talk about transformation, but the true reform happens as we true ourselves to the reference point that is the reality of God.

33:37
We need to learn to point to and worship, glorify the triune God in all that we are, and that is going to require an awful lot of change on our part, an awful lot of reorientation on our part, but it's always aligned with God and his word, it always sits under the authority of Christ, and so I think there's room for disagreement about what that looks like, and those are the areas where we have to have these sort of robust, interesting, slow conversations about what really constitutes a cleavage from God's word. When are we really worshiping God on our terms as opposed to worshiping God on his terms? When are we just not fully understanding what his word means and we're going to have to lean back on his mercy and forgiveness for our ignorance? We have to have those kinds of conversations, and so I would just encourage you all to be calm, thoughtful and theological as you do that, and to not doubt the word so much that you abandon it, but having those doubts transformed by everything that is in God's words. So we true ourselves to that reference point.

34:45
Hey, next time on PREPPED, we're going to discuss how to cultivate deep discipleship in an age of distraction and take a little bit of a break from the Genesis series. We're going to pop back over into that with some conversations about Genesis 6 and the flood, and then we'll go on to the Tower of Babel, which is one of my favorite narratives, and then into the life of Abraham a bit. But as I do that, I want to intersperse some of these episodes as well. So if this episode is challenged or encouraged, you share it with someone, leave a review and subscribe to PREPPED, and let's keep building a thoughtful and faithful witness together. Thanks everybody, and we'll catch you on the next episode.

35:21 - Speaker 2 (None)
Thanks for tuning in to PREPPED. If today's episode helped you view the world through a God-centered lens, be sure to hit subscribe so you're always prepared for what comes next. Don't forget to rate and review us on your preferred podcast platform. Your feedback helps us reach more believers eager to live out God's story. Share this episode with a friend, family member or loved one, and together let's keep challenging the world's narratives. Until next time, stay grounded, stay inspired and continue living out God's plan. See you soon on our next episode of PREPPED.