Sons of God, Daughters of Men, and Nephilim

00:00 - James Spencer (Host)
When we see things, when we judge them to be good and we decide to just take them, regardless of what God says, we are not going to do as well as if we sit back, try to discern what it is that God wants from us, how it is that God would judge us and what it really looks like for us to follow after Him. And so, in Christ, we're restored to our true calling as God's people.

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.

00:54 - James Spencer (Host)
Hey everyone, welcome to this episode of PREPPED, the podcast where we explore biblical, theological and ministry topics to help you think more deeply about the scriptures. I'm your host, James Spencer, and today we're tackling one of the more mysterious and probably controversial passages in Genesis, particularly Genesis 6, 1 through 4. And this text really introduces some enigmatic characters the sons of God, the daughters of men and a Nephilim and it sparked centuries of debate about who these figures are and how their story fits into the larger narrative of Genesis. But I think, beyond the mystery, genesis 6, 1 through 4 really does offer some profound theological insights about sin, divine judgment and humanity's rebellion, and so in this episode, what we're going to explore is the good or the saw good. Take paradigm from Genesis 3 and its recurrence. Here we're going to look at the identity for the sons of God and the various options available for that. I doubt we're going to solve this problem, but hopefully we'll give you a framework for thinking through who these sons of God might be and how you might go about investigating this narrative further or making a decision about how to read this narrative at this point. We're also going to look at the connection between the Nephilim and the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men, which is fairly challenging this text. And then we're going to look at some ancient Near Eastern parallels to Genesis 6. And also we're going to tie in how Nimrod and Genesis 10 kind of connects to this story. There's some similar language that's used here. I actually think Nimrod probably connects also into Genesis 11, 1 through 9, the story of the Tower of Babel, and so we'll kind of gesture toward those. That's what we'll deal with in the next episode. Here is the Tower of Babel narrative, but I also think that we need to at least suggest that Nimrod is connected to Genesis 6 as well. So let's go ahead and dive in is connected to Genesis 6 as well. So let's go ahead and dive in.

02:47
The first thing we want to look at is the saw good take paradigm. We saw this in Genesis 3, if you remember, the woman sees that the tree is good for food and desirable for making one wise, and then she takes the fruit and eats it, and so you have this sort of saw good take paradigm, and one of the things we talked about there is that this idea of seeing that it was good is something that was what God did in creation. He created what he was creating, whatever he happened to create on a given day, and he'd stand back and he'd look at that and he would see that it was good. In other words, he would determine that it was what he wanted, it was appropriate, it was the way it should be, and he was standing back and taking the position of a judge at that point. And so when Eve then takes this moment, she sees that the tree is good for food and desirable to make one wise, she's also taking on sort of a judgment, and that judgment ends up being against or contrary to what God had said in his law you know, do not eat of this tree. And so what we see here in Genesis 6-2 is something very similar. So we're going to see.

03:52
The sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive or beautiful. Many translations use attractive or beautiful here, but the actual underlying Hebrew word is tov. Tov just has a broader semantic range. It can encompass things like good or beautiful or attractive, and so you know we have this sort of recurring pattern of saw and tov. The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were tov good and they took as their wives any that they chose. And so we have the now recurrence of the pattern from Genesis 3, saw good, take, and I think this language you know. In mirroring Genesis 3, 6, what we have is we see right. Eve saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and desirable. Similarly, the sons of God see the daughters of man as attractive, literally good. Declaring them good is, like I said, an act of judgment. Eve judged the fruit of the tree as good, apart from God's command. Likewise, now, the sons of God decide for themselves what is desirable, ignoring these.

04:57
Probably what we need to understand is there's some sort of implicit divine boundary that is being transgressed here that the sons of God and the daughters of men should in some way be kept separate. Now we don't have to get into the identities, I don't think, to really make this discernment. So all of the different identities of the sons of God, I think, can apply to this. But what I would say is what we're seeing in this repetition of the saw good, take sort of verbiage, is we're seeing a transgression of a divine boundary, that these are two groups of people, whoever we would say that they are, who do not belong together. It's against, somehow, the order that God has established, and that now what's happening is that there is a transgression of boundaries of sorts that is incommensurate with God's original design and plan. And so, even without identifying who the sons of God are and the daughters of man are, what we can see are two things. Number one there's this contrast there's the sons of God and the daughters of man. So obviously we have a male-female distinction, but we also have maybe what we could call an origin distinction or a filial distinction. The sons of God, whoever these folks are, that they come from, they're of God, and the daughters are of man, and so we've got this sort of dichotomy here in these two distinct groups that we would characterize in different ways. This isn't the sons of God and the daughters of God, or the sons of man and the daughters of man. This is now the sons of God and the daughters of man, and so they are distinct groups that were originally intended to be kept apart or distinguished in some way, that are now intermixing, and so this is a transgression of divine boundaries.

06:46
We also have taking in both accounts, and this culminates in sort of the sinful act of taking. Eve is going to take the fruit. She's going to act then on the judgment that she makes and do what she wants to do, as the sons of God take the daughters of men. And I think the pattern really does just highlight this recurring biblical idea that sin often brings with it misjudging what is good and taking what is not ours to take, apart from God's authority. And Genesis 6 account builds on this pattern to show how humanity's rebellion intensifies over time. It's not just individual acts of sin, but sort of a systemic rejection of God's order that escalates here. But sort of a systemic rejection of God's order that escalates here. And so in Genesis 6, this act of rebellion escalates.

07:31
The moral decay already introduced through Cain's line, in Cain's defiance, you know Lamech's boastful violence, and now the widespread corruption seen in the sons of God and the daughters of men, demonstrate the humanity's growing tendency to reject God's design and for things to begin collapsing in on each other. Remember, you know, in creation God is making these different separations, he's assigning various functions, he's creating a world that works together but that is differentiated in itself. So water is not the same thing as land. And so he's creating all of these different complementarities. But to make those work together there have to be boundaries, and so he's creating all of these different complementarities. But to make those work together, there have to be boundaries, and so what we're really seeing here, I think, is a collapsing of certain boundaries, whatever those boundaries may be, and we'll get to that.

08:14
But whatever those boundaries might be, however they may be construed, that's what's happening here, and I think it's a good way to start off the flood narrative because, as we talked about in the previous episode, the flood is essentially a decreation event. If you think about how the waters come back in on all of the rest of creation, what you're seeing is that everything that God had distinguished and created boundaries and had set in place to create this order where humankind could flourish and there would be animals and plants and all this different sort of of creative things all over the earth. Now what's happening in the flood is the waters come back in it's complete and total chaos, except for the ark, and you have this decreation event. Well, that is fundamentally a breaking down of these boundaries that God set, and it's initiated by another breaking of boundaries that God set the sons of God and the daughters of men. So if we consider how this narrative sort of sets the stage for the flood as not just a reaction to sin but a response to this deep and persistent distortion, disordering of God's creation.

09:23
And the sons of God, in seeing and taking, highlight the human tendency to define goodness on our terms rather than God's. It's this idea that I wouldn't even necessarily, maybe I should rephrase that. Let's rephrase that. So, the sons of God in seeing and taking, they highlight this tendency for a sinful world to fall into chaos, for the boundaries that God has set to collapse, and so humanity continues to get more and more lost they're having trouble than you can envision and more lost they're having trouble than you can envision. It's very difficult at that point to sort of grab hold of the appropriate handles and understand what God is doing in the world, how the world was actually created, because all of these things that were at one point distinct are now being transgressed, the boundaries are being blurred, and so understanding what God's original design was becomes more and more difficult, and so understanding what God's original design was becomes more and more difficult, and I think the recurring theme offers a lens to understand the broader story of redemption and judgment throughout scripture. So that sort of leads us then into the big question, the question that many scholars have tried to answer, and there are tons of different views on this but who are the sons of God?

10:38
Genesis 6-2 introduces the sons of God, but their identity has been debated for centuries. So let's explore some of these major interpretations. Who these sons of God are? First one really divine beings. The sons of God are divine beings.

10:53
We find the phrase sons of God or B'nai Elohim is used in Job 1.6 and Job 38.7 to refer to different angelic beings In ancient Jewish texts, actually, such as like 1 Enoch. They also interpret these figures as fallen angels who rebelled against God and then corrupted humanity. Now, 1 Enoch is an ancient Jewish text written between the 3rd century BCE and the 1st century CE, and while it's not canonical for most Christian traditions, it was influential in Jewish thought and is referenced in the New Testament in Jude 14 and 15.1 Enoch really elaborates on Genesis 6, portraying the sons of God as watchers, angelic beings who descend to earth, take human wives and produce the Nephilim, a race of giants. So is 1 Enoch authoritative? Is it the authoritative interpretive text for us to understand what's going on in Genesis 6? Not at all. This is a much later document, a much later commentary that reflects possibly some of the views that were going on at the time, but also interacts with its own context, its own environment, its own timeframe. And so it isn't at all the case that 1 Enoch should be the definitive decision on what sons of God in Genesis 6 means. We could say the same for Job 1, 6 and Job 38, 7. These are actually much later references, and so you know, to say that we are going to decide that sons of God in Genesis 6-2 are going to be angels, based on Job 1-6 and Job 38-7, is a bit difficult. So it's good textual evidence, but it's not so strong that it would be absolute. There's no way that it could mean anything else. This is the ironclad proof.

12:43
These are angels and so this divine being's view. It does have some challenges, as strong, I think, as the, and I actually tend to think that the lexical argument is good. I think it fits well with a sort of a boundary collapse model where you have then the angelic realm sort of coming into the human realm. These are two realms that ordinarily are kept separate. They're supposed to be distinct, and so I think that it does speak to a collapsing of boundaries, Modern sensibility-wise, I will admit, I'm less comfortable with the angelic interpretation than I probably should be, and it's just one of those things where it just seems so strange that I'm not sure I want to sort of advocate for this view, but I will say that I think it's got fairly strong support. I think it makes a lot of sense of the passage and you can't rule it out.

13:32
One of the challenges I do think it has is Jesus' statement in Matthew 22, 30, that angels do not marry. It does raise some theological questions about the nature of these beings and their ability to procreate, but I also think that if angels are spiritual beings, you know, and they could engage in physical acts with humans, we do see angels interacting with humans in physical ways throughout the text, and so I think again, if we're thinking through the straight, what is the ideal? How do these things work? Yeah, that's probably a good critique. You know, if Jesus says angels can't marry, how is it that these angels are marrying? But I think that's almost precisely the point under this reading is that if angels are marrying, this is something that they're not supposed to be doing, and so we get this sort of collapsing of boundaries and distinctions. Now God's creatures, whether angelic or human, are beginning to do things that are antithetical to their own natures, let's say the way that God created this order. Those boundaries are being transgressed.

14:35
Now, another view on these sons of God is that they are actually human kings, and so this is often rooted in ancient Near Eastern reading. So in the ancient Near East, kings were often called sons of God as representatives of divine authority, and this view suggests that the sons of God were these powerful rulers who were abusing their position by accumulating wives and engaging in polygamy, and these rulers, driven by greed and lust, embody the same sort of prideful rebellion we see elsewhere in Genesis. This interpretation suggests to explain the connection to the Nephilim, who are described as giants or mighty warriors. Could the royal sons of God have exaggerated their influence through alliances with the Nephilim, or is there more to their story? I mean, the gaps in this interpretation invite deeper reflection on how power and authority are often distorted in human hands. I think that's the real challenge for me in this view is that the Nephilim aren't really well explained necessarily by the human king view. I would say the same, that it isn't transparent, for instance, that we jump to this sort of ancient Near Eastern cultural understanding of the sons of God in this text. It just doesn't make a lot of intuitive sense to me and so, while I like the interpretation, I agree that there are many ancient Near Eastern texts that read you know sons of God and call kings sons of God. Read you know sons of God and call kings sons of God the connections here between why this is so bad, why this particular boundary crossing would result in the flood, is more difficult for me to understand.

16:08
The third view, I think line of Seth, that the sons of God are the lines of Seth, the daughters of man are the sons of, you know, of Cain, cain's descendants. So Genesis 4 and 5 traces two distinct lines. They chase the wicked line of Cain and the godly line of Seth and the sons of God could represent Seth's descendants who intermarried with the daughters of men, cain's descendants, and that leads to this moral corruption. You know, the strength of this view in my mind really is that throughout the rest of Genesis we do see that there are problems with the intermarrying of people from the Abrahamic line. Let's say, let's just start with Abraham and allow that to go where it goes with other people. So you think about Esau. Esau marries, you know, non-israelite women, whereas Isaac Jacob are both sent to distant relatives to find a wife, and so I think there could be something to that view it's interesting at least to think about.

17:19
These lines were intended to say separate. You didn't want the let's call it the blessed line and the cursed line. I wouldn't say that is the best way to characterize these, but you hopefully understand what I'm saying there. Cain's line has been moving away from God, seth's line has been moving toward God, and so for these two to come together and decide, okay, this is going to be what we want to do, this becomes a problem that there's now not a clear and distinct understanding of who is going to be serving God, who are going to be the people who are worshiping God serving God, who are going to be the people who are worshiping God, and I think this has a viable interpretation.

17:59
Now I will say again this view doesn't seem to fully take into account the extraordinary description of the Nephilim as giants or mighty men. Now let me just clarify that, because giants comes up in numbers, this is the one time that the Nephilim are really associated with. The giants is in Numbers, and it's when the spies come to report what's going on. The spies report really does deal with, you know, these spies who are afraid to go into the land and they're saying well, there are giants there and the Nephilim are sort of in view.

18:32
What I would say is that in Genesis 6, there is no representation of the Nephilim as giants. They're the mighty men of old, so they're the gibor, the giborim. And so if the Nephilim are the offspring of this union between Cain's line and Seth's line, it isn't clear why they would be so distinct from other humans. And I think that this interpretation too, it calls for a deeper exploration of how covenant lines can be corrupted over time. And I would say, really it just doesn't make a lot of sense in the Nephilim.

19:06
I think the most natural one for making sense in the Nephilim is the sons of God as divine beings. However, I sort of think that, thematically in the book of Genesis, I personally think that the sons of God being the line of Seth and the daughters of men being the line of Cain offers really interesting interpretive trajectories. Now, ultimately, I probably have skewed a little bit toward the sons of God as divine beings view, skewed a little bit toward the sons of God as divine beings view. I would say that that is the view that I'm most inclined to at this point, but it's very much like a 60-40, right A 55-45 sort of scenario, and I think that the only one I'm less in love with is the sons of God as ancient kings. I'm not convinced about that view, but the other two, I think, are really viable, and so each of these views they do offer some valuable insights, but none really resolves every question.

20:06
The text leaves certain ambiguities intact, inviting us to wrestle with its theological and narrative implications. So what's clear, however, I think, is the actions of the sons of God, whoever they are, contribute to a climactic moment of rebellion that demands divine intervention. So let me clarify one thing In the divine being's view, this is sort of challenging, because the divine being's view wouldn't technically be simply human rebellion. So I think we have to watch that language. What I see this as is the beginnings of these breakdowns of distinctions. Whatever these two lines are, what we can be clear about is that they are breaking distinctions down that should have been maintained. Right, we too often think about this as just human rebellion, but if the sons of God are actually divine beings. Human rebellion doesn't really fit.

21:05
There is a view that says that, you know, the sons of God are taking these women by force, but the language here in Genesis doesn't necessarily have to reflect that. It could mean that, you know, the picture could be in our minds that these daughters of men are sort of interested in being with the angels for a number of reasons, including the fact that they would like to increase their profile, their power, their being like God. We might say that might be a little too much reading in. You know, sort of to go back to the Genesis 3 narrative and pull that forward. It's definitely not in the text, and so I'm not suggesting that's a strong opinion, but the idea would be that this is, you know, in that sort of see good, take paradigm, that there is a desire for greater authority, ownership, autonomy, self-determination in this passage. But at the end of the day, I think it's safer to view this, as this is a narrative about the breaking down of God-defined boundaries.

22:09
So the next sort of question we have to ask, though, is are the Nephilim? Who are the Nephilim, and what is their connection to the sons of God? So a lot of times we think of these Nephilim as just offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men, and many interpreters see the Nephilim as the direct result of this union, explaining their extraordinary strength. Right, their position. We'll call it is the giborim, the mighty men, and this interpretation suggests a blending of human and divine elements that intensifies everything.

22:44
Others argue that the Nephilim are mentioned, incidentally, as a separate group of ancient heroes or warriors, and in this view they are not the offering but a parallel example of humanity's corruption. So what's the role of the Nephilim in Genesis? I think the Nephilim symbolize the growing corruption and violence of the earth. Their renown reflects human pride and the pursuit of power apart from God. I don't know that we can read the Ghibor, the mighty men aspect as a positive, so this will get us into what happens with Nimrod a little bit later.

23:17
But I would just argue that the Nephilim are not heroes in the sense that we think of them often today like superheroes, like Superman or Batman or something like that, that these are oppressors, killers, oppressors, killers, that the mighty men are in some way representative of a force that is antithetical to God, and so I think the Nephilim's inclusion in Genesis reminds us that. You know of the human tendency to self-direct and to try to position oneself against God, and that this union whatever again, whatever it was, it could have been between uh, cicelyne and Cain's line and these Nephilim are now these, these sort of uh warriors who come together and say, no, we, we refuse to worship God. Um, but I I think, ultimately, what we see in the Nephilim is this tendency for self-direction, this tendency to self-determine, decide where humanity wants to go, and these Nephilim were uniquely gifted for that. They were the mighty men who moved humanity away from God. And so I think, whether through physical might or symbolic arrogance, their story really warns us against defying God's order, and their larger-than-life presence in the narrative underscores the severity of human rebellion at this pivotal moment in biblical history. Now, one of the things we probably need to do as we're thinking through all of this is just look at some of the ancient Near Eastern parallels. These will be in many ways they're you know they're going to.

24:55
You will have heard about some of these already. You've heard about the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Atrahasis Epic. We addressed both of them in the last podcast in relation to the flood. But Gilgamesh, in the narrative of the Epic of Gilgamesh is portrayed as part divine and part human. He's described as a mighty figure who oppresses others, and his larger-than-life exploits mirror the biblical depiction of the Nephilim as men of renown. We also have the Atrahasis epic, and in this Babylonian story the gods decide to destroy humanity, not because of sin, but because the humans are too numerous and noisy, and that is in contrast with what the Bible highlights about moral accountability in Genesis. And so in Genesis God's judgment is not arbitrary but a response to sin, violence and rebellion.

25:41
And I think that Gilgamesh, the Gilgamesh background him being part human, part divine and being this sort of oppressor a bit portrayed as sort of a mighty man who does these amazing things but who is also not particularly moral all the time in the way that he does them. I think that's actually a really important background. But the flood narrative in Genesis conveys this moral and relational dimension that contrasts sharply with the capricious action of the gods in other myths, and so probably what we could see in the reference to the Nephilim is a Gilgamesh-like figure where you know this again, if we don't read mighty men as sort of these heroic human beings who are fantastic, but as these sort of prideful human beings who are doing things that are antithetical to God. That then makes much more sense of what's going on in this text. So finally, let's talk a little bit about Nimrod and his legacy in Genesis 6. So in Genesis 10, 8 through 12, it describes Nimrod as a mighty hunter before the Lord, and his description does echo the Nephilim. So Nimrod is called the mighty man, a gibor the same term is used for the Nephilim in Genesis 6, 4. And he establishes cities like Babel, which again later become symbols of human pride and rebellion against God. We're going to see Babel in Genesis 11, 1 through 9 for the second time really, in this narrative there's some thematic parallels like the Nephilim, and Nimrod tend to represent this misuse of power and human arrogance.

27:20
There are readings of Nimrod that make him more heroic. Some commentators do suggest that Nimrod is more of a hero than he is a villain, but I think that his connection to the genealogy of Cain in 10.7. It is, I'm sorry, not Cain, ham Ham who was cursed after Noah. I think that sort of gives this whole picture of Nimrod more of a dark tinge, is the way I would tend to say it. And the language used in the Nimrod description, though often translated in ways that give it a little bit more of a positive sense. These are all terms that also have sort of a dark side, and so what I tend to see is, again, we're dealing with this ambiguous language within the biblical narrative, but ultimately, this connection with Ham and the things that Nimrod does, his association with Babel, tends to lead me to think that Nimrod is not the greatest person on the planet, that he is not somebody that we should look at and view as a hero.

28:20
But I would say Nimrod's legacy does tend to lead, I think, directly to Babel, where humanity seeks autonomy from God, in this culminating in divine judgment. So Babel's construction illustrates humanity's collective rebellion, I would say ignorance of God, a direct outworking of the themes that are in some sense introduced in Genesis 6. So if you imagine a boundaryless world in which the distinctions between what is God's order and what is man's order is continually becoming intermingled, now what you have in Babel and I'll talk more about this in the next episode, so I don't want to give everything away, but what you have, I think, in Babel is human ignorance. It's unrestrained and unguided human capacity run amok. And so Nimrod, to me, is a negative figure, loosely associated with the Nephilim and with the Tower of Babel narrative, so he's sort of an interesting bridge character between these two narratives and so it's kind of difficult to decide which one to mention him in, but obviously I'm doing this episode.

29:27
Finally, what we can, I think, say is that, regardless of Genesis 6, 1 through 4 and what we see there, regardless of Genesis 6, 1-4 and what we see there, I think what we also see is that God is going to respond with the hope of redemption. So Genesis 6, 5-6 describes God's grief over humanity's wickedness. The Lord saw the wickedness of man was great in the earth and the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth and it grieved him to his heart. But even in judgment there is still hope. God preserves Noah and his family, continuing the promise of redemption. The flood is both an act of judgment and a reset. It's offering a fresh start for humanity, so that in remembering Noah and the people in the ark, god is now going to send the Ruach, the breath, the spirit that was, you know, sort of hovering about around the, uh, the deeps in in Genesis one. He's going to send the spirit to, let's say, recreate or, um, reestablish the appropriate boundaries, uh, between the various parts of creation. And I think the story does point forward to Christ, who reverses the corruption of sin and establishes God's righteous kingdom. And it knows, deliveranceance prefigures a lot of these greater deliverances achieved through Christ, who restores what humanity lost in the fall.

30:42
So Genesis 1 through 4, it's a mysterious and very complex passage, but it does highlight recurring biblical themes the spread of sin, the misuse of power and, I would say, the real collapse of divine boundaries. That, to me, is the big contribution and one that we often miss when we're reading Genesis 6. It's this collapsing of divinely established boundaries that is part of the problem. And so there's the consequence then becomes human autonomy, and whether we focus on the Nephilim, the sons of God or figures like Nimrod, the message is really clear Apart from God, human ambition leads to destruction.

31:19
When we make our own calls as to what is good, what is right, when we see things, when we judge them to be good and we decide to just take them regardless of what God says, or apart from what God says, or in ignorance of what God says, we are not going to do as well as if we sit back, try to discern what it is that God wants from us, what it is that God would judge this, how it is that God would judge this, and what it really looks like for us to follow after him. And so, in Christ, we're restored to our true calling as God's people, and I think that's really what all of this points toward. That, as we look at these narratives in Genesis, what we're seeing is we're seeing the wrong ways to live. We're seeing that, instead of accepting the boundaries that God has created and maintaining those distinctions, we've decided that, no, transgressing those boundaries is actually a good thing, this is what we should do, and that is a part of human rebellion. And, as those boundaries is actually a good thing, this is what we should do, and that is a part of human rebellion. And as those boundaries are blurred and those distinctions made less clear, what we end up with is we end up with a world that's increasingly difficult to navigate, because we just don't know where to go, we don't know how to move, we don't know what we're doing, and so that is where, as we're restored in Christ and he gives us eyes to see the world in new ways, we learn to live under his authority. Now, what we're really doing is we're living into the created order that God has already established. We're seeing different boundaries, we're understanding why these distinctions are important and we're maintaining them, and so that is when we come to Christ. That's part of what happens, I think, in our overall sanctification.

33:03
Now, thanks for those who are listening. Thanks for listening to PREPPED today. If you enjoyed this episode, share it, subscribe and join me next time as we continue exploring the depths of God's Word. I'll catch you in the next episode. Everybody, thank you for listening.

33:17 - 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.