From the Unseen Realm to Christian Legal Challenges in America

I'm about to talk to a biblical and Semitic scholar about the unseen realm. Um It's time for The Line of Fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and president of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH.

That's 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Every single day as we look at the news, we're looking at what we see. big debate tonight between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

another shooting in the States, leaving nine people Wounded and the shooter dead, upheaval around the world, around the nations, all these things are important, but you know. There is an unseen realm. There are things happening in an unseen realm. And the Bible often talks about this unseen realm. This is Michael Brown.

You're listening to The Line of Fire. And we're going to talk about the unseen realm with a biblical and Semitic scholar, Michael Heiser. We had a Conversation about this last year that was very popular. We actually re-aired the interview.

So I'm so delighted to have Mike back with me for an hour today. He is the scholar in residence at Logos Bible Software. He earned his PhD in Hebrew, Bible, and Semitic languages at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. And his main research interests are Israelite religion, especially Israel's divine council. Ooh, we'll talk about that.

Contextualizing biblical theology with Israel and ancient Near Eastern religion. Jewish binitarianism, what's the difference between that and Trinitarianism? Biblical languages, ancient Semitic languages, textual criticism, comparative philology and Second Temple period, Jewish literature. A lot of overlap with my fields of interest, but we're going to make this practical, clear for everyone. And Dr.

Heiser's book, The Unseen Realm, is written for everyone to understand. We'll tell you how you can get a copy of that in a moment. But without further ado, hey, Mike, welcome back to the line of fire. Thank you, Michael. Thanks for having me back.

Oh, my joy. You know, it's interesting. One of the calls I got on my show Friday, someone was asking me. about the name or the noun Elohim and how that referred to God and was there a divine council and did the Israelites believe in many gods? I actually got a couple of questions about that last week and I said, well, we'll talk about that with Michael Heiser, who wrote about these very issues on Monday.

So Michael, how is it that you got so interested in this unseen realm that a lot of believers don't understand, let alone think about?

Well, I I my uh watershed moment or the shot across the bow. spiritually speaking, came in graduate school. I mean, I taught you know, undergrad at a Bible college for five, six years. Had a couple of master's degrees. I'm in the Hebrew Studies department at Wisconsin.

Before church, one day, I I don't know I don't know what m I was talking about with this guy. He was in the Hebrew department too, but the conversation ended with him handing me his Hebrew Bible and saying, You need to read Psalm eighty two in Hebrew. And I had never done that. And you go to the first verse: Elohim net tha ba'a.el, God has taken his place or taken his stand in the divine council. And without getting a grammar spasm here, Elohim is singular there, capital G-O-D, because nitsab is a singular verb form, it's a participle.

And the next line is Bekerab Elohim Yeshpot, in the midst of the gods he passes judgment. And the second one is plural, you know, because of the character. You can't be in the midst of one. We knew we weren't talking about a Trinity because of verses two through five. God is angry.

With this group of Elohim. And I looked at that, and two thoughts popped into my head. One was Wow, that looks a lot like a pantsy arm. You know, that was like a disturbing thought, you know, before church. And the second one, fortunately, providentially was.

I bet Jesus knew this passage. I bet Paul knew it. I bet the apostles knew it. In other words, I'm not looking at anything that nobody you know, none of these people had ever seen. And so it's like this has an answer because obviously, you know, an Orthodox Israelite, if we can use that term, you know, would not be a polytheist.

Jesus wasn't a polytheist. The apostles were a polytheist.

So what's going on here? And that experience sort of really propelled me in a number of ways.

Alright, so that is the watershed moment. The Israelites were not polytheists, but did they believe other gods exist? And I thought Yahweh said that he alone was God. We're going to continue this conversation with Dr. Michael Heisen.

We'll be right back. Hey friends, this is Michael Brown. I want to encourage you to join our support team today. Become a torchbearer, one of our regular monthly supporters that enables us to broadcast the line of fire around America and around the world. And oh, every month we sew back into you in many, many different ways.

Join our team, become a torchbearer. Go to ask Dr. Brown, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org, and click on donate. Give us strict to always do what's right. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr.

Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Welcome back, friends, to the line of fire. I'm speaking with Dr.

Michael Heiser, author of the book The Unseen Realm.

So, here I have a biblical and Semitic scholar. Who has done his research and has come to conclusions that might surprise many of us? And some here and there, I'd say, hey, let's have a discussion about that. But one of these eye-opening things that if you've studied the Bible in Hebrew and studied it in ancient recent contexts, you're not surprised by this, but many people reading it the first time are like, oh my, or how could that be? Were the Israelites polytheists?

Did they believe in different gods or did they believe in one supreme God? Or I thought Yahweh was the only God. And friends, if you want to get a copy of Dr. Heis's book, The Unseen Realm, you can get it together with a complete 12-hour course I taught on angels. Demons and deliverance, just go to the website askdrbrown, a s-kdrbrown.org to find out more.

And if you have a question, if you'd like to ask Dr. Heiser a question, call 866-34TRUTH. That's 866-348-7884. As long as it's relevant for Dr. Heiser, he will gladly take your question.

So, Mike, what Did the Israelites Believe? Were they polytheists? Did they believe in monolatry or henotheists? How do we understand that there's only one true God? And yet the Bible talks about other gods, like Exodus 15, Mikamocha, Ba'alim, Adana, who is like you among the gods, O Yahweh.

Right. Yeah. My view is that Verses like that mean exactly what they say. Really? Yeah, I mean that that that we don't have we don't have you know oh Lord who is like you among you know Cartoon characters or unicorns or leprechauns.

I mean, these are beings that actually exist. God challenges them and defeats them, and He is superior to them. when I came across um you know Psalm eighty two I naturally tried to find, you know, evangelical sources and, you know, like help help me through the woods here. And unfortunately, a lot of them just fudged the issue. A lot of translations fudge Psalm eighty two.

We go down in Psalm eighty two, God is speaking again to these other Elohim, this group of Elohim, it says, I said, you are Elohim, sons of the Most High, the B'nai El Yon, all of you.

So we know who the Most High is. Again, that's the God of Israel.

So these are the sons of God. And a lot of evangelical You know, sources would say, well, these are just people, these are just the Israelite judges. But if you go over to Psalm 89, You have the sons of God there in the same council language, and there it's in heaven, in the sky.

So, this is quite obviously a spiritual council, council of divine beings, disembodied spirit beings. And I didn't know what to do with it. But eventually, again, God providentially led me to think carefully through this, and it became the subject of my dissertation and lots of other things. And here's what you have. Here's why there's a disconnect.

When we see the letters G, O and D, in a Bible or anywhere on a screen or whatnot. Our brain, again, just because of who we are as modern Westerners or modern Christians. our brain immediately assigns a specific set of unique attributes to the letters G, O and D. But that is not the way an Israelite thought about the word Elohim. You say, well, how do you know that, Mike?

Are you making that up? Does that make you feel better? No, we know that because of the way Elohim is used. It's actually used of half a dozen different things in the Hebrew Bible.

So the the deceased you know, Samuel, in 1 Samuel twenty eight, thirteen is called an Elohim. The gods of the nations are called Elohim. The gods of this council are called Elohim. You've got Deuteronomy 32:17 with the Shadim. which most English Bibles translate as demons, are called Elohim.

That alone should tell you. That a biblical writer, when he wrote Elohim in a text, was not assigning a specific set of attributes to that word. If he thought that way, he would never use that word of any other entity other than the God of Israel. But he doesn't do that. We just do that because of the way we're trained.

What Elohim actually means, the reason why it's used of different entities. is you would use that term if you were describing or labeling. A being in the spiritual world, a being that is by nature disembodied and belongs in the spiritual realm. What would an Orthodox Israelite believe? What would David believe?

Or Abraham or whoever? He would believe that, yeah, over there in the spirit realm, there's lots of Elohim because Elohim means spirit being. Just like a synonym for Rouja, spirits.

So and Yahweh lives there. Yahweh is an Elohim. but no other Elohim is Yahweh. Yahweh gets singled out in the Hebrew text, the Hebrew Bible. And as described, in unique ways as all-sovereign, omnipotent.

The creator of everything, visible and invisible, that's what makes Yahweh unique. I like to use the phrase, He is species unique. And that's what a a true orthodox Israelite would have believed. There is only one of those. But in the spirit realm, there's lots of Elohim, but none of them are Yahweh.

Yahweh is distinct and unique, and to use academic terminology. He's ontologically different and superior. to all other gods.

So in the sense that we would define God as the eternal Creator, There is one and only one God. Everything else is created by Him. Is that what God is saying of Himself in the book of Isaiah? Yeah, I think the statements that there's none beside me, there's none like me. They're not statements of exclusivity, like I'm the only Elohim that exists, because that creates a pretty obvious self-contradiction in the Hebrew Bible.

Their statements that I am alone unique. There's none like me in various respects.

So there's none like me. You know, in in addition to me, there's no other like me. And that phrase, I mean, there's about 10 different phrases that scholars call incomparability statements. There's about 10 different ways to say that in Hebrew. Two of the most common, there's none beside me, actually show up.

in Isaiah and Zephaniah. where respectively you've got Babylon and Nineveh. Claiming in the text, there's none beside me.

Well, obviously, they're not, the text isn't saying that. Only Babylon exists in the world. Babylon is the only city in the world. And then Nineveh for Zephaniah. It's very obviously not what the text means.

It means that Babylon and Nineveh are claiming to be. superior. incomparable. And that's the sense that we need to approach these phrases because I don't believe that that scripture is internally contradictory. I think it's a consistent worldview.

where God is saying the Hebrew Bible is telling us In the spirit realm, there's lots of beings that an Israelite would call Elohim, just generically. Is that sort of the umbrella term? But Yahweh among them is unique. There is no God like him. He is the God of gods.

He's the Elohim of Elohim. He is the Lord of Lords. You know, all these famous, you know, unfamiliar descriptions we get. of the God of Israel. There's no question that there's only one of those by definition.

And the way that Yahweh gets described. It's just that all of that isn't packaged and transmitted. through the term Elohim. And really, when you just go over to a New Testament mentality. that that in certain ways pulls the curtain back even more.

And Paul says in Ephesians 6, we're battling principalities and powers in heavenly places. or in 1 Corinthians 10 or 2 Corinthians 10 that these are not gods, these are demons.

So he's saying of course there's a spiritual realm and Jesus was dealing with spirit beings constantly.

So if, and this is obviously not a precise translation, but if someone just translated Elohim with spirit beings, because we know the root has to do with power and things like that, but let's just say we translate it with spirit beings and said, but there's only one ultimate spirit. The creator of all things. I mean, that's what's being said. And yet, there are Western. In our Western mentality, we really downplay the spiritual realm, which is so real in ancient Israel and real for the New Testament writers.

Yeah, and you know, it it's it's really I mean, you know this as well as I do, the academic community will Will somehow miss this. They'll take references to plural Elohim and then try to argue that Israelite religion evolved from polytheism to monotheism. You know, I rejected that in my dissertation, so that was quite a tap dance to get a PhD in a secular institution. You know, and reject that because that's what everybody's thinking, but it's so obvious. Again, that this one Elohim gets described in ways that none of the other ones do.

But somehow that just fits the paradigm. That reinforces what they want to say now. You used a couple of terms, monolatry and henotheism, early on. Israelites versus Orthodox Israelites were certainly monolatrists. That's a word that refers to worshiping only one.

And it's very clear the Old Testament demands that of a faithful, believing Israelite. You worship only Yahweh. Chenotheism, I think, is also ruled out. Uh by The the whole Panoply of the usage of Elohim because look at what henotheism presumes. Panotheism presumes, yeah, there's one God among many and he's He's on the top of the heap.

But he could be replaced.

Okay, and henotheism itself doesn't really distinguish the one at the top. Ontologically, or in terms of attributes. It just says, well, he got there because he was the most popular, or he was perceived as beating the other gods, or something like that. That's the Israelite thinking goes well beyond that. Yeah, and then is absolutely ruthless in terms of worshiping idols and bowing down to these other spirits that are all created by the one true God and many of whom are in rebellion.

Is there a rebellion against God in the Bible, in the spiritual realm? God of light, hear our cry, send the fire. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Hey, just a quick reminder, in case you don't know this, if you don't own Logos Biblical Software, they've just come out with version 7, the premier Bible software. I keep realizing how little I know about how much is there. I keep being stunned by what I have in the software and how much is available.

When you order through our website with the code Line of Fire 5, Line of Fire 5, when you order it through our website, you'll get a 15% discount on all entry-level packages.

So it's a great thing to take advantage of. Hang on, make sure I'm giving you the right code here. Let me just check to be sure. Yeah, Line of Fire 5. You get a 50% discount.

On all packages that you order. And then Logos is kind enough to donate 15% of each sale to us.

So if you have it, you keep buying new things, use that code, and you'll be a blessing to us at the same time. Speaking with Dr. Michael Heiser, author of the book The Unseen Realm.

Mike, I want to talk to you about a battle in the heavenlies. Was there some type of cosmic conflict? Does the Bible allude to that? Are there seven-headed monsters that Yahweh defeated? I want to ask you that in a moment.

First, let's grab a couple of calls. We'll start in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Max, welcome to the line of fire. How you doing, Doc? You're involved.

Go ahead, sir.

Okay, uh just getting back to the argument that we had about three weeks ago. about the national healthy of the Mesopotamia.

Okay. I just want to bring more evidence. Uh-uh, do you have a quest do you have a question for Dr. Heiser? I've got to respect the time of my guest.

In fact, since you give me a different name than when you called last time, we're going to pass on this right now. Feel free to call me another day. We'll chat. Eric, in Boston, your question for Dr. Heiser.

Hi, Dr. Brown, Dr. Heiser. Great to speak to you both. Um my question has to do with How do we go about what's the methodology that you use, doctor Heiser, in determining what is just ancient Israelite belief?

perhaps maybe like I've I've seen you write about this, the ancient Israelites believed and like a flat earth with a dome and stuff and But you don't believe that.

So, how do you go about determining, okay, this is actually true, and this is just the perspective of the ancient Israelites in the Bible?

Well, I I like to say that I I give God credit for knowing what he was getting when he called people and moved people to produce scripture. In other words, if God wanted uh science you know, and material produced through the tools of science. when he chose someone in the second millennium BC, that is sort of a counterintuitive proposition. God knew what he was getting. God knew what his own purposes were.

He's not going to prompt an ancient writer. To produce things that the ancient writer cannot know. And God was perfectly fine with that. And that ought to tell us if we assign intelligence to God, which I think we obviously should. that God knew what He wanted, He was wise when He chose, and what was produced He was happy with.

It should tell us that his goals, again, were not to have a second millennium or first millennium BC Israelite produce modern. science and modern cosmology. God, it would have been absurd for God to expect that. And God does not do absurd things.

So again, these are the sort of thoughts that I have again, and just say, well, then what did God, what did He actually want them to do? God allowed ancient writers to use the language that was at their disposal in their head, in their framework, to communicate to people of their own time. And if you think about it, if the point is affirming dualism, clear creator creation distinction. Who the creator is. That we're created, we're responsible to that creator.

Again, big picture theological thoughts. Those things transcend science. Science will change constantly. But God was wise enough to have biblical writers produce Theology for us. Using whatever language they could, that transcends all that, that is timeless.

Now for if to take this a little bit further, I think we are bound to embrace as revelation. what God had these writers write when it comes to the spiritual world, because that world cannot be tested with the tools of science. That world is beyond the tools of science.

So while on the one hand, again, God would not choose people to produce something they couldn't possibly know, and preventing the absurdity, We can evaluate the natural world of science. God, of course, knew we would do that. He would move people to discover this or that thing in Providence, and that was fine with God. But we don't have those tools at our disposal because we are embodied beings. We live in the terrestrial world God has created for us.

And so we have to trust God that the biblical writers produced again something he was completely satisfied with And we need to embrace those truths from the spirit world, the world that, again, just can't be analyzed. and evaluated with controls of science. Yeah, so if an ancient Israelite actually believed that there were windows in heaven. Windows in the sky that were opened up and the rain came down through the windows. Or if they believe that that was just metaphorical language, that's not what the Bible is seeking to communicate, which is what it is seeking to communicate is God's the Creator and God controls this.

And God has purposes for all of this as opposed to That an ancient Israelite probably would have thought that the sun rose and the sun set. That would be the logical thing. And what's interesting is through history, until people realized that the earth went around the sun, if the Bible had taught the other, people would have dismissed the Bible for being wrong for most of history. Yeah, you know, we have to give God some credit here. I mean, if he wants to produce, again, something that would satisfy the modern twenty first century scientific mind.

God is fully aware of what someone writing in a thousand BC is writing. Can't we give God enough credit to say, no, no, no, no, no, I didn't want that.

Okay, but don't write that because that's going to be wrong three or four thousand years. Again, God knew what he was doing and he knew what he was getting, and he had providentially prepared all of the writers to produce the thing he wanted produced. And if they're incapable of it at some point, And God wouldn't require that of them. He would step in and make sure that the revelation that He wanted given to us Was sound. Again, but we and I know why we do it.

We do it as a reaction to. Scientific atheism, which many people, and I frank I'm frankly one of them, I think that's an oxymoron. But we do it because of this sort of atheist compulsion to use science to beat the Bible over the head. And my retort is always, you know, Well, why are you mad at the Bible? for not producing what it was never intended to produce.

Why are you mad at the Bible for not being what it was never intended to be? Are you mad at your dog for not being a cat? Are you mad at your son for not being a daughter? If you can show me, mister Atheist, that this approach makes any sense at all in the real world, Well, then we can have a conversation. But right now, your proposition is looking kind of dumb.

because it's just it produces such a misguided result. and proceeds from a deeply flawed assumption. But again, we play into the atheist hands when we try to make scripture. you know, biblical writers produce things that God knew they weren't capable of producing. We actually entrap scripture with our own good intentions to defend the scripture, which is a big mistake, again, in my view.

Yeah, and listen, and thank you for a great question, Eric. When we understand that the purpose of Genesis 1 is to teach us about God more than to teach us about science, then we're supposed to get out of it and understand that everything that God says that we're to follow and believe. Is true. Hey, go to askdrbrown.org, check out a really great resource offer with the unseen realm in the teaching series by yours truly. It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr.

Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

This is the kind of conversation I can have for many hours speaking with Dr. Michael Heiser. His book, The Unseen Realm, came out last year, and we got lots of great responses to the interview we did. In fact, we re-aired it a couple of times when I was traveling, the two hours we spent.

So, so glad to get another hour with Dr. Heiser. If you enjoy Lagos biblical software, which so many of you do, you can thank Dr. Heiser for his expert work as scholar in residence, overseeing so much of the work and tagging. If you've been through it, man, I can just hover over this word in English, and it'll tell me what it is in Hebrew or Greek.

You're talking to the man who tagged verse after verse after verse in the Bible. Michael, what was it like? Going through word for word the Bible the way you did. Obviously, it was grammatical, you were doing things like that, but that's something that most of us will never, ever, ever do, even if we can read the original language, is to go through it that meticulously. Were you able to get more out of Scripture, or were you so absorbed line by line it was challenging?

You know, I I actually enjoyed it. And you do notice things. I felt like a scribe some days. You do notice things that you otherwise wouldn't notice. When you have to hand link.

Every word of a translation. I did the whole King James, I did part of the NIV. And there was another one, I can't remember which one I did, but we've done lots of these different projects. But when you have to hand link Every word of a translation to the word or segment in the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek from which it derives. You really do notice things at a granular level.

And yeah, I took notes.

Well, I got to go look that up, I got to run this search. I loved it. It was an enjoyable experience. It took a year. It takes a year to do one reverse interlinear, working two or three hours a day.

So I love to get questions about the King James because I'm probably the only person in the world Who has ever gone through every word, hand-linking it to these segments?

So you get to know it really well uh as a translation. It was fun. I I really enjoyed it. Yeah, let's just think of one little thing. Obviously, the King James is beautiful, classic.

As a new believer, I read it cover to cover several times, memorized thousands of verses out of it. And many times it is consistent with the use of a word, same word by the same author in the same context, should be translated the same way. But take some like Asteneo, having to do with weakness. And when you're going through Paul talking about weakness, and then it changes to infirmity. I mean, the King James isn't perfect on that either.

Yeah, we we sometimes forget that the King James was, like modern translations, a committee translation. And the translators at different points in different books you can tell, again, if you did the exercise I did for work, You could tell when you had a translator who really knew his Hebrew better than one of the other guys that worked in a different portion. I'll give you an example. In in Hebrew, you have the demonstrative pronoun. Let's just say who, you know, functioning as a demonstrative or a personal pronoun.

And you're taught in Hebrew grammar, well, it has these two possible functions.

Well, it can also be used. as the copula, the linking verb to be or is uh in English because that's just the way it it was used on occasion.

Well, there are books of the King James where the the translator just spotted every instance of that, knew his Hebrew really well. and caught all of them. Then there'd be another place where they really didn't know what to do with it. you could tell that they were confused at some point.

So There are things like that in the King James where they may Again, have had a difficulty with a word. A grammatical point like that where you have quote unquote inconsistencies. But by and large, the the King James. Is a good translation. There's a reason it's held up so long.

I was like you. I was weaned on it as a Christian. Read it through several times and when this project came up inside the building, it's like, I want to do that one. Yeah, amazing. And I wonder how many other people have done it, especially with multiple versions.

Okay, we come back. Was there a rebellion in the heavens? Does the Bible talk about it? When did it happen? Are there seven-headed monsters lurking around?

Oh God of burning, cleanse. Single flame. Say It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 TRUTH.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. When you use Logos Bible software, of course, it's going to link you to many relevant studies, articles. You want to study a subject, you search for it, all the references can come up. You want to go through scripture, here are your commentaries, here's background, Bible dictionaries, different things.

But as you're going verse reverse, use the exegetical God, you don't know the languages much, you're on safe ground. The information you're going to get there about what the Greek or Hebrew word means or different usages of it, you're on safe ground. And someone you can thank Dr. Michael Heiser, scholar in residence at Lagos. Remember, to order your Lagos Bible software, just go to our website, askdrbrown.org.

You'll see it right on. On the home page, as you scroll through. And during the break, I noticed someone had posted something. on my YouTube channel and it was in Russian.

So I don't read Russian, so I posted it in Google Translate Mike. And the Russian came out as this: Great channel, exclamation point. With our subscription and huskies, we hope for reciprocity.

So didn't quite nail it. And I love doing that.

Sometimes I'll see something in Hebrew and then post it there or Arabic, which I read more slowly, post it, Google Translate it, look at the results. They don't always nail it. It's a bit of a science, I think. Yeah, yeah, it it is for sure.

Alright, so. In the Bible, we know about Satan. We know that at a certain point there was a fall. Does Isaiah 14 allude to it? Does Ezekiel 28 allude to it?

What about the picture of Satan in Revelation 12 with seven heads? And then the reference in the Psalms to Leviathan, multi-headed, the twisting serpent in Isaiah 27. And ancient Near Eastern iconography, where you have these seven-headed deities. I mean, what actually happened behind the scenes? Yeah.

Yeah, this this is language again to the ancient Israelite that would have meant something, not because they believe that there are You know, sky monsters that can sort of land and take material form, and God had to go into combat with them. Their their metaphors and symbols that communicate A spiritual battle, in other words, a spiritual enemy. Who opposes God. And God does do battle in the spiritual world, He's a spirit being. And, you know, to us it looks like, you know, We don't know what to do with it.

And our propensity, again, because we're told, you know. Interpret the Bible literally, seek no sense when they're you know, the first sense is, you know, make sense and all that, all these little axioms that we get. Again, an ancient Israelite would have read about Leviathan, and they would have known, again, what that meant, because that was such a familiar. uh character uh in in Canaanite literature and Canaanite religion. what they had been taught, what the Canaanites believed.

And of course, since they live in proximity to the Israelites, you're going to have conversations with your neighbors about religious things And so that's going to be their story of how the forces of chaos were. put under control and which God is the one responsible for giving us an ordered place to live. You know, the the Bible includes these things. to often take shots at them. Uh and and to again equate those things with wrong theological ideas or To dismiss the deities that are given credit in these creation stories.

And once that happens, those symbols can get repurposed. I mean, you look at Revelation twelve, you know you have the dragon with seven heads, again, that comes from somewhere. you know, we have imagery like that in Daniel, for instance. And so that's designed to take the reader's mind back to the Daniel story. And what does it symbolize there?

Well, it it has to do with the the these four beasts, and the last one is just hor horrific. And You know, that one is is is going to give way to the kingdom of God. Again, A lot of this stuff is designed to draw attention to spiritual combat. and also places where that combat and its ramifications or discuss In the Old Testament, and of course, also the New Testament. New Testament repurposes a lot of this kind of stuff for that reason.

Would you say that the images are real but not literal? Yeah, I would say they stand when a person has a vision of this thing, yes, I think he's really seeing what he describes. Uh But I would say our interpretation of them Even in the Old Testament. Should not be literal. We should ask: well, where does that image come from?

Where would What would the hearers think about that? Where might they have heard that before? Heard it talked about. And once you can answer that question, you connect those dots, then you'll understand. how the original readers and hearers would have processed that language.

And in Daniel's case, it's very clear that it's symbolizing again one of these these empires again that are we also read in Daniel are under the control of hostile, rebellious divine beings.

So this is a spiritual warfare image, and that's the way they would have processed it. What about Ezekiel 28, the king of Tyre? Is that pointing back to Satan behind that? What are we to make of that? Yeah, I I I think since We've talked about this before.

And you know, Old Testament scholars know this. They make a lot of hay of it, I think, unnecessarily. that the word Satan, Satan, is not a proper personal name in the Old Testament because it's appendant. For the definite article, the Satan. And Hebrews like English, you know, I'm not the Mike.

We don't do that for proper personal names.

Okay, we get that. But the term itself you know, adversary, opposer. It really fits with what happens in Genesis 3. You know, that you had. an an opposition, a divine rebellion.

happen. And so that's why later on in the intertestamental period, the New Testament, Writers thought, hey, we need to start using this term of this villain back here because if the shoe fits, let's have him wear it.

So I do think that Ezekiel 28 And Isaiah 14, let's throw that in the bunch. and Genesis three for that matter. I think they're all describing Ape. Primeval divine rebellion. That results in the mortality of humans being driven from the presence of God, the life of God, eternal life.

And that's, again, why humanity finds itself in a situation it's in and needs redemption. And I think all of those passages point back to that original episode. Even though Isaiah and Ezekiel are using that. Story of divine rebellion to portray an earthly king, an earthly ruler. in a very negative way.

They're using it for an analogy. All right. Let's get to a few specific things about beings or peoples mentioned in the Bible. I remember talking to you about this a couple of years ago, but let's do it again or a year ago because I get asked this all the time. The Niphilim.

Genesis 6, who were they? Are they still around today? No, I don't think we need to. I'm not one of these that believes that there's modern Nephilim or a Nephilim army that is associated with the. In spaceships?

Not even in spaceships? Not even in spaceships. Yeah, I'm I'm I'm not the the the capital C sort of conspiracist, and there there's a number of reasons why. Again, if people read The Unseen Realm, there are actually two views of interpreting Genesis 6 supernaturally. I think there were.

Again, offspring that were unusual. They're described as men, but then their immaterial part is described as coming. From rebellious, you know, sons of God.

However, that works out, I don't know. I'm not omniscient to be able to tell you exactly how that works out. But I think that's what the text described. But according to the Old Testament, these are wiped out in the time of David. If you're going with the Septuagint, it's a little longer.

you still see them mentioned a little bit later in Jeremiah, but The whole point of ridding the earth of them. Is that they were the leading candidates to exterminate the people of God. And so that's why even after the conquest, you still have some left. Joshua defines victory in the conquest as there are no more Anakin in the land. And then he says, Oh, but a few of them have run off into the Philistine cities, and that's where we find them again, and then they're finally dealt with at the time of David, at least according to the traditional.

Hebrew text. And I think that the point of that is saying, look, God used you know, different people. to get rid of this this particular people group. who were raised up in some way by hostile gods, To prevent the Israelites from inheriting the land and to possibly destroy Israel. And so we have to take care of that.

Those You know, if you want to use the term bloodline, they have to be dealt with. And they are. again, but I don't think that we're looking at sort of a the need to have them in prophecy. I know all about Matthew twenty four. It's it's not legitimate hermeneutic.

To look at Matthew 24 and pluck out one phrase: marrying and giving in marriage. and say, oh, that's the Nephilim coming back at the second coming of Christ. And then you leave the other three or four descriptions. That park in back there, and they're clearly not used as anphilime. That's kind of plucking things out to.

to build a theology on. Plus, I would say that Matthew twenty four does not use the same wording As the Septuagint in Genesis 6.

So, had the writer wanted us to make that connection? Yep. He would have done what he does in many other places. He would have quoted the Septuagint to draw our eye. and our attention back to that passage, but he never does.

Yeah, and when you look at the larger thing Jesus is saying, is just as in the days of Noah, people weren't prepared and they were just going about normal life, and then the flood came, that's going to be happening that people still won't listen to the warnings, they still won't believe, and then destruction comes just as it was in the days of Noah. Hey, friends, get your copy of Dr. Michael Heiser's book, Unseen Realm, get it for yourself for a holiday gift. When you get it, you'll also get at a greatly discounted price. My 12-hour teaching series on angels, demons, and deliverance.

Ooh, the spiritual realm interfacing with the natural realm. It's fire we want for fire we want. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-342.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. I just think of Exodus chapter 12 Verse 12, where on the eve before the death of the firstborn, God announces. To Israel on this night, I will have victory over the gods of Egypt. Gods there is being used to refer to those spiritual powers that are supportive of Egypt.

They are real. They're not God like Yahweh. They're not his peers. God created them too. And elsewhere, we might use the language of angel or demon.

Michael's done a wonderful job in terms of communicating. His message in a very interesting way. You won't be able to put the book down once you pick it up. That's a strong endorsement from Professor Tremper Longman, one of the top evangelical Old Testament scholars. In the world, talking about my guest, Michael Heiser's book, The Unseen Realm.

All right, Mike, we've just got a few more minutes. Obviously, we could go on for hours and hours like this. The Rephaim. Are they a subdivision of the Anakim? Do they have to do with spirits of the dead?

Who are they? Yeah, and I know you've done a lot of work here, a lot of good work. You actually changed my thinking on a couple of points when I went back and read your book. Ah They they are. I mean, I Just a side note.

your your your treatment on how it's not about healing needs a lot more attention because you always run into that. Um You know, but sidebar ended, I guess. I was really challenged by that. But yeah, the Rephaim, again in Deuteronomy 2 and 3, this is a label given to the Anakim word or associated with the Anakim. And we see the Rephaim like we would in external ancient texts as.

also being inhabitants of the underworld.

So again, the underworld is a place you don't want to stay. I'm also very contrarian when it comes to the The belief that the Old Testament did have a positive view of the afterlife and also a negative view of the afterlife. A lot of Old Testament scholars want to deny that there's you know, they just want to keep it so vague, but The Raphaim are there. They are the departed spirits. again, of some of these giant clans.

And you just don't want to stay there. And this is why Second Temple Jewish tradition. picked up on this thread and a few others, a few other places. and taught that demons were the departed spirits Um The descendants of the Nephilim of the giant clans. That's something you'll read over and over again in intertestamental Jewish literature.

And they're drawing it in part from certain Repha'im passages. In the Old Testament. I mean, there are other threads that come from different places, but that one's present. Yeah, very interesting. And of course, we get to a side discussion here that we'd find edifying, but we might leave a few good folks out.

There's a professor, Mark Smith, a Catholic background, prolific Semitic scholar, took over the chair basically of my main mentor at NYU years back, Professor Barak Levine. And every few years I've interacted a little bit with Mark. He's a very gracious guy. And I say Catholic background because he's not one of these aggressive atheists or things like that. But he's prolific.

He's absolutely brilliant in Semitic scholarship and talking about the origins of belief in God and the ancient world. And so what you've done on a popular level and other research and on a scholarly level is obviously going to intersect with some of what he has to say. We've only got a couple of minutes. And again, I recognize the vast majority of listeners would not be familiar with Professor Smith's scholarship. But it does present this view.

that you critique in your dissertation. Where would you say that you differ with Professor Smith's scholarship in this area?

Well, fundamentally, I don't think that references to divine plurality or references to a council require a polytheistic outlook. You know, for sure, Israelites were like Christians are today. They don't all believe the same thing, you know, in every occasion or at every point. But to use council references and the plural Elohim to say that, oh, this is evidence of polytheism. and then we get rid of it, I think is incoherent, not only because it sort of ignores the elasticity, the umbrella nature of Elohim, But also, after the biblical period, I have an article that people can find on my website, drmsh.com, put in.

Yeah. Divine Plurality and then Tyndale, T-Y-N-D-A-L-E. I have a whole article published in a journal about divine plurality in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They were very, very theologically conservative, but there are over one hundred sixty references. The plural Elohim and Elim.

in the Dead Sea Scrolls, many of them in council context, So where did the evolution go? The people at Qumran didn't get the memo. there is no neat evolution. toward monotheism, uh as though we have to get rid of divine plurality terminology. They're not making any effort to get rid of it at Qumran.

They were fine with it. And my response to that is they're fine with it because they understand Elohim. just refers to a spirit being. It is not Loaded with a specific set of unique attributes. And I don't think Mark has really addressed that well.

I really like him. I've spent time with him. myself. I really enjoy 'em and and uh I really I can't say enough good about him, but we have a fundamental disagreement there. Yeah, and listen, the fact that one of my first scholarly articles was on a particular lexeme in Ugaritic and Hebrew and etc., that he cites it approvingly: hey, that's good to me because he's a world-leading Ugaritic scholar.

So we appreciate his scholarship in the midst of having theological differences. And then, if you can do this in a minute or less, John 10. What is Jesus doing with Psalm 82 and John 10?

Well, the best answer for this is to go to nakedbiblepodcast.com. I'm going to see it here. Naked Bible Podcasts dot com. And I believe it's episode Oh, I think it's 109 or 105, but I devoted a whole hour and a half of discussing this. Short version.

Jesus has claimed equality with God in John 10, thirty. He claims it in John ten thirty seven and thirty eight, I am in the Father, the Father is in me. And that tells me that in the middle of it, when he quotes Psalm eighty two six, He's not assuming that the gods of Psalm eighty two are just people. He's not saying, hey, don't get mad at me for calling myself a son of God or the son of God. Because you guys can too.

That isn't what he's saying. He's saying, look, doesn't your own scripture teach you? that the the terminology, sons of God, is actually used elsewhere. of divine beings. people, you know, beings that are more than human.

That's his first point. And then his second point, he follows it. He doesn't backpedal away from the claim in ten thirty. He says, now that my terminology is justified as pointing to beings that are more than human. The Father is in me, and I am in the Father.

I am Lord of the council. I'm not just more than a man. like the yellow heme here. I am Lord of the Council. And he identifies himself with Yahweh, the one rendering judgment in the council.

over all other all the other LA.

So that's what he's doing. That's the quick and dirty version. Oh, I love it. Hey, it's a gift to be able to do the one-hour podcast and to reduce it to a minute on live radio. Not everyone has that.

Hey, thank you for it. Another day we'll have to talk about binitarianism and Jewish beliefs, but thank you for your work. Thanks for joining me again. Thanks for having me. All right, get the book and my teaching series at askdrbrown.org.

My bottom line today: the spiritual realm is real and our God rules over it. Jay Seculo, you know him, the leader of the ACLJ. He'll be joining me in a moment. Uh It's time for the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution.

Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and president of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH. That's 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Well, I'm coming your way live from Little Rock, Arkansas. I failed to mention it in the first hour of the broadcast, but yes, coming away live from Little Rock. And when we flew in, my sister Dylan and I flew in. The day before yesterday, Saturday afternoon, and we arrived at the airport. Driving out of the airport, I was surprised to see that it is the Bill and Hillary Clinton National.

airport Obviously, they're famous in Arkansas.

Some would say infamous in Arkansas, depending on the point of view. But we're coming away live from Little Rock. And in a moment, I'm going to be joined by Jay Seculo. You know him on the radio. You know him as the leader of the ACLJ.

You know him as being on the front lines of major legal cases involving Christians and America for years now. And Jay is also a Jewish believer in Jesus. Many people have listened to me over the years and said that I remind them of him and he of me because we are both somewhat fast-talking Jews who believe in Jesus.

So Jay will be joining us shortly. I won't be taking calls for Jay Seculo, but in a few minutes, when I'm done speaking with Jay, I will be taking your calls. And I've got a couple of questions for you. 866-34TRUTH-866-3423-2232323. 3487884.

The big debate tonight. Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton.

Some say as many as 100 million people would tune in. If that's the case, it'd be completely off the charts, absolutely outrageous. If you've got some big TV show, one of the biggest shows in America today, The Walking Dead, or something like that, maybe that gets $12. 14 million viewers or something, or the last episode of The Sopranos on HBO. These are not shows I watch, but just that I know about.

That got something like 12 million. And then you'll have, you know, Monday Night Football will get a certain number of viewers, obviously less tonight because of the debate. When the Beatles run Ed Sullivan in 1964, that got a viewership that would have been the majority of Americans with TVs would have been watching it. You don't have anything anywhere near that. Because you have so, so many networks people can watch and so many things they can listen to, and then they get stuff online.

So the debate could be massive. But just out of curiosity, Just out of curiosity. The debate tonight. Is that going to impact how you vote? Or Hillary Clinton could bomb out, but you're voting for Hillary anyway.

Or Donald Trump could bomb out you're voting for Trump anyway. Or You may not vote for either. But if Donald Trump does really well, because you know he can't vote for Hillary. I know I can't vote for Hillary. If Donald Trump does really well, you'll vote for Donald Trump.

We're Where are you at? I'm just curious.

So I asked this question on Facebook. Um let's see. Where is it? The results of tonight's debate will greatly influence how I vote. And I gave three choices.

Absolutely, maybe not at all. What do you think was the overwhelming response? Oh, overwhelming out of those choices. The results of tonight's debate will greatly influence how I vote. Absolutely.

Maybe. Not at all. I'll tell you that a little later in the broadcast. And I did a poll, and oh yeah, we got our final results: 659 votes. How do you feel about Senator Cruz's endorsement of Trump?

He did the right thing. He sold out. It was a calculated risk. Tell you the results of that, but how do you feel? How do you feel about the fact that Senator Cruz endorsed Donald Trump?

And we'll take your calls a little later in the show. Do you feel he did the right thing? Hey, after all, he gave a pledge. to support the Republican nominee. Do you feel he caved in?

Just pragmatism, you know, he he his donors didn't like where he was standing or he needed to get more popular to get the Senate election in in Texas. Or, you know, look, it's just good politics. Or hey, it's we practice forgiveness. What do you think? I'll tell you how our poll respondents answered that as well.

We'll come right back with Jay Secula. Ain't the world O God of burning, cleansing flame. Send the fire. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. It is my joy to have with us today on the line of fire Jay Seculo. You know, Jay, on the front lines of key. Cultural battles in America today for many years with the ACLJ, the American Center for Law and Justice.

In fact, I got so used to saying ACLJ that I forgot what the ACLU even stood for. But we know, what the initials stand for, we know what they stand for. And it's so good and important that we have folks like Jay and his son Jordan on the radio with the ACLJ, standing up for what's right, standing up for persecuted Christians in other parts of the world, standing up for morality and liberty here in America. And Jay will be participating at the annual celebration, excuse me, the annual apologetics conference. During the break, I was answering someone's question about the Feast of Tabernacles.

Someone said the feast here. He'll be speaking at the annual Apologetics Conference in Charlotte, October 13th through 15th.

So we'll give you more details on that in a moment. But, Jay, welcome to the line of fire. Michael, thanks for having me. I appreciate it. I appreciate your great work.

Well, thanks. You know, often people say that I sound like you because we're both fast-talking, fast-thinking Jewish believers in Jesus. I guess just in our blood. Yeah. Mm-hmm.

The DNA. In fact, we launched on our radio broadcast today. We just went on uh one of the conservative talk stations uh uh out of Manhattan.

So, uh at nine seventy AM the answer, which is uh when the Conservative talk station And I said, for me, this is like coming home. These are my people. Exactly. Yeah, and I'm I'm on the Christian side of that WMCA as well. Yeah.

Oh, but to expand onto 970, that is awesome, Jay. That's incredible. I'm excited about it. Hey, what's your state of mind these days with the all-out assault on religious liberty, and you know where things could be heading for churches, for Christian schools? What's your state of mind?

What should our state of mind be? I mean, I just wrote a book that came out last week called Unholy Alliance. It talks about Iran, Russia, and jihadists and their share. their desire and what they share together as an agenda for world conquest. And I think When we look at religious liberty here, we we have a government that, look, between the Department of Justice And the Little Sisters of the Poor, our government decides to course back the Department of Justice and go after the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Oh. Religious liberty is Pitcherly a victory right now. I think in most cases we still carry the day, but we're now in even Supreme Court.

So that doesn't mean you will continue to carry the day.

So I think the reality is This next election is going to have a dramatic impact on the future direction of religious liberty litigation. Generally, I'm optimistic. Mike, I've been litigating these cases, as you know, for over 30 years, and we've had great success by God's grace. You can't drop your guard for a minute. No, you absolutely can't.

And there was one case that involved a former student of mine from a little Bible school on Long Island that ended up getting to the Supreme Court in a 9-0 decision that you helped lead the way in with Lamb's Chapel.

So you have seen amazing victories. How have things changed over the course of thirty years?

Well, it used to be. To be, you know, for the first part of it, I'd go back, let's go back 40 years.

So in the 60s and the 60s, and even the early seventies, religious liberty rarely won. Today. then we kind of changed the paradigm by arguing these as free speech cases. rather than strictly as the free exercise of religion. And then we started winning.

And what you've got now is if you listen to the coworks, the the even in the political season we're in, people will say, well, I'm all for the freedom of worship. But freedom of worship is not inclusive of the free exercise of religion or Freedom of speech. Freedom of worship means you could do what you want in your own synagogue or church. Uh you know government will stay out of that, but it doesn't mean you can impact the culture. With your message or your viewpoint.

And that's the difference between the free exercise of religion and this freedom of worship.

So you gotta watch out for the code words here. Vote words are very important. And it's important on a domestic front, and as I said, in our book that we've got out now with dealing with Islam, it's important there too. How you phrase things makes a difference. All right, so you brought up Islam.

You've written about this as well. Where are Americans going to extremes where they think every Muslim is a potential terrorist? Where are they putting their head in the sand as if we don't really face a threat from radical Islam? What should our viewpoint be? But look, let's take what happened.

in Washington state on Friday, which is gotten no coverage. Like a zero. I mean, hardly a mention. Five people were killed in a shopping mall, Washington State in Everett, Washington on Friday evening. They first reported that the individual that was responsible was, quote, Hispanic, end quote.

So nobody covered the story. Then you find out that the individual is not Hispanic, that he's backed, his country of origin was guess what? Turkey.

So instead of the paradigm being it's never terrorism unless you prove me otherwise, when you've got these mass casualty situations to start with, And this is what I say in the book on Holy Alliance. Start with. the paradigm that it is terrorism and then back but Build a fact up. And if we're wrong and it's not, well great. But if if it is, of course any any shooting in a mall is terror when you've got r these random executions.

But they didn't even report it in the media and this would have been otherwise big news. Remember, Vice President John Kerry said, I wish the media stopped reporting on these cases. Yeah, look, Donald Trump made a statement, and there could obviously be hyperbole with any political candidate, not the least being Donald Trump. But he basically said that Hillary Clinton is tougher. On his supporters, than she is on radical Muslims.

And I think there's a lot of truth to that. Because they have this view Of, well, there's this big moderating force within Islam, which is not true. What is true is there are reformers within Islam. That really want to see the faith reform, but they are few and far between. I mean, Judy Jasper, I can think of a handful.

Yeah. moderate versus fundamentalist versus jihadist is apparent it's a It's called patience. I mean, here's the differential. The the the jihadi doesn't have much patience. The more moderate influence ones still have the same desire which is the application of sharia they're just not going to go to violent ends to do it but we We shouldn't label all Muslims as terrorists in all countries where Muslims come from.

From is incapable of immigration. who's coming in this country. And if we don't know who's coming to get the country, Guess what? They don't come in. My grandfather had to go through Ellis Island.

Yeah, same same with mine. We just don't know what my name was shortened to. It was got to Brown somehow, but we never found out exactly what. Mine was Sokolov. Actually, I'm a parent sloth, but that's a longer story.

So if we switch back for a moment to religious liberties, just looking at an article in the New American that one radical left-wing Obama appointee serving as chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has basically said in a report that religious liberty is a code for bigotry. You're fighting that in the courts. How do we fight this in the battle in the court of public opinion, where the moment we hold to a view that, hey, a kid should have a mom and dad, or marriage is defined as a man and woman for good reason, that we're labeled bigots. It's one thing to fight this in the courts.

How do we fight it in the court of public opinion?

Well, it's called media advocacy. I mean, you do it every day. You've been doing it for decades. I mean, we do it as well. I mean, you got to utilize the media and your ability to communicate as you are with your network.

And we've got to utilize that media as an advocacy tool.

So it's should not be a situation where if you hold a view contrary to the majoritarian rule, In the United States of America, that you're labeled a bigot because you don't think the little sisters of the poor should have to provide. you know, birth control that can be a board of feasance to their employees. Boy. I mean, that just makes perfect sense.

So I think what you've got Is this realization? Michael, and I think it's where we are right now as a culture that we are. Swimming against the tide. Mm-hmm. in a lot of issues.

And if we're going to swim against the tide, expect To have resistance. But how do you get through resistance? Right. Continue switching. If you don't continue swimming and you're swimming against the tide, What happened?

Takes shot if it takes you to the Yeah. That's okay. If it takes you out to the ocean deeper, that's not. Yeah. And your book, Unholy Alliance, what's that going to tell the reader?

Well, it's first of all going to give you a history of what the battle really is. You know, there's a famous quote. I used a couple of quotes, but there's one by Uh Winston Churchill. Where he says unsuccessful intervention in the affairs of another government is generally not considered a good thing.

So I think when we go into engagement, we have to go into the engagement. the idea that we're going to win. That needs to be the goal. Win the battle. Benjamin Disraeli, the famed Prime Minister of Greater.

Great Britain in the 1870s said when dealing with Russia. They only understand power. You can't arbitrate with the Russians, he said. Yeah. unless you have power.

If you have power, you can. If you don't have power, you can't. Right now we're perceived to have no power. Retrace the Two major strands of Islam, the Sunni and Shia. We trace their origin.

We trace their interactions with Hamas and Hezbollah. What they're trying to reshape the Middle East. The third actor in all of this, Russia. Why would Russia work with dijihadis? And we about why that's the case.

And for the Russians, part of it is military Uh re-engagement in the Yeah. warm water ports off of Syria. There's this multi-pronged issue going on right now, and you've got this. Uh holy alliance. which is Russia, jihadists.

Syria, Iran. Yeah. working together. Not sharing the same goals necessarily, but same desires. Got it.

All right. Are you sometimes called a conspiracy theorist and you're just believing the latest sensationalism? How do you combat that? Do you document your claims? Yeah, I've got Let me put it this way.

Is 300 pages. It's very readable. Let me tell you something. End notes with which is what we call footnoting which is a Which has a lot of Substantive material in it. is almost eighty pages.

So there are When someone asks you something, you will be the expert on this topic. And when I say expert, I mean literally the expert. 220 pages of text. You read Unholy Alliance, you will be the expert on what's going on with Iran, Russia, and the Greater Middle East. It's the second in a series.

The first one was ours was Rise of ISIS. This is the second one, is Unholy Alliance. One coming out next year or latter part of next year of the year after. Is going to be on Israel.

So it's going to be rise of ISIS on Holy Alliance and then the defense of Israel. All right, I am speaking with Jay Seculo, his latest book, Unholy Alliance. We're going to talk about the Apologetics Conference coming up, Jay's involvement in it. You don't want to miss it. We'll be right back.

It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Friends, if you want to help influence where culture is going, help support voices like Jay's and mine, the ministries we have, the works that we do. You don't take this on and raise funds for it because you're trying to advance things personally. In fact, it's quite the contrary. Rather than making personal advancement, you make sacrificial advantages. Efforts to advance the cause.

That's what we all do as believers. And if you appreciate Jay's work these many years, the ACLJ, let him know that. Stand with him, stand with us in the work that we're doing here at the Line of Fire. And if you're anywhere near the Greater Charlotte area, or you want to make the trip in for the conference, or you'd like to live stream for the first time ever, you can do this, go to ses.edu, SES.edu, that's Southern Evangelical Seminary, the annual apologetics conference. It's one of a kind, an incredible lineup of speakers.

I've had the joy of speaking there quite a few times. And this year, for the first time, you can live stream October 13th for ladies only, then October 14th and 15th. Jay, you've got a special session. They're making it a major feature of the conference. What are you going to be doing there?

Well I want I want to talk to people about kind of the state of affairs. I mean, we're going to be at that point, you know, weeks away from the election for President of the United States. He got the Supreme Court. at stake. You know, part of apologetics, and you know this better than anybody because you're one of the best in the country.

country in the world. This is you've got to be able to proclaim that message of truth. truth.

So what right now we're fighting for is the ability to proclaim that message of truth And I'm going to give a realistic assessment of where we are. You know, we sometimes talk in these circles about well there may be a Supreme Court vacancy. This is not a well, there may be. I mean, there is a Supreme Court vacancy. I mean, going into this, so I'm gonna look.

I'm going to kind of give a land of land. About what we have in. in the new book, but also talk about the fact that our regulatory environment in our government. is almost prophetically dangerous at this point. It's almost like a fourth branch of government's been established with these bureaucrats.

And I co I did another book called Undemocratic, and it Uh basically that's the theme.

So I'm going to put all of this together in a talk. and gives a real assessment of where we are as a country And and lay out a path. going forward because I don't ever want to lose hope. Michael, I know you're big on that too. I don't want to get in despair.

going to win every case. My goodness, that's just not the way it's going to be. You gotta be faithful and do the best you can with what you have, and that's what we're gonna be talking about. Should we be making a big deal about the Johnson amendment and Donald Trump saying that he would seek to abolish that?

Well, first of all, he's the first candidate that's ever said it.

So and I've been fighting against the Johnston amendment since the 1980s. And yes, I mean, the idea that you can muzzle churches but you don't muzzle unions. Churches can't speak out on a particular candidate. policy or position if they name the candidate, but the But the local AFL CIO can, that's absurd.

So I think that I think that's a huge thing. I think that I'm glad he's healing. Tonight's a big night too. For this whole thing, uh, with the debate.

So it'll by then things will have been. I think we'll be even clear on where things are.

So I'm looking forward to laying that out. All right. And what about the threat to loss of tax exemption for churches? A, is that a real threat? B, should we even care?

I mean, after all, that concept did not exist in the early church, and it doesn't exist in countries like China where the church is growing.

So, is it a real threat, and should we care? Yeah. the the taxes m status c creates an even playing field.

So it you remove the even playing field, and that that's not helpful, number one. Number two, anytime you have government's capability to censor a message, whether it be denying tax exempt status or revoking tax exempt status, That's dangerous. And I will say this. Let's look at it in the context of I just had all those cases and representing all those conservative groups against the IRS, which we won. But we had to go to the We've been at the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia right below the Supreme Court. To get justice and That case.

So, look, it's a real threat. I think it should be an even playing field, and that's what the tax exemption does. All right, what about the possibility that a Christian school A private Christian school. Be it a seminary. Be it a Christian elementary school, could be required to affirm the talking points of gay activism just as those things are being pushed, say, in the public schools and the Obama administration, pushing for those things and threatening the loss of federal funding for those that don't tell the lie.

Could that theoretically come as pressure on Christian schools? It could come, but it would be absurd if it did. Only I don't say like it won't, but it'd be absurd because let's look at it this way: like on the marriage issue. A pastor, a minister, a rabbi, a priest. can decide not to marry any couple if they don't think they should be married.

for any reason they want. The pastor could say, I just don't want to do this. I don't think you're. Yeah. Take the sexual orientation out of it.

I just don't think you're the right couple to get married. And the idea of the First Amendment is the state. Cannot then compel that pastor to violate their conscience.

So that's how basic this is. I mean, I get into this discussion. all the time on the marriage. issue and people say Yeah, well, is there a constitution? Yeah.

same-sex marriage and the answer to that is no because there's no constitutional right to marriage. Marriage is what? It is a sacrifice. Yeah. A holy act within the faith community is within The state's view.

There's not a constitutional right on either side, but the idea that we've got the government. Telling a minister or a school, here's what your policies must be. Absenting compelling governmental interest? The answer is no. All right, and we've got two minutes.

If you could. Say one thing, and obviously, you've got a massive platform to do it, but to my listening audience. If you could say one thing to pastors and Christian leaders in America today, what would you say to them? Yeah. I litig Michael, as you know, I litigate cases all over the world.

We've got offices all over the world, and there's no place I'd rather be than the United States of America. And we we should not lose hope for a moment. No matter how this election goes, We live in the world. the greatest country in the world. is clear.

pray for those in authority. It doesn't say pray for those who are in authority that agree with you. Is praying for those that are in authority. you do that You pray for it. And you pray that God's will would be done.

You pray also that you'd like to see justice reign and righteousness reign. That's part of legitimate. Prayer. But the fact is, I think we should never. Mm-hmm.

You know, and even in our book dealing with With the Islamic threat. with Unholy Alliance. The new books. give hope at the end. I said this.

We will win. We must win. We have no option. And that's the position I take. Yeah, and ultimately, we grieve for Muslims because we know they're lost, and we know that ultimately the kingdom of God will triumph, and all authority belongs to King Jesus.

What's the only hope to really combating this? I mean, you should take all the military action and defense measures you can. The gospel of the Messiah is Shua. That's it. Absolutely.

Hey, Jay, thrilled with what you're doing. Hey, if you ever need someone to fill in with you on 970 one day, let me know. Up, Michael. You'll be off the top of it. All right.

Thank you so much. Jay Seculo, you can join Jay at the Southern Evangelical Seminary Annual Apologetics Conference. For information, go to ses.edu. It's worth traveling to, people coming from multiple nations and all around America. But for the first year ever, you can live stream the main content from the main stage.

So, more information there at Jay Seculo, one of the keynote speakers. And obviously, you hear Jay in just a couple of minutes say hours worth. You'll get to hear so much more from him there, face to face. I had a really fascinating interview the first hour with Dr. Michael Heiser.

And I'm going to give you a couple of highlights of that in the last half hour of the broadcast today coming up next. But there is a very real unseen realm. The Bible talks about it quite factually, just the way we would talk about it. I'm sitting in an office, I'm looking at a chair. I'm looking at a bookcase, there are lights over my head.

The spiritual realm, is that real? The Bible pulls back the veil and tells us what's happening behind the scenes. If you go to my website, askdrbrown.org, you can get Dr. Heiser's book, The Unseen Realm. with a complete 12-hour teaching series I did on angels, demons, and deliverance.

It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr. Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 TRUTH. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. I got an exciting email. Earlier today, from my producer Matt, letting me know that we just posted three new videos. Yeah. We don't normally do that just in a short period of time, but three brand new videos.

One where I talk about two-thirds of millennials could not identify Israel on a map. And they got some of the other countries right at a higher percentage. What does that mean about their knowledge of the Middle East conflict? Ooh. And then Dr.

Alex McFarland on why we should study the scripture. And then one more that I did. Are the words of Jesus relevant for us as believers today? One popular TV preacher said the words of Jesus like an expired credit card. What?

What? So, we address these false charges head on. To check out all the videos, just go to thelineoffire.org. You'll see some listed right there, and just click on the digital library for the latest videos.

So, be blessed by these. We're here to equip you. This is Michael Brown, and yes. Coming your way, everyone listening in DFW area, coming your way. Find out tomorrow night after radio, God willing.

Then Wednesday night, a special equipping service at Gateway Church, their main campus, as I talk about having hearts of compassion and backbones of steel. And then Thursday night, a special intimate meet and greet when I can have thousands of people there. It's going to be a special time. I'm going to give an inspirational faith-building message, a short message. Going to take live questions from all of you that are there.

We want to take a picture together. Have me sign a book. It'll be my joy to do it. We're coming to meet you there, our listeners in the greater DFW area. I'm in Little Rock, Arkansas right now, and a dear sister came yesterday with her husband, older couple.

They drove from Tyler, Texas to be at the meetings. They are monthly supporters of our ministry and had a book they wanted me to sign. And they drove all the way from Tyler, Texas, drove on Saturday to hear me speak three times at Agothi Church in Little Rock yesterday, Sunday. And they said, This is the closest you're going to be.

Now, they drove all those hours. I said, Actually, I'm coming to Dallas this week. I'm going to be there in two days, three days.

So, you don't have to drive all the way across the country, just drive a half hour, an hour, and we'll meet over there. All right. Senator Ted Cruz. endorsed Donald Trump. And there are some very, very disappointed.

I mean pulling their hair out disappointed. feeling that he completely betrayed them, disappointed. feeling that he violated his principles, disappointed. Others say, look, the guy is a politician. He needs to be reelected.

His donors aren't happy. Many donors that he wouldn't endorse Trump. And either he's having some problems with the Senate race in Texas, so he's just being pragmatic. And others say, hey, come on. He made a commitment to endorse Donald Trump, whoever the Republican nominee would be, to support him.

It's Trump.

So Trump went after his family and so on. But. What did Ted Cruz say, hey, my faith requires me to forgive with or without an apology?

So he's not now a surrogate for Donald Trump, but he's saying we're anti-Hillary. We know what she'll do. We hope Donald Trump will do the right thing.

So how do you feel about that? Did his esteem go up in your eyes? Did you lose respect for him? Glenn Beck, after pressing Ted Cruz in a lengthy interview. And now says I should have endorsed Marco Rubio.

That's interesting. Very interesting. I did a poll on this on Twitter, and I asked this question. about the endorsement. How do you feel about Senator Cruz's endorsement of Trump?

And The three choices, he did the right thing. He sold out. it was a calculated risk.

So I'll tell you the results of that poll in a moment. And I did another poll earlier today, just two hours ago, we started it. The results of tonight's debate will greatly influence how I vote. I gave three choices. Absolutely.

Maybe, not at all. I don't think people voted. What about you? Will the results of the debate tonight influence how you vote? Yes or no and why?

How do you feel about Senator Cruz? endorsing Donald Trump. We'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. We all know of God. Satan. Angels and demons.

But is there more to the unseen realm than that? Scripture alludes to a divine counsel, sons of God. What is the unseen realm? Could understanding it bring light to confusing passages? Could it clarify some unclear concepts in the Bible?

and even help us understand Jesus' mission better. These questions fueled a 15-year journey into researching what the ancient Israelites believed about the unseen realm. Welcome, welcome to the line of fire. This is Michael Brown. To get your copy of Dr.

Michael Hais's book, The Unseen Realm, he's a biblical and Semitic scholar, very similar background and training to what I had at NYU, he had at the University of Wisconsin. To get his book, The Unseen Realm, together with my 12-hour teaching series, audio teaching series on angels. demons and deliverance. By all means, by all means, take advantage of this very special offer. We've really reduced the price to be a blessing to you.

Go to thelineoffire.org. You'll see it right there. I want to see exactly what Glenn Beck did say. I'm looking at a headline. Glenn Beck, after grilling Ted Cruz, quote, I should have endorsed Marco Rubio.

But again, I'll see what his exact words are. Senator Cruz, did he do the right thing or the wrong thing by endorsing Donald Trump?

Well, here's the long and short of it. He knew. When he made the pledge. To endorse whoever the nominee would be, he knew. that that nominee might be Donald Trump.

He was the front runner at that point. Obviously the cruise camp was thinking and hoping and believing that he would go down in the weeks that followed, but he was the frontrunner. And he certainly knew that that would be a possibility. You say, well, then that simply had to endorse.

Well, according to Ted Cruz. And Matt, maybe you can find this link. He had previously said, and I remember watching the clip. That commitment was rendered null and void when Donald Trump went after his family. that that commitment to support the nominee was rendered null and void when Donald Trump attacked his wife Heidi and attacked his father Raphael.

I mean, a ridiculous posting of a of a picture to make her look bad, uh Heidi Cruz, and then the ridiculous allegation that Rafael Cruz had some connection somehow to the assassination of JFK.

Now You say, well, I could see that. In other words, you made the commitment based on assumptions that these things wouldn't happen, that someone would not go that far and make these kind of crazy charges.

So yes, it makes sense that he withdrew his endorsement. or his his promise to support the nominee. On the other hand, you'd say what about forgiveness?

Well, Donald Trump didn't apologize to him. True. But aren't we commanded to forgive either way? In other words, if if a criminal commits a crime against me, I may want to see justice, and I may know that this person needs to face the full effects of the law, etc. But at the same time, in my heart, I'm not going to carry bitterness and hatred and anger.

I am going to pray for that person, and I'm going to forgive them from the heart.

Well Donald Trump did a few weeks ago apologize for things said, he used that word, he apologized for things said that caused personal pain. I don't know that he reached out to Ted Cruz directly, but he did make that public statement. Does that cover it?

Well, Ted Cruz has subsequently said that his faith requires him to forgive others with or without an apology, and that his wife and father are strong people. In other words, they're hardly put off by this or devastated by the attack. in the context of forgiveness. in the context of forgiveness. I'm not talking about political expediency.

I'm not talking about political calculation. In the context of Forgiveness, Ted Cruz did the right thing to keep his commitment and endorse Donald Trump. and say I'm supporting him, he is the nominee. He's been very careful in what he said. He has not become a Trumpite and sounding the praises of Donald Trump.

Now you said, yeah, but he previously called Donald Trump a pathological liar. The day he dropped out of his campaign, he let loose with all kinds of salvos. and summarize what many critics of Donald Trump felt. And I imagine the Hillary Clinton camp will be Uh will be playing the quotes of of Ted Cruz and say now he's endorsing Trump. This is this is what Donald Trump's friends are like.

You know, who needs enemies? And they'll play that clip of, if they haven't already, of Ted Cruz actually excoriating. Donald Trump. So he's not now just said, I believe in Donald Trump and he's going to be an amazing leader. What he's saying is this, hey, he keeps putting forth the right things, Supreme Court appointees and things like that.

and listening to the right people.

So I'm hoping that if elected, he'll do the right thing. And I did make a commitment. And so I'm going to keep my word and I do forgive.

So once you factor in forgiveness. Once you factor in Forgiveness. I don't see how he wouldn't endorse Donald Trump because he gave his word.

Now, Should he have given his word? That's a whole other story. In other words, I'm I'm not a Republican. If I vote in the fall elections, I'm suddenly going to vote Republican. I'm not going to vote Hillary Clinton.

And I would have sufficient reason to vote for Donald Trump. And I continue to lean that way based on who he's listening to, based on things that he is saying. based on stances that he's taking. Yeah, I'm not putting my trust in any person. But I'm leaning towards voting for him, and obviously, in that, voting against Hillary.

My wife Nancy said she couldn't vote for him. If the elections were today, she couldn't vote for him. I don't think her views are going to change much by the fall unless she has strong reason to have them change or sees a difference in him. She feels that I'm being too easy on him in that respect. And of course, I've raised serious criticisms about Donald Trump in the past.

But that being said, I'm not a Republican. I'm a registered independent. I don't have an allegiance to either party, although I am massively in favor of the Republican Party platform in comparison with the Democratic Party platform. And if I'm just voting for the platform, it's a no-brainer. I vote Republican, period.

That being said, I could not have made a pledge if I was running for president. That I would support whoever the nominee would be. Because I don't know who that nominee would be or whether I could truly stand with them or not. In other words, I'm not all in Republican or else. Like someone's all in Democrat or else or all in Republican or else that's that's not me.

But again, if you factor in forgiveness, even if you hate the fact that Senator Cruz did this, again, he's not doing it with tremendous enthusiasm when he's being pressed. Do you feel Donald Trump's fit for the presidency? He's not saying, oh, yeah, he's the man. He's the man. And I didn't get to see the interview, but my sister Dylan was able to watch the interview with.

With Glenn Beck and just getting some feedback from my team here in terms of it being a difficult interview. And one way at least he said he would have preferred Rubio considering that they're both politicians and he thought Cruz was not. In other words, Glenn Beck has said, Hey, This is the first time I've ever seen Ted Cruz calculate his answers. And answer very, very carefully like a politician would. And Glenn Beck was saying, Hey, I didn't think Ted Cruz really was a politician like that.

And people are saying, what are you talking about? Everything he's done is calculated.

Now, he's not a typical politician in that he's taken stands that have been unpopular and he's burned bridges because of his convictions. And that's one reason I endorsed him. And if ultimately he said, Look, I've got to keep my word and I've got to keep my personal thoughts and feelings out of this. Then he did the right thing. He did the right thing.

If he simply caved to pressure from donors or potential problems in the Senate race, or things did not go as he expected at the convention, the RNC when he spoke and gave his message. And then, you know, he was welcomed. He was welcome with standing ovation, right? And then when he closed with vote your conscience, he was booed off the stage, basically. And even if that was orchestrated, it was not.

Probably what he was expecting.

So if it's just a matter of calculation. Then he's like other politicians. If it's a matter of This pragmatism of, hey, I need this donor support and I yield to pressure, then he's not the man we thought he was because of his depth of principle. If it's a matter of, hey, I've got my principles, and based on my principles, I could not endorse Donald Trump, even though I gave my word to because of what he did.

However, forgiveness requires me to, then He did the right thing and he did the Christian thing. But in any case, To think, though, that any political leader does not have a political bone in their body. or does not calculate politically. or Glenn Beck perhaps putting him on too high a pedestal. That's a lesson for everybody.

No matter who the political leader is, to get ahead in politics, other than God just sovereignly, supernaturally raising that person up. like God raised up Joseph in Egypt. There's going to be a lot of political stuff that happens. And there are going to be choices that they make and they calculate their way through. And it's not necessarily evil or wrong.

It's some way playing the game of politics in a wise way as opposed to in an unrighteous way. But on my poll, let's just see here. The pole It was not overwhelming in terms of any one view, but let's see where it is. 40% said he did the right thing. 33% said he sold out, 27% a calculated risk.

So quite divided. Change the world. God of light, hear our cry. Send a fire. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr.

Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Scholars, because of the rationalistic Western mindset, are detached from talking about these things and tend either not to see them or tend to try and play them down or are not sure what to do with them.

What Unseen Realm does is help people understand that the world of scripture is a real world and it can give us a way to bring these together under the Rubric of a God who's created a spiritual realm as well as a physical realm. Those are the words of two biblical scholars, Darrell Bach, Dallas Theological Seminary, Gary Breschers at Fuller Theological Seminary, speaking about Dr. Michael Heiser's book, The Unseen Realm. It's our special resource offer this week. You'll be absolutely fascinated by it, and it gets you digging in the word like never before and realizing the reality of the spiritual realm.

And when you order it this week, you get to. My entire 12-hour teaching series, eight lectures on angels, demons, and deliverance. Glenn Beck, I should have said, you know who can win, you know who can beat Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio. And I disagree with him on the gang of eight. There's about 80% that I do agree with him on.

He's kind of a politician, but he's a different kind of a politician. He's a young politician. He's Hispanic. He can win. Let's go for it.

Instead, I said, let's find a truly honorable man, and that will always let you down. It will always let you down. He's still, I believe, a good man. He's just a politician first. Speaking of Ted Cruz, I've never put him into the category of a politician, and that's my fault.

That would be some level of naivete on the part of Glenn Beck, who's certainly been around and is certainly worldly wise in that respect.

So, again, my poll. How do you feel about Senator Cruz's endorsement of Trump? So, my Twitter followers are largely conservative as I am. and maybe more pro-Cruz than pro-Trump. If I'm correct, I've never really surveyed that in a way that I could get clear data.

40% said by endorsing Trump he did the right thing. 33% said he sold out. 27% said it was calculated at risk.

So that means 60% did not identify first with he did the right thing. On the other hand, only 33% said he sold out.

So interesting there.

Okay, what about tonight's elections. I want to tell you my uh my uh tonight's debate.

Now I'm actually going to be in flight, I believe, from from Little Rock. I'm going to be in flight to Charlotte, North Carolina. And in that case, Setting, I'll try to follow on my computer what's happening with the debate. And the way that I would normally do that is go to a website. uh news website that will be Posting tweets from different people watching, different political pundits watching it and making their comments, and then be interacting with Nancy as she's watching it.

But My question that I posted on Twitter. The statement said this. The results of tonight's debate will greatly influence how I vote. Okay. That was my statement.

The results of tonight's debate will greatly influence how I vote. And I thought, should I just say agree, disagree? I thought, no, I'll give three choices. Absolutely. Maybe Not at all.

Absolutely. Maybe Not at all. What do you think the results were? Eighty-three per cent said what? Did they say absolutely?

Maybe, not at all. Eighty three per cent said not At Oh. Isn't that fascinating? 12% said maybe, only 5% said absolutely.

Now it's just the first 176 votes, and again it's reflecting of people who are following me on Twitter. If I had done it on Facebook, as I often mention, our Facebook page, Ask Dr. Brown, is 20 times bigger with over 420,000 people on Facebook and only 22,500 or something on Twitter. But I don't have the ability to just do a simple poll.

Someone have to read through all the responses and we get hundreds, we can get thousands of responses which can't just sift through in the context of a radio broadcast.

So we just work with the data that we have. But What it's saying is Either. People have made up their minds. and they're going to vote for one or the other. They they either hate Trump with such a passion And hate Hillary with such a passion that they're not even going to vote.

It doesn't matter what happens to the debate. Or. They are so much behind Hillary Clinton, either because they like her or because they're so against Donald Trump. or they're so behind Donald Trump either because they like him or they're so against Hillary. Either way, They are going to not be influenced.

83% said they would not be influenced at all. They didn't even say maybe. They will not be influenced at all by the results of the debate. Here's where I'm at. Under no circumstances Barring Hillary Clinton.

absolutely repudiating what she stood for and who his she has been for decades. Barring that and a completely different person emerging that has no connection with the Hillary Clinton of the past and no connection to her radical pro-abortion, pro-homosexual activist policies and weak policies regarding national security in the past and things like that. and a true turning from corrupt ways of the past. Under those circumstances, would I vote for her? Would I consider voting for her?

Is it even a possibility of voting for her?

Okay. So that's clear. And I'm not expecting that to happen.

However, Donald Trump could continue to get me to lean towards voting for him. And what it would mean is this. it would mean that he's exercising more self-control, Because it's going to have to do that. In the presidency, if he can't do it. in a debate of this magnitude Can I expect to do it as the president?

Unlikely. Because there's going to be far more pressure, not a debate setting, but far more pressure with international leaders and other things.

Now, he's met with, well, at least three international leaders recently. He met with the president of Mexico, and he was statesmanlike in that meeting. He's met with Prime Minister Netanyahu. And I believe that meeting went well. And he met with Egyptian President al-Sisi.

And in that meeting, as I just read some things briefly, didn't get to study it in depth. that the Egyptian president and his colleagues were more favorable of the meeting with Donald Trump than with Hillary Clinton. Because of Hillary Clinton and Democrat policies towards Muslim Brotherhood and things like that.

So if he exercised self-control, If he seemed to better understand why he was espousing. conservative values, which means he's getting it more. He's not just trying to get the vote of evangelicals because he knows that's the only way in. I believe he surrounded himself too closely with evangelical leaders, men like Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee, as well. And Christians like James Robinson and others who are regularly speaking into his life, and he hasn't shut them out.

if I saw that he had more understanding of this, Okay, the fact that he was pro-choice in the past, the fact that he's married three times and celebrated his adultery, okay, that's still... is the past. And I'm not voting for him even based on that as much as. Where is he going to stand today? and what decisions would he make if elected?

So If he bombed out If he if he behaved in a complete unruly Way and the worst case scenario for Donald Trump, then how could I say I'm voting? But it could influence me in a positive way. We Shao. See. My bottom line today.

Pray, pray, pray for God's mercy on America and for righteousness to rise.