Returning veterans often carry deep, often invisible wounds that far exceed the physical or psychological categories typically discussed. Andrea and Charles argue that many soldiers experience moral injury—the spiritual and ethical damage that comes from participating in wars that violate God’s standards for just warfare. Modern militaries condition young men into unquestioning obedience, often sending them to kill people they’ve never met for reasons they never fully understand. When soldiers return, there is rarely a meaningful transition back into civilian life; they are expected to simply hand in their weapons and resume normal living. The result is disorientation, guilt, trauma, and sometimes crushing despair, reflected in the staggering suicide rates among veterans—far exceeding battlefield deaths. Hollywood myths and patriotic slogans often hide the truth: many soldiers come home morally shattered, struggling to reconcile what they did with what they once believed.

The hosts emphasize that Scripture speaks authoritatively about war, and that most modern conflicts do not meet biblical criteria for defensive warfare. When nations ignore God’s law and wage offensive or preemptive wars, they create moral casualties—both among those they fight and among their own sons who are ordered into ethically compromised situations. The state offers drugs, labels, and bureaucracy through the VA, but very little true spiritual care or repentance. The Church must not hide behind clichés like “thank you for your service,” but instead minister to veterans as fellow image-bearers in need of truth, forgiveness, and restoration. Biblical law offers a path for righteous defense but condemns empire-building, aggression, and alliances with unbelieving nations. Until God’s standards are restored, society will continue producing wounded souls whom only Christ can truly heal.

The episode explores the biblical critique of modern prisons and the surprising opportunities that prison ministry provides for the gospel. Pastor Dave Bush explains why prisons—unknown in biblical law—create environments that often worsen crime, reward idleness, and foster injustice. Yet, because prisons exist in our society, he argues that Christians must step into these dark places with the light of Christ. Bush describes how his reluctant entry into prison ministry began with repeated letters from an inmate seeking reformed teaching, a process through which he gradually realized God was calling him despite his fears and hesitation.

Bush recounts the realities inside the prison: the hunger inmates show for Scripture, the spiritual clarity that comes from knowing they are guilty, and the remarkable transformations he has witnessed. Unlike many outside churches, the men he teaches know their sin deeply, and they eagerly pursue doctrine, repentance, and biblical ethics. He also describes the brokenness of the system—religious programs earn no sentence reduction, cults and false teachings flourish, and despite staff resistance or indifference, reformed teaching produces lasting fruit. Some former inmates have gone on to meaningful Christian service, even leadership in the church, demonstrating the power of true conversion.

The conversation moves into the wider biblical and ethical issues surrounding crime, punishment, repentance, and restoration. Both host and guest emphasize that modern civil government fails to follow God’s law, leading to confusion about justice, rehabilitation, and reintegration—especially for those whose crimes would have been capital offenses under Scripture. Bush stresses the need for discernment, compassion, biblical consistency, and wise boundaries when ministering to former offenders, while affirming that the gospel truly changes hearts. The episode ends with encouragement for believers to consider prison ministry only with proper training and calling, and with a reminder that God places His servants exactly where they are needed—even behind bars.

In this episode of Out of the Question, Andrea Schwartz and Charles Roberts examine the meaning of allegiance, loyalty, and partisanship, emphasizing that a Christian’s primary allegiance must always be to God alone. They begin with a reflection on a Supreme Court justice who claimed to separate her personal convictions from her rulings, using this as a springboard to discuss divided loyalties and the danger of pledging allegiance to anything other than the sovereign God of Scripture. Roberts and Schwartz argue that allegiance is a formal commitment to a sovereign, and since there can be only one true sovereign, Christians must not pledge ultimate loyalty to the state, political parties, or even national symbols. They highlight how misplaced allegiance—such as patriotic worship services or the idolatry of the nation—parallels ancient paganism’s worship of man and the state. Biblical examples like Daniel and his friends show that while Christians can be loyal to civil authority, their allegiance must remain uncompromised before God.

The hosts then explore how these distinctions apply in practical and political life, contrasting legitimate loyalty (such as to family or community) with partisan bias that often conflicts with biblical truth. They warn against partisanship that elevates party or ideology above God’s law, citing examples like “Christian Zionism” and blind political affiliation. The conversation concludes with reflections on authority, conscience, and faithfulness in public and private life: a Christian in any position of influence must obey God first, even at personal cost. They urge listeners to read R.J. Rushdoony’s Sovereignty and Christianity and the State for a deeper understanding, and to continually evaluate whether their decisions flow from allegiance to God, loyalty to people or institutions, or mere partisanship—a distinction they believe is essential for genuine Christian faithfulness in a compromised culture.

The episode “Is Judeo-Christian Misleading?” challenges the commonly used term Judeo-Christian, arguing that it masks fundamental theological differences between Judaism and Christianity. Hosts Andrea Schwartz and Charles Roberts trace how the phrase suggests a natural alliance—often political rather than spiritual—between Jews and Christians, despite their opposing views on Christ’s identity. They emphasize that Jesus’ main opposition came not from Rome but from the religious establishment of His day, which ultimately rejected and crucified Him. The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, they argue, marked the definitive end of the Old Covenant system and its rituals, replaced by the New Covenant in Christ. Yet many modern Christians, especially in evangelical or dispensational circles, continue to adopt Jewish customs like Passover Seders or menorah lightings, mistakenly believing this draws them closer to God.

The hosts further explain that true Christianity cannot merge with Judaism, since the latter denies Christ’s deity and the Trinitarian nature of God. They discuss how historical shifts—from post-exilic Judaism to modern secular Israel—have blurred distinctions in the minds of Christians influenced by sentimental or political loyalty rather than Scripture. Through scriptural references, especially from Galatians and Hebrews, they stress that the old system has “become obsolete,” and warn against reviving it under the guise of unity or heritage. Ultimately, they call listeners to view faith through the lens of covenant history rather than cultural tradition—understanding that the people of God are those redeemed through Christ alone, not through ethnic or ritual identity.

The episode opens with Andrea Schwartz reflecting on how modern pulpits often avoid engaging with real-world crises through a biblical lens. After events like 9/11, many churches declared that such tragedies had nothing to do with God, effectively denying His sovereignty. Over time, pastors have increasingly been discouraged from addressing cultural and political events from the pulpit, leaving congregants without clear biblical interpretation of current events. This void became evident after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, when many pastors were instructed to ignore the incident altogether. David Sims, a Michigan-born pastor and veteran, chose to address the event from Psalm 120, declaring that Christians live among those who hate peace. His refusal to apologize for the sermon’s tone or content led to his forced resignation, revealing deep tensions within modern churches over how to address cultural conflict biblically.

In his sermon, Sims identified two core forces shaping the present crisis: the pervasive influence of Marxism and the church’s capitulation to a functionally Gnostic, pietistic faith that divorces belief from action. He argued that anti-God ideologies—abortion, transgenderism, statism—have flourished not merely through cultural dominance but because the church has largely withdrawn from active resistance. Sims contrasted biblical obedience and prophetic boldness with modern Christian tendencies to seek comfort, avoid offense, and reduce faith to private spirituality. His message emphasized that Christianity requires confronting evil and applying God’s law to all of life—not just personal devotion. The reaction to his sermon, including walkouts, elder opposition, and eventual dismissal, highlighted how many congregations have become more concerned with comfort and numerical growth than covenantal faithfulness and prophetic clarity.

In this episode of Out of the Question, hosts Andrea Schwartz and Charles Roberts examine how cowardice is treated in Scripture, particularly in Revelation 21:8, where “the cowardly” appear first in a list of those condemned. The conversation explores how cowardice is often overlooked or minimized compared to other sins like murder or adultery, despite its serious placement in the biblical text. Roberts reflects on his initial surprise at this verse and draws on Rousas John Rushdoony’s observations linking cowardice to democratic systems that allow people to hide behind majority opinion rather than taking personal responsibility. The discussion critiques how fear of man—particularly fear of government—has led many churches to abdicate their roles during crises, such as the COVID-19 mandates, rather than standing courageously for biblical convictions.

The hosts argue that cowardice spreads socially and institutionally, infecting churches, leadership, and culture. They trace this cultural softness to modern comfort, bureaucratic leadership, and the absence of real risk-taking role models. Drawing on historical figures like Alexander Solzhenitsyn, they warn of the West’s decline in civic courage. The episode concludes by urging Christians to name and condemn cowardice, contrasting it with biblical courage modeled by figures such as Gideon, Abigail, Deborah, and the Puritans. The core message is that cowardice is not a harmless weakness but a betrayal of God’s kingdom—and that fearing God over man is the only true foundation for courage and cultural resistance.

The conversation spotlights “victorious eschatology” through a living remnant: two Virginia Tech students, Gil Roten and Camden Whitener, who call themselves the Kingsmen. Raised outside explicit Reconstructionist circles, they were drawn in through Bible study and presuppositional apologetics (Durbin/Van Til/Bahnsen/Rushdoony). On campus they practice bold but cordial evangelism every Friday at a high-traffic intersection—using conversation-inviting signs like “Jesus was sacrificed for sin. Babies shouldn’t be.”—and funnel interested students to “Theology Tuesday” at Panera and to their local church. They emphasize standing openly on Scripture in classes (especially philosophy), report mostly respectful interactions, and even once refused to disperse when threatened with arrest over their sign—without ultimately being arrested.

Their aim is practical, generational Reconstruction: obeying God’s law, building Christian community, and making the faith’s intellectual depth accessible. Both plan ordinary vocations (accounting, statistics), marriage, family discipleship (Deut. 6), and—if providence allows—writing, podcasting (Sola Lex Dei), and possible church planting to create a tangible place people can “point to” for Reconstructionist life and teaching. They reject celebrity-driven movements in favor of grassroots faithfulness, intend to keep a durable network with fellow Kingsmen, and invite contact (e.g., Gil on Facebook and the Sola Lex Dei podcast) so others can learn, join, and replicate the work.

This episode of Out of the Question explores how Christians often misunderstand or mishandle the Fourth Commandment concerning the Sabbath, reducing it to a list of rules rather than seeing it as a divine gift of rest and dependence on God. Andrea Schwartz and Pastor Charles Roberts discuss how profaning God’s name or His Sabbath stems from treating what is sacred with irreverence, and how both the Old and New Testaments emphasize the Sabbath’s deeper purpose—resting in God’s provision rather than human self-sufficiency. They draw from Scripture, the catechisms, and R. J. Rushdoony’s Institutes of Biblical Law to explain that the Sabbath was not originally a day of worship but of rest, later expanded in meaning through Christ. Violating the Sabbath was a serious offense because it symbolized rebellion against God’s created order, while obedience brought blessing and life.

The hosts reflect on how earlier generations, guided by “blue laws” and a communal sense of sacred time, recognized the Sabbath’s importance in ways largely lost today. They contrast that historical reverence with modern society’s busyness and self-determination, which have eroded any sense of true rest. The conversation connects Sabbath principles to stewardship, economics, and even ecology—extending rest to families, servants, animals, and the land itself. Ultimately, they argue that rediscovering the Sabbath’s meaning is crucial for Christians today: not as legalistic restraint, but as a joyful acknowledgment of God’s sovereignty and care. Profaning the Sabbath, they conclude, is not just breaking a rule—it is severing oneself from the rhythm of creation and the blessings God intends for His people.

This episode of Out of the Question revisits R.J. Rushdoony’s 1966 essay Social Unrest and highlights its continued relevance in today’s climate of violence and societal upheaval. Rushdoony argued that prayer alone is not sufficient; it must be coupled with active Christian responsibility to restrain evil and uphold justice. Simply retreating into sentimentality or saying “I’ll pray about it” while avoiding action is, he maintained, a form of disobedience. The discussion stresses that prayer should not be a substitute for action but must be informed by God’s Word and applied through faithful obedience to His law in everyday life, whether in personal responsibility, family, or civil society.

The hosts connect these principles to current events, showing how permissiveness, shallow theology, and reliance on humanistic systems have led to chaos, from violent crime to collapsing communities. They emphasize that true mercy cannot exist without justice, and that God has ordained civil government to restrain evil and enforce righteous order. Christians are called not to retreat but to advance the kingdom by applying God’s standards in practical, concrete ways—beginning with their own lives and families. Faithful obedience, not passive religiosity or sentimental “niceness,” is what God requires to confront evil and preserve a godly society.

ChatGPT said:

The doctrine of sin, as defined in Scripture and the Westminster Shorter Catechism, is clear: sin is lawlessness, a failure to conform to or a transgression of God’s law. Yet many professing Christians today fail to recognize this reality, with surveys showing that nearly half of respondents don’t even view themselves as sinners. This distorted understanding of sin often stems from a lack of systematic theology, resulting in fragmented, man-centered interpretations of the Bible rather than a whole-counsel view. When sin is minimized or redefined, the Incarnation and atonement lose their meaning, and Christianity itself is hollowed out. Modern trends, from antinomian dismissals of God’s law to legalistic distortions, reflect a failure to teach and uphold the biblical theology of sin, which is foundational for a God-centered worldview.

Instead of condemning sin, many within the church have shifted to condemning the law, aligning themselves with cultural definitions of morality rather than God’s standards. This creates confusion, where obedience is reduced to man-made “do’s and don’ts” rather than conformity to God’s will. The root issue goes back to the fall in Eden, where humanity chose autonomy over submission to God. Without understanding sin’s theological nature—its origin, consequences, and remedy—Christians will continue to substitute humanistic definitions of right and wrong for God’s law. The result is cultural decay and personal compromise. The biblical call is to recover a God-centered theology of sin, grounded in the fear of the Lord, which alone brings wisdom, obedience, and victory in Christ.