In this episode, we’ll talk about how marriage isn’t just destroyed by the big blowups—but more often by the small, everyday moments when we ignore each other’s bids for connection, and how learning to “turn toward” instead of “turn away” can change everything.

--

The PursueGOD Family podcast helps you think biblically about marriage and parenting. Join Bryan and Tracy Dwyer on Wednesday mornings for new topics every week or two.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org/family.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Many couples believe that divorce comes from big, explosive issues—infidelity, money problems, or major betrayals. But according to renowned marriage researcher Dr. John Gottman, it's often not the big things that break a marriage. It's the small, everyday moments—missed chances to connect—that slowly build up into bitterness and resentment over time.

Gottman calls these small moments “bids.” A bid is any attempt from one partner to get attention, affection, affirmation, or support from the other. Bids can be loud or quiet, obvious or subtle.

Examples:

• “How do I look?” (Translation: Can I have your attention?)
• “Getting the kids to bed is hard.” (Translation: Can I have your help?)
• A spouse sitting down next to you on the couch. (Translation: Can I be near you?)

Whether you notice these bids and how you respond to them will shape the health of your marriage—far more than you might think.

Every time your spouse makes a bid for connection, you have three ways to respond. Over time, your pattern of responses becomes the emotional climate of your relationship.

This is the healthy response. When you turn toward a bid, you engage with your partner’s attempt to connect. It could be as simple as answering their question, offering a smile, or stopping what you're doing to give them your attention.

Example:

Spouse: “Look at this funny video.”

Turning Toward: “Haha! That’s great. Show me another.”

What it does: Builds trust, intimacy, and love. Each “turning toward” moment is like a small deposit in the bank account of your marriage.

Proverbs 15:1 – “A gentle answer deflects anger, but harsh words make tempers flare.”

Kind responses create peace and connection.

This is the neutral-to-negative response. You ignore the bid, act distracted, or give a half-hearted answer.

Example:

Spouse: “Can we talk after dinner?”

Turning Away: “Uh-huh…” (while scrolling your phone)

What it does: Over time, this makes your partner feel invisible or unimportant. They may stop reaching out altogether.

Philippians 2:4 – “Don’t look out only for your own interests, but take an interest in others, too.”

Marriage thrives when both spouses make each other a priority.

This is the harmful response. You react with sarcasm, criticism, or irritation. It not only ignores the bid, but also shuts it down in a hurtful way.

Example:

Spouse: “This parenting stuff is exhausting.”

Turning Against: “Well, maybe if you were more organized and less lazy, it wouldn’t be so hard.”

What it does: This breeds contempt and emotional distance. It's one of the strongest predictors of divorce in Gottman’s research.

Ephesians 4:29 – “Don’t use foul or abusive language. Let everything you say be good and helpful, so that your words will be an encouragement to those who hear them.”

In this episode, we trace how one global faith became divided between East and West — from the councils of Nicaea, Chalcedon, and Constantinople to the final break in 1054 — and discover what it means to return to the unified, Spirit-led Church Jesus originally envisioned.

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Last week, we ended with a coronation that changed history.

In 800 A.D., Pope Leo III placed a crown on the head of Charlemagne, declaring him “Emperor of the Romans.” It was the rebirth of a Christian Rome — what we now call the Holy Roman Empire.

It seemed like a moment of triumph for the Church, but it came with a cost.

That act blurred the line between heaven and earth — between spiritual authority and political control.

The pope gained protection.

Charlemagne gained divine legitimacy.

But the partnership that promised unity in the West sent shockwaves through the East.

In Constantinople, Christian leaders looked on in disbelief. The Eastern emperor was already the rightful heir of Rome — so who gave a Western pope the right to crown another?

It was more than a political power play; it was the outworking of deeper cracks that had been forming for centuries.

So before we move forward to the Great Schism of 1054, we’re going to back up — to the early councils of the Church, when East and West still sat at the same table.

We’ll see how questions about who Jesus is, who leads the Church, and how truth is defined began to pull believers in different directions long before anyone realized the family was breaking apart.

When Emperor Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople in 330 A.D., the center of gravity in the Christian world began to shift.

Rome was still revered as the old seat of power, but Constantinople — “New Rome” — quickly became the heart of a thriving, educated, and deeply spiritual East.

In the West, life revolved around survival. As the empire crumbled under invasions and chaos, the Church became the glue that held society together. Latin was the common language, law and order were prized, and the bishop of Rome — later known as the pope — grew in influence as emperors disappeared. By the time Rome finally fell in 476 A.D., it was the Church, not the state, that provided leadership and stability.

In the East, the story looked very different. The Byzantine Empire remained strong and sophisticated, speaking Greek, preserving classical learning, and weaving theology into every part of public life. The emperor saw himself not just as a ruler, but as a protector of the faith, working hand in hand with church leaders in Constantinople.

This wasn’t a rivalry at first — just two cultures expressing the same faith in different ways.

But over time, those differences deepened.

In the West, Christianity took on a more legal and institutional shape. The Church developed systems, laws, and hierarchies, with the pope eventually claiming to stand in Peter’s place as the “Vicar of Christ.”

• When Did the Bishop of Rome Become “the Pope”?
• The title pope (from the Latin papa, meaning “father”) was originally used broadly for bishops across the Christian world.
• By the 4th century, it became increasingly associated with the bishop of Rome.
• Under Gregory the Great (590–604 A.D.), the office gained immense influence during times of crisis, and from then on, pope became an exclusive title for the bishop of Rome.
• By the time of the Great Schism (1054 A.D.), the pope’s title symbolized Rome’s claim to universal jurisdiction — something the Eastern Church could not accept.

In the East, Christianity retained a mystical and communal spirit. Authority was shared among several patriarchs — in Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem — each overseeing their own region while recognizing one another as equals.

Even as East and West developed distinct personalities, they still saw themselves as one Church — united by their faith in Christ and their commitment to guard the truth.

But as Christianity spread across languages, cultures, and continents, new questions began to surface: Who is Jesus, really? How does His divinity relate to His humanity? Who has the final say when the Church disagrees?

To answer those questions, Church leaders from every corner of the empire gathered in a series of monumental meetings known as the ecumenical councils.

These councils would clarify essential truths about God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit — and at the same time, begin to expose the tensions that would one day divide the family of faith.

Called by Emperor Constantine in the city of Nicaea (modern-day Turkey), this was the first worldwide gathering of Church leaders — bishops from both East and West.

They met to confront the teaching of Arius, who denied that Jesus was fully divine. The council affirmed that Jesus is “of one substance (homoousios) with the Father,” and produced the Nicene Creed — the first official statement of Christian orthodoxy.

This was a rare moment of unity: East and West stood together in defense of the truth about Christ.

Half a century later, Emperor Theodosius I called a second council — this time in Constantinople, the new imperial capital.

Only Eastern bishops attended, since travel from the West was difficult and the Roman Church was preoccupied with internal struggles.

This council expanded the Nicene Creed to include a fuller statement about the Holy Spirit — affirming His divinity and role in the Trinity.

While the council’s conclusions were later accepted by the West, the lack of Western participation began to show early cracks in Church unity.

70 years after Constantinople, Church leaders gathered again at nearby Chalcedon to settle lingering questions about Christ’s nature. The result was another milestone — and another fracture.

The Council of Chalcedon declared that Jesus Christ is one person in two natures, fully God and fully man, “without confusion, change, division, or separation.” This balanced statement — called the Chalcedonian Definition — became the cornerstone of orthodox Christology for both East and West.

However, not everyone agreed.

Christians in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia rejected the Chalcedonian formula, believing it overstated the distinction between Christ’s natures. They preferred the language of “one united nature” (miaphysis) — a view they believed best preserved the mystery of the Incarnation.

The result was the first enduring break in the Christian world:

• The Coptic Orthodox Church (Egypt),
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Church,
• The Syriac Orthodox Church (Syria), and
• The Armenian Apostolic Church

all separated from the imperial (Chalcedonian) Church. These are known today as the Oriental Orthodox Churches.

This split, happening centuries before 1054, revealed a recurring pattern: theological disagreements expressed in different languages, shaped by culture and politics, could tear the Church apart.

Chalcedon was the first precursor to the Great Schism, proving that even sincere pursuit of truth can divide when humility and communication break down.

The point: By the time the Roman Empire finally fell in the West (476), the seeds of future division — linguistic, cultural, and theological — had already been planted. 

One of the most famous theological flashpoints that illustrated the tension centered on a single Latin word — filioque, meaning “and from the Son.”

Originally, the Nicene Creed (325 A.D.), reaffirmed at Constantinople (381 A.D.), declared that the Holy Spirit “proceeds from the Father.” Both East and West agreed on that wording for centuries.

But in the late 6th century, bishops in Spain added the phrase filioque to the Creed, teaching that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. They did this to defend the full divinity of Christ against lingering Arian heresies in the West. The change spread slowly through the Latin-speaking world and gained traction during the Carolingian era (8th–9th centuries) under Charlemagne’s influence.

The Eastern Church, however, was never consulted. To them, the addition broke the rules of unity — a universal creed could not be changed without a universal council. Theologically, they also worried the phrase confused the distinct roles of the Father and the Son within the Trinity.

By the time Rome officially adopted the phrase in 1014 A.D. under Pope Benedict VIII, the damage was done.

For the West, the filioque was a necessary clarification — an expression of Christ’s equality with the Father.

For the East, it was an act of theological arrogance — a symbol of the West’s growing independence and disregard for shared authority.

What began as a single word in a creed became a defining fault line between two visions of the Church: one emphasizing doctrinal precision and papal authority, the other emphasizing mystery and conciliar unity.

The political divide between East and West came to a breaking point in 800 A.D., when Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne, king of the Franks, as “Emperor of the Romans.”

To believers in the West, it was a moment of renewal — the Church and the empire united once again under Christian leadership. But to the Byzantine emperor in Constantinople, it looked like open rebellion. The East already had a Christian emperor; the pope had no right to crown another.

That single act created two competing centers of power — two “Roman Empires,” each claiming divine authority to rule in Christ’s name.

The Western Church tied itself ever more closely to political power, while the Eastern Church remained intertwined with imperial authority in Constantinople.

What had once been one faith under one empire was now a rivalry between two worlds — each convinced it was defending the true kingdom of God.

The split between East and West wasn’t just political or theological — it was cultural.

Even the way believers worshiped began to reflect their distinct worlds.

• In the East, Communion was celebrated with leavened bread, symbolizing the risen Christ. In the West, it was unleavened bread, following the Jewish Passover tradition.
• Eastern priests could marry, while the Western Church required clerical celibacy as a sign of full devotion to God.
• The Eastern liturgy was poetic and mystical, filled with incense, chant, and sacred icons meant to draw the heart toward heaven. The Western liturgy was structured and formal, emphasizing order, logic, and Latin precision.

None of these differences, on their own, were heresies. But over time, they became symbols of suspicion.

Each side began to view the other as drifting from “true faith” — not because of what they believed about Christ, but because of how they expressed that belief.

Cultural diversity, once a strength, had become another source of mistrust.

By the time the eleventh century arrived, the divide between East and West was more than theological — it was personal, political, and deeply human.

Centuries of miscommunication and mistrust had hardened into arrogance on both sides.

In Rome, popes saw themselves as guardians of order and truth — but too often mixed spiritual authority with political ambition, using faith to strengthen their influence over kings and emperors.

In Constantinople, the patriarchs were no saints either. Many had become entangled in imperial politics, defending their own prestige just as fiercely as the truth of the gospel.

The result was a Church led by men who often claimed to represent Christ — yet acted more like rivals defending territory than brothers pursuing unity.

Each side spoke a different language, followed different customs, and operated under different assumptions about leadership, worship, and power.

What began as diversity within one family of faith had become a cold distance between estranged relatives.

All it would take was a spark — a clash of egos and empires — to turn that tension into a permanent break.

That spark came in 1054 A.D., when envoys from Rome arrived in Constantinople, and the long-simmering differences between two churches, two empires, and two visions of Christianity finally exploded into open division.

The split that had been centuries in the making finally erupted in 1054 A.D., and it wasn’t over a single issue — it was over everything that had been festering for generations.

Language barriers, theological disputes, political rivalry, and personal pride all collided in one combustible moment.

When Pope Leo IX sent Cardinal Humbert to Constantinople, it was supposed to be a diplomatic mission — a chance to repair strained relations and reaffirm unity. But by the time Humbert arrived, tensions were already boiling. The Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, was outspoken, defiant, and fiercely protective of Eastern traditions. He had publicly condemned Latin practices, even closing Western-style churches in the city.

Humbert, for his part, was no diplomat. Known for his arrogance and quick temper, he arrived with letters from Rome that accused the Eastern Church of heresy and rebellion. He and Cerularius clashed almost immediately — two proud men representing two proud institutions, both convinced they alone were defending the faith.

On July 16, 1054, in a moment that would define the next thousand years of Christian history, Humbert marched into Hagia Sophia, the great cathedral of Constantinople, and placed a bull of excommunication on the altar during worship. The document denounced Cerularius and the entire Eastern Church.

Cerularius responded in kind. He convened his own council, denouncing Humbert and excommunicating the pope’s envoys. The two sides effectively excommunicated each other, each claiming to speak for the one true Church — and neither willing to back down.

The rift was now official.

The Church that had once stood united under persecution was permanently divided:

• The Roman Catholic Church in the West, centered in Rome and led by the pope.
• The Eastern Orthodox Church in the East, centered in Constantinople and governed by councils of patriarchs.

And while later attempts would be made to heal the wound, the bitterness of 1054 would never fully fade.

What began as a family dispute over theology and leadership ended as a tragic story of pride, politics, and lost unity — a reminder that even those who claim to represent Christ can forget to act like Him.

The Great Schism of 1054 was only the beginning of separation. Over the next several centuries, events cemented the divide.

Even before the split, Saints Cyril and Methodius (9th century) had brought the gospel to the Slavs, creating the Cyrillic alphabet and translating Scripture.

Their work led to Prince Vladimir of Kiev’s conversion in 988, establishing Orthodox Christianity among the Slavs — the foundation for the future Russian Orthodox Church.

Relations worsened during the Crusades. The most devastating moment came in 1204, when Western Crusaders sacked Constantinople, looting churches and desecrating holy sites. To the Orthodox world, this betrayal by fellow Christians sealed the wound.

As the Byzantine Empire declined, leadership in Eastern Christianity shifted northward.

In 1448, the Russian Orthodox Church declared independence from Constantinople.

When Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453, the ancient Christian capital came under Islamic rule.

Moscow soon saw itself as the new guardian of Orthodoxy — the “Third Rome.”

By the late Middle Ages, Eastern Orthodoxy was a communion of autocephalous (self-governing) yet...

Welcome back to the podcast! We’ve all heard them. Little phrases that sound wise, comforting, or even spiritual—but they’re not true. In this series, we’ll uncover some of the most common believable lies people buy into about God, life, and faith.

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

In this episode, we're kicking off a new series walking through the story of the Church — from the apostles to the modern day — to uncover where things went right, where things went wrong, and what it means to stay faithful to Jesus’ design.

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Drive through any city and you’ll see it — church signs everywhere.

Catholic. Baptist. Methodist. Presbyterian. Pentecostal. Non-Denominational.

How did we get here? And more importantly… have we lost something along the way?

In this series, we’re walking through the story of the Church — from the apostles to the modern day — to uncover where things went right, where things went wrong, and what it means to stay faithful to Jesus’ design.

Here’s where we’re going: 

1. From the Apostles to the Catholic Church (The Church Takes Shape)
2. The Great Schism – East and West Divide
3. Pre-Reformation Movements – Wycliffe, Hus, and the Anabaptists
4. The Protestant Reformation – Truth Rediscovered
5. The Denominational Explosion – 1600s – 1800s
6. Modern Movements – Pentecostals, Evangelicals, and Non-Denoms

When Jesus said, “I will build my church,” He wasn’t talking about buildings, politics, or denominations. He was launching a movement — a family of believers united by truth, transformed by the Spirit, and commissioned to make disciples of all nations.

Over the next two thousand years, that movement grew, spread, divided, and institutionalized. Some of it was faithful. Some of it wasn’t.

Our goal isn’t just to study history. It’s to recover the essence of a biblical church — one rooted in the gospel, led by the Spirit, and faithful to God’s Word.

What does it mean to be the kind of church Jesus actually envisioned?

Jesus made an unshakable promise:

“I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.” — Matthew 16:18 (NLT)

At Pentecost (Acts 2), that promise became reality. The Holy Spirit filled believers, Peter preached, and thousands came to faith.

“All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper), and to prayer.” — Acts 2:42 (NLT)

The Church began as a grassroots movement of ordinary people empowered by an extraordinary Spirit. There were no buildings, no denominations, and no political power — just a message of forgiveness and hope in Jesus Christ.

As the gospel spread, the apostles appointed elders (presbyteroi), also called pastors (poimēn) or overseers/bishops (episkopoi), to shepherd local congregations. These terms describe different aspects of one office — mature, Spirit-led shepherds guiding God’s people.

Paul told the Ephesian elders:

“Guard yourselves and God’s people. Feed and shepherd God’s flock—his church, purchased with his own blood—over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as leaders.” — Acts 20:28 (NLT)

Church leadership was plural and local, not centralized. Deacons served practical needs (Acts 6:1–6), and every believer was equipped for ministry (1 Corinthians 12).

Christ Himself was the Head of the Church (Colossians 1:18). Authority rested not in hierarchy, but in the apostles’ teaching — the inspired Word of God.

Paul described the Church as:

“Built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. And the cornerstone is Christ Jesus himself.” — Ephesians 2:20 (NLT)

This “foundation” refers to the original eyewitness apostles, personally chosen and commissioned by Jesus (Luke 6:13). Their authority was unique and unrepeatable.

When James the Apostle was martyred in Acts 12, no one replaced him. Unlike Judas — whose betrayal required another to complete the Twelve — James’s death marked the close of that foundational era.

There are no “capital-A Apostles” today. Their teaching, recorded in the New Testament, remains the lasting foundation.

The Church stands on the apostolic Word, not an apostolic office.

Scripture, not succession, is our authority.

When Gentile believers began following Christ, some argued they must also follow the Mosaic Law. The issue threatened to divide the Church.

The apostles and elders met in Jerusalem to seek God’s will.

“So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue.” — Acts 15:6 (NLT)

After prayer and testimony, James concluded:

“We should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.” — Acts 15:19 (NLT)

“We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus.” — Acts 15:11 (NLT)

The result was a letter affirming salvation by grace through faith and urging unity among believers.

The process was biblical, Spirit-led, and communal — a model for decision-making in every age of the Church.

For nearly three centuries, Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire.

• Nero (64 A.D.) blamed Christians for Rome’s fire and executed them publicly.
• Domitian (81–96) demanded emperor worship; John was exiled to Patmos.
• Decius (249–251) required sacrifices to Roman gods; refusal meant death.
• Diocletian (303–311) launched the Great Persecution, destroying Scriptures and imprisoning believers.

Yet persecution purified the Church. Martyrs like Polycarp, who prayed for his captors, and Perpetua and Felicity, who sang hymns before death, inspired courage. The blood of the martyrs became the seed of the Church.

In 312 A.D., Emperor Constantine claimed to see a cross in the sky with the words “In this sign, conquer.” After victory, he legalized Christianity through the Edict of Milan.

For the first time, Christians could worship openly. Property was restored, persecution ceased, and bishops gained influence. Constantine later convened the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.), where church leaders affirmed that Jesus is “of one substance with the Father.” The Nicene Creed became a foundational statement of faith.

The shift from persecution to privilege changed everything. The once-oppressed Church became favored by the state — and power began to shape its structure.

Under Theodosius I (380 A.D.), Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. Churches grew wealthy, clergy gained social status, and faith became cultural rather than personal.

The empire’s five key cities — Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem — became centers of church authority. The bishop of Rome, claiming Peter’s legacy, gradually asserted supremacy over others.

When the Western Empire fell in 476 A.D., the bishop of Rome filled the leadership vacuum. Over time, that role evolved into the papacy, and the Roman Catholic Church emerged as both a spiritual and political power.

By the Middle Ages:

• The Pope was seen as Christ’s representative on earth.
• Salvation was mediated through church sacraments.
• Worship was conducted in Latin, inaccessible to the common believer.
• Tradition often outweighed Scripture.

The Church gained stability — but drifted far from the simplicity of Acts 2.

Even as the Church developed structure and faced persecution, God raised up theological thinkers whose writings would shape doctrine for centuries.

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–108 A.D.) – A disciple of the Apostle John, Ignatius wrote letters urging believers to stay united in truth and avoid false teachers. On his way to martyrdom in Rome, he declared, “It is better to die for Christ Jesus than to reign over all the ends of the earth.” His letters show how early Christians viewed Christ’s divinity and the Church’s unity.

Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 A.D.) – A philosopher-turned-Christian, Justin defended the faith before Roman officials, arguing that Christianity fulfilled the deepest longings of philosophy. His Apologies and Dialogue with Trypho helped bridge faith and reason, introducing the idea that all truth ultimately points to Christ.

Augustine of Hippo (354–430 A.D.) – Living after Constantine, Augustine’s writings defined Western theology. In Confessions, he showed how grace transforms the human heart; in The City of God, he contrasted the kingdom of God with the kingdom of man. Augustine taught that salvation is by grace through faith — ideas that would deeply influence the Reformers a thousand years later.

Each of these men reminds us that ideas matter — and that truth must be defended in every generation.

By the 400s, the Western Roman Empire was collapsing under internal corruption, economic decline, and repeated invasions by Germanic tribes (Visigoths, Vandals, Ostrogoths).

In 476 A.D., a Germanic general named Odoacer deposed the last Western emperor, Romulus Augustulus, and declared himself ruler of Italy.

That moment marked the symbolic end of the Western Roman Empire.

The Eastern Roman Empire (later called the Byzantine Empire) survived for nearly a thousand more years, with its capital in Constantinople.

After 476, the Roman Church — especially the bishop (pope) of Rome — became the only unifying institution left in the West. The popes, monks, and bishops preserved learning, provided leadership, and filled the political vacuum left by Rome’s collapse.

In the centuries after the fall, Europe was a patchwork of tribal kingdoms — Franks, Goths, Lombards, and others. Most people looked to the Church for order and moral authority.

The popes began to see themselves as successors not only to the apostles, but also as heirs to the moral leadership once held by the emperors. The ideal of a Christian empire — where church and state worked together under God’s authority — began to take shape.

This idea would culminate in a new empire — one that claimed to be “holy” (under God), “Roman” (the successor to ancient Rome), and an “empire” (uniting Europe under a single Christian ruler).

In 800 A.D., nearly 300 years after the fall of Rome, Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne, king of the Franks, as “Emperor of the Romans.” This act symbolized the rebirth of a Christian Rome in Western Europe — what we now call the Holy Roman Empire.

It was an alliance:

• The pope gained protection and political backing.
• Charlemagne gained divine legitimacy for his rule.

The empire united much of Western Europe under a Christian identity, but it also blurred the line between spiritual authority and political control.

As historian Voltaire famously quipped centuries later, “The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.”

But in its time, it became the central stage for the medieval Church’s growing power — setting up centuries of conflict between popes and emperors over who truly ruled in Christ’s name.

Next week, we’ll see how East and West finally broke apart — how theology, culture, and authority collided in the event known as the Great Schism — and what it reveals about the Church’s ongoing struggle between truth and control.

The early church began as a Spirit-led movement built on Christ and the apostles’ teaching. Over time, it became an institution shaped by empire and hierarchy.

But Jesus never stopped building His Church. Through persecution, philosophy, and politics, He continued to preserve the truth of the gospel.

The lesson for us is clear:

A biblical church is not defined by power or popularity, but by truth, humility, and dependence on Christ.

When we drift from those essentials, history repeats itself.

Welcome back to the podcast! We’ve all heard them. Little phrases that sound wise, comforting, or even spiritual—but they’re not true. In this series, we’ll uncover some of the most common believable lies people buy into about God, life, and faith.

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Believable Lies: Loving Means Affirming

Our culture has embraced a powerful but dangerous idea — that real love means total affirmation. We’re told that if we truly love someone, we must agree with everything they believe, approve of every lifestyle choice they make, and celebrate every identity they claim. To do anything less, we’re told, is hateful or judgmental. But when we look at the life of Jesus, we find a radically different picture of love. His love was never about blind affirmation — it was about truth and transformation.

In John 8:1–11 (NLT), the religious leaders dragged before Jesus a woman caught in adultery. They demanded a verdict:

The crowd waited, silent and tense. Would Jesus condemn her or affirm her? Those seemed like the only two options. But Jesus revealed a third way — a love that was both truthful and gracious.

When the accusers persisted, Jesus replied:

One by one, the accusers slipped away until only Jesus and the woman remained. Then He said:

Jesus didn’t excuse her sin, but He didn’t crush her either. He forgave her and called her to a new life. That’s what real love does — it offers mercy and transformation side by side.

Our world says: If you love me, affirm me.

Jesus says: If I love you, I’ll free you.

From the very beginning, God’s love has been faithful — but never permissive. In the Old Testament, God loved His people Israel deeply, yet He never affirmed their rebellion or idolatry. His love led Him to correct them, discipline them, and restore them.

In Jeremiah 31:3–4 (NLT), God tells His people:

What’s remarkable about this passage is when God said it — right before Israel faced exile and destruction for their sin. Even as judgment approached, God promised His love would remain. His discipline was not the absence of love, but its expression. Like a good parent, He cared too much to let His children destroy themselves.

Proverbs 13:24 (NLT) says:

True love doesn’t affirm destructive choices. It steps in to correct and rebuild. God’s love was faithful enough to discipline, patient enough to rebuild, and strong enough to keep His promises.

That’s not the kind of love our culture celebrates — but it’s the kind that saves us.

Many modern songs and slogans present love as soft, sentimental, and affirming. But God’s love is much deeper. It’s not sentimental — it’s sacrificial.

Romans 5:8 (NLT) says:

God didn’t wait for us to clean ourselves up before He loved us. His love met us in our brokenness — but it didn’t leave us there. Jesus didn’t come to tell us that everything about us was fine. He came to set us free from sin.

When Jesus touched the leper in Mark 1, He didn’t leave him in his unclean condition. He healed him. His touch was compassionate, but it was also transforming. That’s how Jesus loves us.

John 15:13 (NLT) reminds us:

Jesus didn’t affirm our sin — He died to overcome it. His love tells us the truth, even when it hurts.

When Peter tried to stop Jesus from going to the cross, Jesus rebuked him:

That’s not affirming language. It’s the tough love of a Savior who sees what’s at stake.

If God’s love is faithful and sacrificial, then our love should be the same. We are called to love others enough to tell them the truth — not harshly, but humbly.

Galatians 6:1 (NLT) says:

True love doesn’t look the other way when someone is headed for destruction. It gently restores. It speaks truth with grace.

Jesus calls us to love others in a way that mirrors His — not with passive approval, but with courageous compassion.

Matthew 28:19–20 (NLT) gives us the mission:

Making disciples isn’t about affirming people where they are. It’s about helping them obey Jesus and become more like Him. That means real change — and real love.

At the end of John 8, Jesus shows us what love looks like in action. He doesn’t say, “I affirm you.” He says, “I forgive you. Go and sin no more.”

That’s the third way — the way of truth and grace. The way that refuses both cruelty and compromise.

Jesus’ love doesn’t ignore sin; it overcomes it. It doesn’t celebrate brokenness; it heals it. It doesn’t tell us we’re fine as we are; it makes us new.

The world says: Love me by affirming me.

Jesus says: I love you — now let me change you.

That’s the kind of love that changes hearts, families, and eternities.

In this episode, Tracy examines the growing trend of Gentle Parenting through a biblical lens, showing how compassion without correction can miss God’s bigger plan for shaping a child’s heart.

--

The PursueGOD Family podcast helps you think biblically about marriage and parenting. Join Bryan and Tracy Dwyer on Wednesday mornings for new topics every week or two.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org/family.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Gentle Parenting has gained significant popularity in recent years as a parenting philosophy rooted in empathy, emotional connection, and positive discipline. It’s roots come from Alfred AdlerAdvocates promote its compassionate, respectful approach to child-rearing as an alternative to authoritarian or punitive parenting styles. While aspects of gentle parenting align with biblical calls for kindness, patience, and love, there are significant theological and biblical concerns that challenge some of its foundational assumptions. This article explores the principles of gentle parenting, the underlying views about human nature, and examines where it diverges from biblical truth from an evangelical perspective.

At its core, gentle parenting emphasizes a few key principles:

1. Connection Over Control: Gentle parenting prioritizes forming a strong emotional bond with the child over exerting control. It believes that a connected parent-child relationship is the foundation for healthy behavior, promoting cooperation rather than compliance based on fear.
2. Empathy and Emotional Awareness: Gentle parenting encourages parents to understand and validate their children’s emotions. The idea is that emotional intelligence and self-regulation come through modeling empathy, not through punishment or suppression of emotions.
3. Positive Discipline: Gentle parenting replaces punitive measures (like spanking or time-outs) with positive discipline. Misbehavior is viewed as an opportunity to teach and guide rather than punish. Natural consequences and open communication are favored over strict rules or punishments.
4. Respect for Autonomy: This philosophy treats children as autonomous individuals deserving of the same respect as adults. Children are given choices and involved in decision-making processes, even from a young age, to foster a sense of independence.
5. Modeling Desired Behavior: Parents are encouraged to model the behaviors they wish to see in their children. Instead of disciplining through authority, parents demonstrate patience, kindness, and self-control, expecting their children to learn by example.

The principles of gentle parenting rest on certain assumptions about human nature that, while appealing, often conflict with the Bible’s teachings on humanity’s fallen state and the need for discipline. Biblical parenting embraces the timeless truth of God’s Word instead of the changing ideas of popular culture. When evaluating Gentle Parenting, be sure to do it through the lens of the Bible.

One of the main assumptions behind gentle parenting is that children are inherently good or morally neutral. Misbehavior is often viewed as a result of unmet needs, developmental immaturity, or a lack of understanding. This view suggests that with enough nurturing, empathy, and guidance, children will naturally grow into compassionate, well-behaved individuals.

The Bible teaches that all humans, including children, are born with a sinful nature. Psalm 51:5 says, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.” Romans 3:23 declares that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” While gentle parenting tends to see misbehavior as primarily situational or developmental, the Bible is clear that rebellion, defiance, and disobedience are manifestations of the sin nature present in all of us.

Proverbs 22:15 Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him

Therefore, while it is important to nurture and guide children, parents must also recognize the need for correction and discipline to address sin. Failing to acknowledge the sinful tendencies of children can lead to permissiveness and a neglect of the God-given responsibility to train children in righteousness.

Another key assumption is that children are autonomous individuals whose choices should be respected as much as possible. Gentle parenting promotes the idea that children’s autonomy should be honored, and their opinions and preferences should be given weight, even from an early age. The focus is on collaboration rather than control.

The Bible calls for children to submit to their parents’ authority (Ephesians 6:1) and for parents to exercise authority in love. God has established the family with clear roles and responsibilities, and parental authority is part of His design for the family structure. 

Ephesians 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), 3 “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” 

Gentle parenting, with its emphasis on collaboration and autonomy, can unintentionally undermine the biblical concept of authority, which teaches that children are to learn obedience and respect for their parents.

In contrast to the idea that children’s autonomy should be prioritized, Scripture instructs parents to “bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). This involves not just nurturing but also setting clear boundaries and requiring obedience as part of spiritual formation.

Gentle parenting operates on the belief that discipline should not involve punitive measures that cause pain, discomfort, or emotional distress. Instead of consequences that might bring short-term discomfort, gentle parenting advocates for teaching and guiding in ways that maintain the child’s sense of emotional safety and comfort.

The Bible consistently teaches that discipline, including corrective discipline, is an essential aspect of parenting. Proverbs 13:24 states, “Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.” Hebrews 12:6 affirms, “The Lord disciplines the one He loves, and He chastens everyone He accepts as His son.”

Discipline is a form of love and care, not cruelty. It helps children learn the consequences of sin and rebellion and points them toward godly behavior. Gentle parenting’s emphasis on avoiding punishment or discomfort at all costs can leave children without the necessary boundaries and correction they need to grow in wisdom and godliness.

“But misuse shouldn’t prevent right use. The presence of some dangerous drivers on the roads shouldn’t put a stop to all driving, and the existence of some abusive parents shouldn’t stop other parents from using punishment rightly”. Gospel coalition

Proverbs 3:11-12 My son, do not despise the Lord's discipline or be weary of his reproof, for the Lord reproves him whom he loves, as a father the son in whom he delights.

Gentle parenting offers a compassionate and empathetic approach to child-rearing that resonates with some biblical principles, such as kindness, patience, and love. However, from an evangelical perspective, its foundational assumptions about human nature, authority, and discipline fall short of the Bible’s teachings. Scripture teaches that children, like all humans, are born with a sinful nature and that discipline, including correction, is a vital part of their moral and spiritual formation.

While parents should always aim to model Christlike love and grace, they must also embrace their God-given authority to train, correct, and discipline their children. True biblical parenting incorporates both grace and truth, just as God deals with His children—with both lovingkindness and firm discipline.

Many people coming out of Mormonism ask, “So now that I’m free to choose, how do I pick a church?” In this episode, we explore what it really means to find a healthy, biblical Christian church — one that’s Jesus-centered, Bible-based, and grace-driven.

--

The Unveiling Mormonism podcast pulls back the curtain on Mormon history, culture and doctrine. Join us for new episodes every Monday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org/mormonism.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Leaving Mormonism can feel like losing your spiritual “home base.” In LDS culture, wards are assigned by address. In biblical Christianity, you’re free to choose a local church family. But freedom raises a wise question: How do you pick a healthy, Bible-teaching, Jesus-centered church?

Many former Latter-day Saints have heard 1 Timothy 3:15 used to imply that the “true church” must be a single organization with one earthly headquarters and priesthood keys: “This is the church of the living God, which is the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (NLT) Paul isn’t describing a corporate institution; he’s describing a community of believers built on Christ with qualified local leaders (read all of 1 Timothy 3). The foundation is Jesus himself—not a modern hierarchy. “For no one can lay any foundation other than the one we already have—Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 3:11, NLT) “Together, we are his house… built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. And the cornerstone is Christ Jesus himself.” (Ephesians 2:20, NLT)

In other words, the “pillar and foundation of the truth” is the global family of men and women who belong to Jesus and uphold his Word in local congregations.

Healthy churches are:

1. Jesus-centered (the person and work of Christ are central),
2. Bible-based (Scripture is the final authority),
3. Grace-proclaiming (the gospel is good news, not good advice).

“All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true.” (2 Timothy 3:16, NLT)

“There is salvation in no one else!” (Acts 4:12, NLT)

“For everyone has sinned… Yet God, in his grace, freely makes us right in his sight.” (Romans 3:23-24, NLT)

Some churches teach that God guarantees health, wealth, and constant success if you have enough faith. That’s not the New Testament gospel; it’s motivational religion with Bible words. Jesus said, “If any of you wants to be my follower, you must give up your own way, take up your cross daily, and follow me.” (Luke 9:23, NLT) The Bible prepares us for valleys as well as victories: “Even when I walk through the darkest valley, I will not be afraid, for you are close beside me.” (Psalm 23:4, NLT) Don’t swap LDS performance religion for a health-and-wealth counterfeit.

Jesus said, “Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples.” (John 13:35, NLT) In a healthy church you’ll find people who speak the truth in love, carry one another’s burdens, pray honestly, confess sins, and extend grace. “Share each other’s burdens, and in this way obey the law of Christ.” (Galatians 6:2, NLT)

Use these questions as you explore websites, listen to sermons, and visit services or small groups:

1. What do they believe about the Bible? Is Scripture the final authority—without “new revelation” that replaces or overrides it? (2 Timothy 3:16)
2. Who do they say Jesus is? Fully God, fully man, the only Savior and Lord? (Acts 4:12)
3. What is their gospel? Salvation by grace alone through faith in Christ alone—not Jesus plus baptism, rituals, or rule-keeping? (Romans 3:23-24)
4. How do they handle money and suffering? Do they teach generosity without promising guaranteed prosperity? Do they prepare people to trust God in trials? (Luke 9:23; Psalm 23:4)
5. Is politics in its proper place? Do they preach biblical truth about moral issues without turning the pulpit into a campaign rally?
6. What’s the community like? Do you see truth and love in action, and pathways into groups and serving? (John 13:35; Galatians 6:2)
7. How do they teach about the Holy Spirit? Biblical, Christ-exalting, orderly—avoiding unbiblical extremes or sensationalism.
8. How is leadership structured? Qualified elders/pastors, shared accountability, no cult of personality. (See 1 Timothy 3; 1 Peter 5:3)
9. How do they respond to questions and doubts? Are honest, Bible-anchored questions welcomed rather than shamed?
10. Do you sense freedom in Christ? “So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus.” (Romans 8:1, NLT) Is grace the air they breathe?

You’re not trading one organization for another—you’re entering a living family built on Christ’s finished work. Jesus promised, “I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.” (Matthew 16:18, NLT) Find a church that is Jesus-centered, Bible-based, and grace-proclaiming—and plug in.

Welcome back to the podcast! We’ve all been told that if you really trust God, you’ll never have questions or doubts. But that’s simply not true. Listen today to find out why!

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Many Christians quietly carry a burden they rarely admit out loud: “If I really had faith, I wouldn’t have doubts.” The idea sounds spiritual, but it’s simply not true. Even the Bible’s greatest heroes wrestled with questions—including John the Baptist. Real faith isn’t the absence of doubt; it’s the choice to keep trusting Jesus even when life leaves us with a boxful of questions.

When John the Baptist burst onto the scene, he seemed like the last person who would ever doubt. He preached with fiery conviction:

John didn’t mince words. He lived boldly, called people to repentance, and baptized crowds in the Jordan River. He even recognized Jesus for who He truly was:

At first glance, John seemed like a rock of unshakable faith. But even this great prophet had questions.

When Jesus came to be baptized, John tried to stop Him:

John didn’t fully understand what Jesus was doing. His theology was still “under construction.” And that’s an important lesson for us: you don’t have to have perfect doctrine before you belong to Jesus. From the very beginning of Christianity, the core message was simple—Jesus is God, He died and rose again, and those who repent and believe will be saved. (Acts 2:36-39)

If John the Baptist could wrestle with holes in his understanding and still be called a man of faith, then we can, too.

Like many Jews of his day, John expected the Messiah to bring immediate judgment:

John pictured a Messiah who was fiery, fierce, and forceful—someone who looked a lot like himself. But Jesus showed up gentle, merciful, and compassionate. He healed the sick, blessed outcasts, and even ate meals with tax collectors and sinners.

When Jesus didn’t match John’s expectations, it created space for doubt. And the same thing happens to us. When our picture of Jesus is shaped by culture, politics, or personal preference instead of Scripture, we can feel disappointed when He doesn’t act like we thought He would.

Eventually John was imprisoned for speaking the truth about Herod’s sin. Sitting in a dark dungeon, cut off from ministry and friends, his questions grew heavier.

This is one of the most shocking questions in the New Testament. The very man who once pointed everyone to Jesus now wasn’t sure himself. Yet his doubt didn’t disqualify him from being used by God.

How did Jesus respond? He didn’t scold John or shame him. Instead, He pointed John back to the evidence:

Jesus reminded John that the signs of the kingdom were unfolding all around him. Miracles, changed lives, and fulfilled prophecy confirmed that He truly was the Messiah.

Then Jesus said something remarkable about John:

Think about that. Jesus honored John as the greatest prophet, not after he resolved his doubts, but right in the middle of them.

Your doubts don’t mean you lack faith. They mean you’re human. Real faith is choosing to trust Jesus when life doesn’t make sense. It’s holding onto Him when your theology feels unfinished, when your expectations are unmet, and when your dungeon feels dark.

Like John the Baptist, you may not have every answer. But you can trust the same Jesus who heals, restores, and raises the dead. And He blesses those who keep holding onto Him—even with questions still in their hands.

Real faith isn’t the absence of doubt. It’s trusting Jesus in spite of your doubts.

In this episode we reveal how the infamous Kinderhook Plates—once hailed by Joseph Smith as an ancient record—turned out to be a deliberate 19th-century hoax that exposes the cracks in Mormonism’s prophetic claims.

--

The Unveiling Mormonism podcast pulls back the curtain on Mormon history, culture and doctrine. Join us for new episodes every Monday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org/mormonism.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

In 1843, Joseph Smith—the founder of Mormonism—was handed what looked like an ancient discovery: six mysterious brass plates unearthed in Illinois. But the “Kinderhook Plates” weren’t ancient at all; they were a deliberately crafted hoax designed to test Smith’s prophetic gift. In this episode, we uncover the full story—how the plates were forged, why they were presented to Smith, what he claimed about them, and how the LDS Church eventually admitted they were fake. More than a quirky historical footnote, the Kinderhook Plates pose a serious question about the foundation of Mormonism and the claims of its prophet. We’ll also point you back to the solid ground of Scripture and the simple gospel of Jesus Christ.

What You’ll Learn in This Episode:

• The backstory of the Kinderhook Plates and why they were created
• How Joseph Smith responded and what he claimed they revealed
• Evidence from eyewitnesses, later confessions, and modern scientific testing proving the plates were man-made
• How the LDS Church’s position on the plates has shifted over time
• What the Bible says about testing prophets and why Jesus—not any modern prophet—is God’s final revelation

Why This Matters:

This isn’t just an old scandal. It’s a living test case for Joseph Smith’s credibility and for the LDS Church’s truth claims today. If a prophet can’t discern a man-made fraud, what does that say about his revelations?

Scripture Highlight:

Deuteronomy 18:21-22 – God’s own test for identifying false prophets.

Welcome back to the podcast! We’ve all heard them. Little phrases that sound wise, comforting, or even spiritual—but they’re not true. In this series, we’ll uncover some of the most common believable lies people buy into about God, life, and faith.

--

The PursueGOD Truth podcast is the “easy button” for making disciples – whether you’re looking for resources to lead a family devotional, a small group at church, or a one-on-one mentoring relationship. Join us for new episodes every Tuesday and Friday.

Find resources to talk about these episodes at pursueGOD.org.

Help others go "full circle" as a follower of Jesus through our 12-week Pursuit series.

Click here to learn more about how to use these resources at home, with a small group, or in a one-on-one discipleship relationship.

Got questions or want to leave a note? Email us at [email protected].

Donate Now

--

Believable Lie #3: God Won’t Give Me More Than I Can Handle

It sounds comforting to say “God won’t give you more than you can handle,” but it’s not true. In fact, the Bible teaches the opposite. Paul admitted he was “crushed and overwhelmed beyond his ability to endure” (2 Corinthians 1:8). Why? Because God never intended us to handle life on our own. He allows more than we can bear so that we’ll finally lean on Him. The promise isn’t that we’ll never be overwhelmed—the promise is that we’ll never be abandoned.

The Misunderstood Verse

This lie comes from a misreading of 1 Corinthians 10:13. The verse isn’t about suffering—it’s about temptation. God promises He won’t let temptation be more than we can bear, and He always provides a “way out.” But suffering is different. Sometimes we really do face more than we can handle.

The Truth About Temptation

Temptations are real but not irresistible. Israel’s history proves this: some fell, others stood firm—not because temptation was weaker but because God was stronger. Endurance is possible, not by willpower but by God’s faithfulness (Hebrews 2:18, James 1:12, 2 Thessalonians 3:3). God’s “way out” can be changing your environment, fighting back with Scripture, or reaching out to others for help.

The Truth About Suffering

Unlike temptation, suffering may indeed overwhelm us. Paul admitted he faced trials he couldn’t endure on his own (2 Corinthians 1:8-9). Yet suffering teaches us to rely on God, not ourselves. It drives us into the arms of Jesus and into the comfort of His people. God comforts us so that we can comfort others (2 Corinthians 1:4).

The Big Picture

God may give us more than we can handle, but He will never give us more than He can handle. Trials push us to depend on Christ, to lean on our church family, and to prepare the next generation to do the same. Suffering will come. But Christ is enough.