Interview with Pastor Bryan Wolfmueller; Four Coners Brewing Co., Heart O'Texas Red Ale, S2, E1
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 бер 2024
- Join Pastor Cholak and Pastor Krieg as they kick off season 2 of Lagers with Luther with a discussion of theology and beer! In this episode, they speak with Pastor Bryan Wolfmueller from St. Paul Lutheran Church and Jesus Deaf Lutheran Church in Austin, Texas. The pastors will also review Heart O'Texas Red Ale from Four Corners Brewing Co. in Dallas, Texas. Próst!
- Розваги
🎉🎉🎉🎉Ya'll are lit, I love this discussion. We need more of this in the black community. 😅😅😅😅
Thanks for watching and glad you enjoyed it. We had a blast with Pastor Wolfmueller. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share. It helps get the word out. Blessings.
🫡🫡🫡Done, when I 👀 it was LCMS, I had to. 😁😁😁😁
For some reason I couldn't find a Southern Baptist beer theology video. 😂 Good stuff! Greetings from an LCMS Christian in Wisconsin, where we have lots of Lutherans and lots of beer.
Wolfmueller must be the only Lutheran pastor without a beard.
Thanks for this tabletalk!
It was our pleasure. We had fun. Thanks for watching.
Another reason to become a LCMS Lutheran.
Wonderful interview! I love these podcasts!
Thanks for listening.
53:34 Tequila with Calvinists😂
As a Calvinist, I’m afraid adding tequila to the mix would assure a non civil discussion… 😂
On preaching- heart > mouth
Best beers are greek. Of course they are. Come and taste, p. Bryan and friends.
Pints with Aquinas spin off?? 🤔
Lol
Yes. We mentioned that in the first episode and gave recognition to them for their inspiration. Thanks for watching.
completely agree with your views on abortion. What I wonder, though, is if being against laws legalizing abortion is really "pro-Life", or if it is just "pro-Morality". Since Roe vs. Wade was overturned, we really are not seeing a decrease in the national abortion rate. Although criminalizing abortion nationwide may be a noble goal, it is probably unrealistic. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of babies are being aborted. My understanding is that very few abortions are undertaken because of rape or incest, but rather the vast majority are because of convenience and finances. How about saving lives by offering financial support from the government to low income woment who are pregnant and/or have children? This should be appealing across the political specturm, shouldn't it? Those of us who are truly "pro-life" will be saving babies lives, and those who are "pro-choice" will see more funding go to low income women and families. This satisfies both sides of the political divide.
I would certainly not fault someone for supporting those in need, especially women and children. I would disagree that what is meant by "pro-life" is really "pro-mortality." This is an accusation often leveled against the pro-life movement. I hear it mostly framed as we are not so much pro-life but pro-birth because after the child is born, we don't care about them or the mother. The proof they cite is not supporting government programs aimed at helping single mothers and children. It is my experience that the vast majority of pro-life people not only speak out against the evil of abortion but also advocate for the health and well-being of the mother, father, and child after birth. The pro-life groups I support and am involved with do just this. They have care for the mothers and children during and after the pregnancy. Please don't confuse a mistrust of government programs and a lack of support for more government intervention in individuals' lives as a lack of support for those in need. Many support private organizations that care for the needs of these low-income women and children and see that as a better avenue to help them instead of bloating a federal bureaucracy whose results really aren't any better than those of the private sector.
Also, the notion that banning abortions does not reduce their number is simply false. Where it has been outlawed, the numbers have gone down. Granted, some have left those states to seek an abortion elsewhere, but the number has gone down. What is unfortunate is that the rise of abortion pills has led to a dangerous and liberal use of them with many harmful consequences.
I don't believe that a national abortion ban is unrealistic, either. The overturning of Roe was viewed in the exact same light until the moment it was overturned. We must never ceed ground to evil, and abortion is evil.
You are correct that the vast majority of abortions are done for financial and lifestyle reasons. Since the horrible decision of Roe, more government programs have been formed, and tax dollars have been spent to support these women and children, and we have only seen an increase in the number of abortions performed since Roe. The evidence suggests that more government is not the answer to reducing abortion. The only real meaningful way is a nationwide ban. Of course, this won't stop every abortion from happening, just as making murder illegal has not stopped murders from happening, but it will certainly help.
@@LagersWithLuther I agree that a nationwide ban is ideal. I may think it is unrealistic in the near future but this is of course something we should work for. In the meantime, I think you may be incorrect about the number of babies being killed after Roe Vs. Wade. My understanding is as you said that women in states where abortion has been eliminated or severely restricted have travelled to states where it is allowed in order to obtain an abortion. The numbers of abortion post-Roe are steady or even rising, and yes the abortion pill is a real challenge.
Why is it that those of us who are pro-Life are unwilling to save lives by paying pregnant women who are "low-income" not to have an abortion? No matter which party is in national office we see that government spending increases and the debt continues to grow. Why not use some of that money to save lives? How much is a life worth?
@@LagersWithLuther heres a question for you let say you convince a non believer to keep their child and that child never comes to faith haven't you just participated in that child condemnation?
@@lisajones7756@lisajones7756 We neither have the power to condemn nor save; that is beyond our control. The Holy Spirit works faith when and where He chooses. We have the responsibility to plant the seeds of faith and water them, yet it is the Holy Spirit who makes faith grow. If a person dies without faith, whether in the womb or out, the result is the same, an eternity apart from God. The idea of contributing to their condemnation because we guided a mother away from killing their child in the womb and the child did not grow to have faith, for whatever reason, would be similar to claiming an auto worker contributed to the death of someone killed in a car accident. We don't claim the auto worker contributes because of the degree of separation from the person bolting on a bumper in a factory to the person driving in the car and the myriad of other factors that led to the accident. However, as pro-life advocates, we certainly frame our arguments in the context of God's created order and ground it in His Word. So, the hope is that even the unbelieving parent would come to faith and raise their child in that same faith. I hope this helps answer your question. And thanks for watching.
@@LagersWithLuther I get this but I look at what Paul says 1cor5
12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church[b] whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[c] those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
Are you going to be there for the teenager and help with $ and time?
The bible has over 100 verses about minding your own business, not to meddle in peoples affair. Unless your going to see this birth all the way through as well as there salvation I don't think anyone should insert themselves. But I thank you for taking the time to answer.
The audio is very bad. I'm sorry.
Yes, we were having difficulty with our cameras. If you listen to some of the previous ones, it is better. I noticed it is a bit off when watching it on a TV as opposed to my computer. It sounds better on the computer. Hopefully, it will be corrected for the next one. Thanks for listening.
@@LagersWithLuther no problem good sir
*promo sm*