TRUNEWS with Rick Wiles - Morning Manna - Dec 17, 2025 - Proverbs 18:17-21 - Two Sides, One Tongue, and the Power of Words

Episode Date: December 17, 2025

Proverbs 18:17–21 reveals the necessity of discernment and the life-shaping force of the tongue. The first to present his case may seem right until another examines him, showing that wisdom listens before it judges. Casting lots can settle disputes when human judgment reaches its limits. A brother offended becomes harder to win than a fortified city—yet this verse reads very differently in the Septuagint, which speaks instead of help from a brother. In today’s Morning Manna, Rick Wiles and Doc Burkhart explore this striking contrast between the KJV and the LXX, why the interpretations diverge, and what each tradition emphasizes. The study concludes with Proverbs 18:20–21, reminding listeners that every word we speak returns to feed us—either with life or with death. Teachers: Rick Wiles and Doc Burkhart You can partner with us by visiting FaithandValues.com, calling 1-888-519-4935, or by mail at PO Box 399 Vero Beach, FL 32961. MEGA FIRE reveals the ancient recurring cycles of war and economic collapse that have shaped history for 600 years. These patterns predict America is now entering its most dangerous period since World War II. Get your copy today! www.megafire.world Get high-quality emergency preparedness food today from American Reserves! www.AmericanReserves.com It’s the Final Day! The day Jesus Christ bursts into our dimension of time, space, and matter. Now available in eBook and audio formats! Order Final Day from Amazon today! www.Amazon.com/Final-Day Apple users, you can download the audio version on Apple Books! www.books.apple.com/final-day Purchase the 4-part DVD set or start streaming Sacrificing Liberty today. www.Sacrificingliberty.com

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to Morning Manna for Wednesday, December 17, 2025. This Friday will be our last lesson for 2025. We will take a two-week holiday break and return on Monday, January 5th, 26. Also, our new online address will be manna nation.com. Don't worry. You're not going to have to. have trouble finding it. If you type faith and values into your browser, it's going to automatically roll over to manna nation.com. On January 1st, 2026, you're going to see the first phase of our new Mana Nation platform. And it will continue to take shape, grow, and expand throughout 26. I know you're going to like it. I'm excited. Then Doc and I, we already know what it's going to look like later in 2026. You're only going to get a peek at the beginning of it in January. Well, we are in the 18th chapter of Proverbs, and today we're going to study verses 17 through 21. Before the class began, Doc and I were chatting, and we said, there is so much material,

so much that we could talk about. We could spend an entire hour on each verse. and not cover everything. But we're going to do our best to get through all of these verses, 17 through 21. Let's pray, invite the Holy Spirit. Almighty God, our Father, we love you with all our heart, mind, and soul. And we magnify your name, and we worship your son, Jesus Christ. He is our king. And we love your spirit.

And so we ask for the Holy Spirit to come take charge of this class. us and teach us the depth or knowledge of your word. Give us wisdom and understanding of revelation of your word so that we would be better citizen in your son's kingdom and bring glory to him. In the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ, we pray. Amen. Amen.

And welcome to this Wednesday edition of Morning Manon. Glad to have you here with us. We are continuing in Proverbs chapter 18 today, and we're going to be focusing our attention on verses 17 through 21, which means tomorrow we'll be finishing up chapter 18, and then we'll have Faith Friday this week as well. And that brings us to the end of our lessons for this year, not the end of our lessons, but the end of our lessons for this year.

And we will retake up the mantle with chapter 19 at the beginning of the year. But today we're focusing on verses 17 through 21, so read along with me, if you will, today. I'm reading from the King James. He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him. The lot causes contentions to cease, and parteth between the mighty.

A brother offended is harder to be one than a strong city, and their contentions are like the bars of a castle. a man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled death and life are in the power of the tongue and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof God bless the reading of his word today All right, let's jump in

verse 17 He that, now this is King James He that is first in his own call Seemeth Just but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him. The Septuagint translation says, The righteous is first in his own calls, but when his neighbor cometh, he is searched out.

Most of the translations are the same. The Aramaic Pashida says he who is first in his own calls seems just, but his neighbor comes and searches him. What does this mean? Okay, so King Sopheed, Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, he had a double blessing, the wisest man and the richest man who ever lived. He observed a universal flaw in human judgment. The first speaker often appears righteous, appears to be right, simply because he or she has the advantage of framing the narrative

live first. And, Doc, this principle is used today in politics and government and many fields, because it's the first person, the first entity to get out in the public with their point of view is already in control of the discussion. And Rick, I've also heard it used in biblical interpretation, too. really first cause yes okay uh the first time something happens in the bible that sets the standard for every other incident of that particular item happening uh later on it's the idea of what's called first cause interpretation uh which i find flaws with because god obviously has a progressive

revelation uh and so you've you've got to take into consideration other things that god has said the first thing they said. He said a lot of... In human relations, the person who gets out there first with his or her story is in the driver's seat. Generally, yes. And politicians know it, political activists know it, propagandists know it? Yes. That's why they spend so much money to get out in the public on television, radio, social media,

and all kinds of advertising with their point of view. Because then everybody else is playing catch. up. So how does that affect you and me in everyday living? So this concept of the first cause carries immense emotional weight because we are naturally wired to sympathize with the first storyteller because we hear his or her version before any other version. appears that could contradict the story. Right. I'm not sure when this term narrative came into our modern vocabulary.

I mean, narrative's been around for, you know, thousands of years, but politically. I don't recall when I was younger hearing people talking about narratives. Right. But it seems like in the last 20 years, narratives have become a common theme. it's all it's it's accepted as well you have a narrative i have a narrative they have a narrative you know all narratives are right okay except you know mine is more right than yours yeah so there there's a mindset in the modern world that we should have competing narratives in other words truth is relative it is what you see this which is mr trumps's position

It says, he that is first in his own call seems just. In other words, in his mind, as a man or woman's mind, he believes his story. And if he or she is the first person to tell their side of a story, everybody who hears it first assumes it's the true side. Okay, so we all know. that everything has three sides, right? My version, your version, and the truth. Yes.

That's the way it is. But people get out there and they want to right away tell their story, their version, their calls. See, it's their calls. They want to tell their calls. And they want to get people believing their side of the story before the people even know something happened. Let's say there's been an argument between two people.

One of those people will get on the phone and start calling or emailing, even physically visiting people to tell their side of the story to get the jump on the other person. And then they could get 20, 30, 50 people believing their story. They've got to get ahead of the story. They have to get ahead. That's right. They have to get ahead of the other person, the other version.

So what this is telling us is that there's a danger in believing surface-level perceptions. That the truth can be the truth could be under, you may have to search, you may have to listen to multiple versions of it. event an incident to find the truth, to discern the truth. Okay. There is this illusion of completeness. The first story sounds like the whole story until the voice of the second story enters the room.

Right. I think, you know, I think all of us, I know, all of us had been burned, we've been victims, of somebody telling other people a version of something that happened or transpired or a conversation that simply their version was just completely twisted and wrong. And when you find out,

there's 20, 30 people believing that version, you're really pained at trying to convince them. No, that didn't happen. That wasn't said like that. that never that never occurred let me tell you how it really happened and now you're on the defensive yes you're trying to explain to people what really happened and but their minds have already been polluted by the first story that they heard proverbs 14 how many months ago were we in Proverbs 14, verse 15 says, the simple believeth every word, but the prudent man looketh well

to his going. See, to believe everything you hear means you're a simpleton. Oh, that hurts, doesn't it? It does. It stings, that bites. Don't believe. That doesn't mean become so cynical. You don't believe anything.

Just reserve judgment. you gather all the facts and then they could judge them and the more controversial something is the more you know extreme something is that's a sign you need more facts okay so we're being cautioned here as disciples of christ to resist the emotional pool of first impressions and especially in family disputes, church conflicts, workplace disagreements, legal controversies,

political debates. Wait, gather your facts. Be prudent, be wise. Don't jump to a conclusion because you might jump to the wrong conclusion. Yes. And be on the side of the wrongdoer and injure the righteous person, the person who was innocent,

the person who was doing the right thing. And you don't want to do that. You don't want to participate in that other person's offense. So the first speaker often believes his or her own news accounts. You know, it's really what comes down to, their own news release. They believe their own news release. People put out a news release, verbal or email or text messages. They're not necessary.

Now, sometimes they're outright lying. But usually they're not consciously lying. They just, they've convinced themselves of their version of what was said or done. And sometimes they don't have their facts right. Correct. Okay. Doc, I can tell you that I, in my own gaze, where I've taken notes and written down notes in a meeting.

And then weeks a month later, I'm verbally telling people what was said in that meeting. And there have been times I've gone back and read my notes and realized I had a wrong. I wrote down in that meeting what was really said. But my verbal telling of the story of the meeting was wrong. Not that it was malicious or, you know, intentionally trying to hurt. Just I got my facts wrong. And then I had to go back and tell people say, you know what I told you last week. That's not what was decided in that meeting. This is what was decided. I am, I forgot. I got my facts wrong. So that could happen to us even when, you know, when we're not even, when somebody's not trying to deliberately mislead somebody, we just forget the facts. But there are those who do try to deliberately mislead. Oh, yes. To be clear about that.

Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. Remember, the devil was, is the accuser of the brethren. Yes. And he's lying. And he's going to lie until he's cast into the lake of fire, Doc. So, Doc, what is the meaning of this word calls, the first cause?

Well, actually, this is a legal term here, okay? And so it's like what's being used in a legal dispute or in a lawsuit. So imagine a tribunal that's being set up, okay? and then this person makes their case, right? Well, if there's no other testimony out there, then that's the only testimony and that's the only evidence, then that's the truth then, right? But this is what we call confirmation bias, okay?

We'll often accept first explanation for something, and sometimes that will get rooted in us, and it's hard to bring us off that, and bring us off of that once we've initially been exposed to it. That just shows you how weak the human mind is. That our cognitive bias tends to lean toward things that confirm what we hear first rather than doing a critical assessment of something. And so this verse really condemns singular testimony.

And remember back in the Mosaic Walleric, Even the Mosaic law required two or three witnesses to establish a matter. But even that can be manipulated. We saw it in the trial of Jesus before the Jewish leaders. They brought in two liars. And they fulfilled the law, two witnesses, but they were two witnesses who were lying. So they were telling the first story, right? They were confirming what they had been told to say.

so and it seemed just it seems just if that was the only testimony uh in many ways that would be if that was the only thing that we heard then the verdict has already been established right yeah so uh and i want us to get to the second part of the verse here and it says but his neighbor cometh and search at him rick yes his neighbor cometh and search at him so the the the arrival of the neighbor changes the atmosphere in the room. Yes. So think of the, you know, think of a group of people, five or ten people, and they're listening to a man or woman tell his or her, her version of some incident or dispute, whatever the debate is about. And this man or woman's got everybody in the room believing him or her.

And people are nodding and they're going, oh, that's terrible, you know. We hope you get this straightened out. And all of a sudden the door opens up and the other party walks in. And the first person who's telling the story is not expecting it. Now he or she's got a problem. That man or woman is no longer in control of the narrative. now the other side of the story is going to speak to the group of people. Right.

And this is where the first story falls apart. We'll say it's full of hole. All right. As the second story is told, more holes appear in the first story. Right. And people are sitting there going, wait a minute, you didn't tell us that part. You left this out. And the more holes that they see in the first story, the more doubt that they have about the first person, the first calls.

So his neighbor cometh, the second party arrives, the second witness, the missing half of the story appears. Right. And what happens? The neighbor searches him. examines, investigates, cross-examines, the truth is dragged into a light. The second person says, now, wait a minute. George, I didn't say that to you. This is what I said for Mary.

I never inferred that message. What you were telling people? That was never my intention. it. This is mine. See, all of a sudden, now, the first person's story, their cause, is being held up to the light.

And if there are holes in it, the light's coming through. Right. And again, a problem. So the only thing they can do, Doc, is double down and argue and say, this is the way it was, or they can say, you know what? Yeah, I kind of got one story wrong.

that's what this is teachings the second voice changes everything the first story cracks the just becomes unjust yes so it's telling us that truth love light truth loves investigation only falsehood lies deceptions fear the arrival of the second voice which in this verb is described as the name, it doesn't have to be a next-to-a-neighbor. It just means the second voice in the story. They don't want a cross-examination of their narrative. They want everybody to believe their narrative and move on, but the second person shows up and challenges, and that's where they have a problem now. Right. So, Doc, does the Bible require witnesses? Absolutely. As I mentioned earlier, back in Deuteronomy and the Mosaic law, it required two or three witnesses.

And so in the first part, we talked about how there was this legal setting, a tribunal. Well, we have another legal word here that Hebrew word for searches, searches him, is actually a technical legal term, meaning to investigate thoroughly or dig to the bottom of a matter. So this principle, Rick, is meant to protect the innocent. Imagine if there was no opportunity to bring any other witness or testimony or evidence or anything like that the prosecution could just simply make their case and then ask the judge for a decision. How unjust that would be. Wait a minute. We have something like that in our modern legal system. It's called summary judgment.

Right. Yeah. And a law of the fairest that was issued back during the COVID days against the Trump team and everything. It was based on just one-sided prosecutorial testimony. That's it. No one else had a chance to make a case against it. And so it just shows you the corruption that's involved there. But, you know, we talk about having a just legal system.

Well, just legal system works to protect the innocent. So cross-examination is a very important part of it. So as disciples, we're challenged to wait for the second side. Justice demands it. The nature of God demands it. And we're a foreshadow of the final judgment, Rick. Every man's cause will not be searched, not by a neighbor, but by the omniscient judge in his sentencing. Okay.

So Christ Jesus was the one who was searched by the Pharisees in that kangaroo court trial they put him through. He was searched by the Pharisees, the scribes and the Romans. No fault was found in him. he alone is the just one and so uh you know a couple years ago rick when we were uh you know starting to go through some of the uh de-platforming and everything i had you know there were accusations on both you and i on anti-semitism and everything and to this day i still people online accuse me of that. But I've only, I only had maybe two or three people that actually reached out to me directly and asked me my position. Right. Out of all the accusations, Rick, I can, I can actually point

to three conversations I actually have had on that topic. And at the end of each conversation, they had a completely different view. They were, the only thing they had heard was what they saw and heard online. Yes. And they took that as truth. But thank God we had a handful of people that reached out. You had the same experience, I'm sure. They automatically assume that something they see or read online is the absolute truth. Matthew Henry spoke to this. He said, he that is first in his own cause seem as just.

He tells his own story and his own favor and with the greatest assurance, but his neighbor comes and searches in, discovers the fallacies of his arguments and the falsity of his facts, we must not be hasty in believing what is said but must get both sides leave or opportunity to speak. Amen. Albert Barnes said the first statement makes a strong impression, but a counterstatement often proves it to be false or exaggerated. The truth is brought to light by the collision of opposing statement.

Yes. this is the following is kind of an adaptation of some things that Spurgeon said he said he that is first in his own cause seems just he has the field to himself but his neighbor comes and searches him then the bubble burst hear both sides before you decide and scotsman william are not said he that is first in his own calls seemeth just he has the advantage of being first. But his neighbor cometh and searches him. Truth is brought out. One side is never a home. And Doc, I just say something about, when you were talking about those days, it's been almost six years ago. Yes. When we came under heavy attack, six, eight years ago, you know, we came under heavy media attack. I mean, I had network. talk show hosts on television putting my face up on the screen

on national television calling me all kinds of names major newspapers the New York Times and so forth horrible stories of what they were saying about me and no newspaper ever called me nobody ever called and said

hey would you like to rebut this Would you, like, express your side of this? They just published this stuff, okay? Right. Okay, that I understand. I can handle that stuff, but I'll tell you that would hurt. I'll tell you the things that hurt. It wasn't the arrows that the news media was shooting at me.

It was when they would call people who knew me personally and say, you know Rick Wiles. and he is a blankety, blink, blank, blank. Do you still stand with him? And they would publicly renounce me. Right. Nobody said, it's not Rick. That's not hell. No, I'm not going to renounce him.

Nobody called and said, hey, Rick, the news media is trying to pressure me to say something, I'll believe you. Nobody. They just went ahead and believed it. and said, okay, don't, don't burn me. If you want me to announce him, I'll do it. Just go away.

Don't burn me. See, this is what this proverb looks like in real time. In real life. Yes. Okay. Don't listen. Don't believe the first story. Get the other side.

All right. Let the other side be heard. Then make your decision. Okay. We'll go to verse 18. The King James, the lot causeth contentious to cease and parteth between the mighty. Septuagint, the lot settlet at rest disputes and decides between the mighty. So now Solomon is referring to the ancient practice, which is still used today in

some forms, even here in America. Right. Where difficult decisions were arrived by casting lots, meaning by chance. By chance. Tossing stones, sticks, dice. In America, we flip coins.

Right. Or draw name. Right. If there's a tie in an election, they usually have a county judge flip a coin. They got to get somebody, you know, like a judge who's impartial, supposed to be impartial. I don't know if anybody ever looks to see if it's a two-headed coin. It's so, hey, heads wins, you know. My friend is the winner, hurry. But we do this in America to decide elections that are that are tied, that nobody can make a decision.

So this is casting lots. We talked about casting lots weeks ago, month ago. So what Solomon is saying here is the casting of lots serves and functions as the peacemaker because it removes the decision from human hands where biases, ego, may taint or even corrupt the process. What casting lots is doing is literally saying, we're putting our faith in God, not in the lot, not in the dice, not in the sticks or stones of being used. We're putting our faith in God that he will cause the dice to land in the way he decides his best. Yes. Now, it's not gambling. Right. But Sullivan is saying it causes contentions to seize. It means the matter settled. All the parties agreed, you're going to cast

slots and you're going to accept the verdict of the lot. You're going to shake hands and walk away. You're not going to argue about it. It causes dissension, arguments to stop, okay? So it just ends the debate. Right. Actually, Doc, I think it should be used more often. I don't disagree with you.

Had all, I don't disagree with you at all. It would end a lot of litigation. It would just end it. You know, all that stuff we went through back in 2020, Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden should have just said, you know what, for the sake of the country, let's just cast lots. I will settle it.

Who won the election? Right. But people don't do it that way. But, you know, our leaders today don't have the wisdom. system that Solomon had. Right. So by invoking the lot, the disputing parties are agreeing beforehand

to submit to the outcome. Therefore, they're presiding a peace treaty. You're getting both parties on record as saying, okay, people, both of you agree, we're going to cast lots, and you're going to accept the outcome of the law. And you've got to get both of them to say, yes, I will accept it. That's the peace treaty.

Only one is going to win. Yes. One side knows they're going to, you know, both sides know that only one is going to win. One's going to walk away winner. One's going to walk away a loser. But they're supposed to walk away in peace. No chair throwing. No breaking beer bottles on anybody's head.

No lawsuit. What we would do today, Doc, is, yeah, they cast lots and then they'd file a lawsuit five minutes later. Yeah, against the lot company. So. All right, so, okay. Is there any, I know some people will say this, man, this, I can't believe this is in the Bible. This just sounds like Las Vegas. Well, it's not, because the Hebrew word for law, actually,

is the word pebble, okay? It was just a little stone. But it was never viewed as chance or gambling. That was never the idea that went in, but as a direct appeal to the Lord himself. So where do we get this? Well, we studied over in chapter 16 a couple weeks ago, in Proverbs chapter 16, verse 33, the lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. And so, This practice acknowledges that there is a limit to human reason, that there are times when just a general intellect cannot discern the right decision, the right path, and the Lord's intervention is needed, is needed. So we see several times in Scripture how it was used. The lot was used to divide up the promised land, all right, in Joshua 18. It was used to detect Aiken's sin at AI in Joshua Chapter 7. They used a lot.

They kept rolling the pebble each time, and they narrowed it down to Aiken. And Aiken then confessed after all the pebble kept showing up and selected them. And it was also used to select officers for leadership. King Saul used this in First Samant. And then over in the New Testament, Loth were cast to one. replace Judas's seat among the apostles. So there's a lot of precedence for this. I experienced a casting of lots, if you will, myself.

I was on the receiving end of it. We tried out for a church. It was Princeton Assembly of God in Princeton, Missouri. And there were several other young families that had also tried out for this church. And by this, for those that aren't familiar, a preacher would go and preach a Sunday morning and Sunday 9 at a church as a candidate as part of the selection process to become pastor of that church. And so I received a phone call from the leader of the church board. He said, by Brother Burkak, we want you to know that we love you and your family.

But there's also another family, too, that we're having a hard time trying to decide between the two of you. And so what they ended up doing, Rick, is they ended up just putting our names in a hat. And actually what they did, Rick, is each the board members wrote a name down and they put the name in the hat and they said, whatever name we pull out of the hat will be the pastor. And so when they pulled the single name out, it was our family. but I was told later on that all the names that were put in the hat were ours. And so, but it was the Lord making the decision for us to go there. It was confirmation to us too. Yes.

Because we needed to know as well. So that was a real life application of a casting of lots in my own life. That's a, you've never told me that story. It's interesting. So the second part of this verse says, saying parteth the mighty. Yes. Parteth between the mighty. It simply means that that the lot, the casting of the lot, settles the dispute between mighty person. People with influence, people with power, people who can keep a fight going. They've got their resources

to hire the lawyers. They got the resources to buy the media for advertising. Casting the lot, parts between the mighty. It settles the dispute. The mighty are those who are who are used to winning, accustomed to winning, accustomed to getting their way. And they don't easily back down. They want their way. But sometimes when two bulls or budding heads, Okay, you got to cast a lot to separate them because their two, their egos are too strong, their wills are too strong, and neither one will back down. And so the lots are cast and it parts the mighty. That's the meaning of this part of the verse. It's an equalizer between mighty men and woman. It just says, hey, in this case, the lot is going to make the decision, and both of you

have to have to agree that you're going to respect the other one, all right? The verb, dog, means simply to divide, to separate, to make a distinction, to render a verdict among the mighty. Yes. You know, it just brings it into a dispute. Right. Let's see, Doc, what did Matthew Henry have to say about this? Well, Matthew Henry, he pointed out the power of the lot. It says the lot was appointed to prevent strife for it referred matter to God, and they recognized that.

And the decision was not to be disputed. So the lot causes contentions to cease, that it. should settle the argument. It puts an end to the strife, which could not otherwise be ended and parts between the mighty. It decides those who are too strong to be decided any other way. All right. How about Charles Bridges, Rick? Cheryl Bridges says the lot ended disputes by bringing in God's judgment, which all parties were bound to submit to between the mighty whose passions and prejudices, rule. The lot stepped in as an arbiter of God. It is the voice of God in human affairs.

Charles Spurgeon said, when two bulls lock horns, the lot is the only peacemaker. Better the lot than the sword is an appeal to the presiding ruler of all events. The lot causes contentions to cease by determining the question. We am or not said, the lot calls it. The lot calls contentions to cease. It is the last appeal in parts between the mighty. The lot is a solemn appeal to God. It is the very opposite of gambling. It is an act of faith. Yes. All right. Now, bring it in verse 19.

And there are two versions of verse 19. How could there be two versions of the Bible? Well, there are, hey, in this case, the authorized King James version and a lot of other Protestant evangelical versions, translations have one particular version, but the Septuagint English translation, the English translation of the Aramic Peshit, the English translation of the Aramic, the English translation of the Syriac translation. have a different version. Yes.

So there are differences of opinion about not just what verse 19 says or what it means, but even the words, what does it really say? So, Doc, there are, well, let's start with, let's start with the King James version of verse 19. okay once you read that one okay so the king james version of verse 19 says a brother offended is harder to be one than a strong city and their contentions are like the bars of the castle now when you first read that the interpretation you know you you receive a a very distinct interpretation a brother offended right that's that first cons again right and so

And so we're shaping the whole rest of the verse based on a brother offended. But there's more to it, isn't there? Yes. All right. So let's compare it. King James says, a brother offended is harder to be one than a strong city. But the Septuagin says, a brother helped by a brother, it is as a strong and high city. It's a completely different sentence.

And then the second part of the King James says, and their contentions are like the bars of a castle. But the Septuagin says, and he is powerful as a well-founded palace. So we've got two completely different versions of this verse. So which is the correct one, Rick? That's what we're going to drill down and find out here. Right.

So the Septuagint is based on a Greek translation, of ancient Hebrew scriptures. And it was produced by Jewish scholars in Alexandria somewhere between the years 250 and 100 BC. Right. Now, these were Jewish scholars. They were Greek-speaking Jewish scholars who also could read and speak Hebrew.

So the situagint is their version of the ancient Hebrew text. Right. Again, translated between the years 250 and 100 BC before Christ. Right. It is the oldest complete form of the New Testament. The Old Testament. Of the Old Testament. It's the oldest complete form of the Old Testament.

Okay. What, Doc, what did the, what did the, what did the King James translators use? They actually used a text called the Masoretic text, okay? That was the, you know, that was what they had available at the time. That's what they had available. And so, but the Maseretic text is actually the Jewish Old Testament produced, by a group of guys called the Maserids, okay? But that was about 600 years after the time of Christ,

600 to 1,000 years after the time of Christ. They did. And that's right. And so the Masoretic text, it's the basis of the King James, of the New King James, the New American Standard, the English standard version, the World English Bible. Most modern translations use as, again, that first cause the Masoretic text for the old covenant scriptures.

Right. But if you go back to the original text, which is in the situagent, and by the way, many of the early church fathers treated the Septuagint as scripture, absolute scripture. The problem was that the King James writers and researchers did not have accidents at that time to the Septuagint. And they use what had been handed to them by Catholic tradition and the Masoretic text. And so if you start looking at from the Septuagint side,

it has a whole different translation here. Absolutely. A whole different translation. Well, Doug, my understanding is the Catholic Vulgate is leaning towards the Septuagint. It leans more toward the Septuagint. And so the idea is, and at some point there was a diversion, and there was a belief in leaning on the Maserites more than even the Latin Vulgate.

And so the King James translators, they got their translation of the old covenant from rabbis that translated the scriptures between the years 600 and 1,000 AD. Yes, and so it's possible that the translation that the, you know, that the King James researchers were using was literally 1,200 years older than the Septuagint. Now, don't you think there might be some changes that might have occurred in understanding of Hebrew and in Greek, and then translating Greek into English and, you know, so many different things that have to happen. But it was a much older text. But if we get back to the original source, to the Septuagint, this verse takes on a whole different meaning.

It does. All right. We're going to give you a brief summary of the teaching based on the King James version, the Mazurra version. All right. This is, what we're going to tell you in the beginning here is what is taught in most Protestant churches in America and other Western countries, because they're basing it on the King James translation, which for myself, I believe it's incorrect. I don't want to speak for Doc, but for myself, I think it's incorrect. So the King James says A brother offended is harder to be one than a strong city

and their contentions are like the bars of a castle What does this mean? It's saying a brother which can be two brothers, two sisters it's referring to the closest human family bonds right okay they're brothers their sisters and one of them is offended okay they're deeply wounded they're betrayed they're alienated they've become there's a breach in the relationship that's how the king james is is framing this this proverb and it says the one who is

offended is harder to be one back than a strong city Right. Because it's really, you know, these ancient times was talking about cities with stone walls around them, like Jerusalem, that were built to hold, to keep back invading armies. It's saying that no army, no military can breach it. That's what happens when there is a breach and a relationship between two family members. that's the King James translation is saying that the contentions the disagreements the argument are like the bars of a castle right now if you just take if you just take that the King James version of that that's pretty good wisdom just by

itself right oh yes it's great wisdom you might have heard a sermon on it at It's important to fast. No, there's nothing, I mean, there's nothing wrong. There's nothing untrue about it. Nothing untrue about it. Nothing untrue about it at all, okay? It's teaching that the longer the offense festers, the thicker the walls become, the harder the barers become. The offense is almost impossible to reconcile between the two family members, sorry.

Right. that's that's the traditional meaning taught in most churches in america today in western europe they're going to go with the king james translation however i believe that the septuagint translation is the accurate one the septuagint says a brother helped by a brother is as a strong in high city and he is powerful as a well-founded power that I'm going to read the Catholic version. Vogue the, what is it, doy, rimes, deemes, Dewey reams. A brother that is helped by his brother is like a strong city, and judgments are like the bars of cities.

So let's go with the Septuagint. It is teaching us here. Well, okay, let's look at it this way. The Masoretic text, the one that the King James uses, it's focusing on the fragility, the brittleness of brotherhood, sisterhood when it's broken, whereas the subtuagent is celebrating the invincibility of brotherhood of sisterhood when it is intact. Right.

So which one is it? Are we celebrating the strength of brotherhood, the power of sisterhood when it's kept, when it's protected, when it's intact? Or are we moaning about what happens when that brotherhood or sisterhood is divided and breached? The King James says, no, it's talking about what is breached. The Septuagin says, no, we're talking about when it's kept intact.

Right. It's a different perspective here. And actually, both of them are great moral stories. Yes. What is the original intent of this verse? And I lean with you toward the Septuagint, and it's its declaration of this. It's talking about the invincibility of Brotherhood, really. Rick, not the fragility of it.

It's the complete other side of it. Right. So when it talks about a brother, helped by a brother, the image I get is in war, two soldiers standing back to back. Right. One's fighting this way. The other one's fighting this way. Both of them are defending each other.

A brother helped by a brother. It's talking about mutual support, mutual defense, It's mutual cooperation. And then we have a strong city. It says when you have two brothers or two sisters united, they're like a strong city. Okay. This, the King James says, it's something that, this is, the painting in the King James is, with, you know, this is an obstacle. It's an obstacle.

You can't overcome it. But the Septuagin is saying this is a strong refuge that protects. So the King James says, this wall keeps you divided. The Septuagin is saying this wall keeps you protected. Totally different viewpoints, depending on which version you accept as being accurate. Doc, Ecclesiastes, another one by Psalm. Chapter 4, verse 12. What does Solomon say about a three-cord, a three-fold cord?

It's not quickly broken. Yeah, so if you have a rope, it's three-fold. Or you think of a rope. You've got that intertwining of the rope. They're hard to cut. They're hard to break. Yes. Because there's three wrapped around each other.

Right. And that strength increases. The more you bind together, the stronger increase doesn't just double or triple. It's exponential in it. So all this really, Rick, is pointing prophetically to the church that when believers help one another, the gates of ill cannot prevail against it, right? So that's why I lean more toward the Septuant. Now, I'm, you know, I'm a big believer in the King James,

and I think they get it right most of the time. But there are instances like this where it requires some additional study and some additional digging to find the first of all, there's the gold that's on top, okay, but then you've got to dig. And then you find the real gold that's underneath. And that's the case with this particular verse here. So sometimes appears to be contradictions between translations. That's why it's always a good idea to investigate.

All right, where did this first idea come up? Why would there be a difference between the two? And so you're seeing this in real time today and trying to get an understanding of a particular verse, which everyone assumes has one translation, and they've been told it all of their life. But when you get down to what the original writings were, it takes on a whole different meaning. A much deeper meaning, in my opinion. Yes.

You mentioned the gates of hell so not prevail against my church as being similar to this scripture. Doc, that's another scripture that people misinterpret. Right. I can't tell you how many times I've been at a church service and somebody who's going through a difficult time, a tribulation, and affliction will stand up in the church and tell everybody what they're going through and then they always say,

but I'll tell you this, the gates of hell shall not prevail. Always meaning it's hell that's coming against them. The gates, they're being chased by the gate, of hell. Okay? I've never been chased by a gate. Isn't there the... Gates are pretty solid, isn't it?

Not going anywhere. I've never been chased down the street by gates. But they'll teach you, I mean, they'll say, the gates of hell shall not prevail. I'm going to win this battle. When Jesus said that, he said, the gates of hell shall not prevail against my church. It was the church that was attacking the gates of hell.

Amen. There you go. And he said, the gates of hell. hell shall not prevail. The church shall win. The church shall defeat the gates of hell. The gates of hell can't stop you. They're not changing you. You're meant to conquer them. Same scripture, but different interpretation. What did Jesus mean when he said her? He meant nobody is going to stop his church. His church is invading. His church's only attack. the same way with this scripture

the interpretation the positive interpretation which I think is the accurate one is that when brothers stand together and doesn't necessarily mean blood brothers but spiritual brothers

or spiritual sisters when you stand together you form a strong city and nobody can get in to hurt you amen your protection is increased by your unity are you some you know you know it's we could go on and talk about a well-founded palace okay the king james says a barred temple um to get a look at this

is it talking about prison bars or is it talking about defensive barred bar defensive well A different viewpoint. Now, this is one of those places where I can't use quotations from most of our familiar commentators because they accepted the King James translation, even though some of them like Spurgeon and others would admit that there was another translation. Yes. they'd acknowledge it they'd acknowledge it

but they'd say but the King James says this right but you know of all the transfer of all the commentators we use excuse me Adam Clark Adam Clark

the Methodist was the only one that really believed the Septuagin version would you read it please sure it's Adam Clark said and a brother assisted by

brother is like a fortified city and their decisions are like the bars of the city. Unity among brother makes them invincible. Small things grow great by Concord. He says, Adam Clark, says the other reading, the Septuagint, is to be preferred. A brother who is helped by a brother is like a strong city. As I mentioned earlier, the early church fathers leaned more toward the Septuagint version because that was the only version they had, Rick. The Maserati texts hadn't come along yet.

And so John Golden Mouth, John Christos has had this to say on this earth. He says, he adds the perfect thing, love. For a brother helped by a brother is as a strong city. Let us consider one another to provoke unto love. Or if we are unified or united, the devil cannot easily get an entrance. A city that is strong and high cannot be taken. Doc, if you would have asked St. John, as you said, he was known as a golden mouth, because of his ability to speak so good, if you would have said, Bishop John, that's not what the King James says. King who?

He lived, what, a thousand years before King James? Yep. there was no King James translation there was no Masoretic text it didn't exist the only thing they had was the Septuagint that's right that's a really good point the Maseretic text didn't even exist

the rabbis hadn't even started writing it yet the only thing in existence was the Septuagint I think it's the accurate one St. Augustine said a brother assisting his brother like a strong city. Charity, meaning love, binds them together, and where charity is, there is strength, for love is strong as death. They are like the bars of a city which keep the enemy

out and the citizens safe. Right. Once again confirming that septuagint version, at least in the minds of the early church fathers, St. Ambrose also concurred with this. The same spirit here, there is unity of spirit, there is the strength of a fortress. The scripture says a brother, helped by a brother, is as a strong city. So no engine of war can break down the walls of love. Right. That's what they got from the Septuagint. Those who accept the traditional King James interpretation, they say the bars of the city keep the brothers divided.

Right. But the Septuagint translation says, it keeps the brothers. protected, guarded. I'll take the Septuagint version. All right, let's move on now to verse 20. We'll go back to the King James. A man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled.

Septuagin says, From the fruits of his mouth shall a man fill his belly. He shall be satisfied with the fruit of his lips. almost identical. No major differences here. A man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth. Okay, so King Solomon is introducing a spiritual law. Words are not like wind that blow away.

but they're seeds they take root and they produce a harvest which every speaker must how many times doc have we said about somebody well they're going to have to eat their own words yeah

well you know what all of us eat our words it's not just a few people all of us eat our words that's the message of this verse your mouth is sowing seed words those words are going to produce a harvest

and you are going to eat it yes so do you like what you're eating oh it brings it back home now doesn't it brings it home the fruit of his mouth it's teaching us that Speech is productive.

It's not idle. Every word spoken contributes to the outcome of the speaker. And returns to him, yes. This is enough to make you this. This is enough to make it just want to tape your mouth. They don't say anything. Is you going to eat what you spoke? the belly what's the belly okay well obviously we know where a physical belly is but spiritually what

does it mean it means the center of our desires yes okay it in other words our words will feed our souls before they ever reach the ears of others I'm telling you this one this one should cause everybody to come under conviction. You're eating the words that you spoke. You're eating the fruit. What you're eating? You're eating the fruit of the words that you spoke. Right.

Your words produce fruit. Okay. You could speak words of kindness, truth, gentleness, grace, peace, love, mercy, and you will eat the fruit of those words. Or you could speak lies in bitterness, in slander, in contempt, in division, and strife, and you will eat the fruit of those words.

So the question is, what are you eating today? you're eating the fruit of your words that you spoke yesterday you're eating the fruit of the words you spoke a year ago five years ago 10 years ago there's a harvest that piles up open your pantry open your spiritual pantry and look at the harvest

it's very sobering because we have this theme in the proverbs about an undisciplined, ungoverned, out-of-controlled tongue. So, Doc, you get people who are literally starving themselves because they're eating the fruit of their words that are bringing death and decay to their lives.

and you have other people who are eating the fruit of their words and they're enriched and they're blessed they're healthy they're prosperous they're peace we always want to blame somebody else

Holman is saying hey you've got to take accountability of your words right not nowhere does it say I can't find a scripture that says that we eat the fruit of somebody else's words. Just our own. Now, other people's words hurt us, they damage of, if they're spoken negatively.

And yes, we have to deal with that pain, but we don't have to eat it. Yes. You know, when you eat it, when your self-talk repeats. it. Yes. Ouch. That hurt, didn't it? When people are speaking negativity on you, condemnation, rejection, all kinds of

ugly stuff. They can't force you to eat the fruit. They're speaking it. They're the ones who are going to eat their fruit. The danger for you and me is that we repeat to ourselves in our quiet inner talk. We repeat the lies they said about it. And this affirms the doctrine of what we call reciprocity in God's divine order and his moral order. God's designed the universe in such a way that our actions and even our very words come back.

act honest, or what they would say is recoil upon the agent, the one who did it. And so when if we get in this first part here where it says satisfied, it can cut both ways. The wise person is satisfied with the fruit of his mouth, with more wisdom. But what about the fool? Well, he is also satisfied. He also gets his belly full, filled to capacity is what it means. Doesn't mean happy. It means you're all full up. And so both the wise can be all full up on love and wisdom, but the fool can also be all filled up as well on their foolishness. And so the lesson is really clear here that our speech, the words that we say, they require stewardship. They require careful control. We are co-creators of our own joy.

and our own misery, with our tongue. Doc, when you were a boy, did you ever eat an unripe green apple? Oh, my goodness, yes. And what happened? You spit it out. And so it looks so appetizing, too. That's the thing. It looks so appetizing.

But did you ever eat it, swallow it? Oh, yes. And then later on it got sick. You got stomach cramps. That's right. Maybe diarrhea. You had all kinds. kinds of problems. Okay, so you, one person could eat a nice, juicy, ripe red apple and

enjoy it. The other person eats an unripe, green apple, and both of them have their bellies full of apple. But one gets sick, and the other one thinks about how sweet the apple was. Yes. This is what it means about eating, having a belly full, being satisfied. Well, you ate it. You chose to eat it. And this says, and with the increase of his lips shall be filled. Solomon is now, he's extending this metaphor from fruit to increase, the harvest. Yes.

He's saying that there is a return on our words that is multiplied. So in business, we talk about an ROI return on investment. But Solomon is saying that there's an R-O-W. A return on words. A return on words. Boy, Doc, that's a left in itself, isn't it? What's your R-O-W? What's your R-O-W?

What's your return on words? So the message here is it just says one seed produces a stock with many grains. One word produces the, situation with lots of consequences good or bad you will eat with the increase of his lips shall be filled doesn't mean satisfied doesn't mean happy right it just says the return on your words will be a harvest that you will eat and it will fill and it will fill your belly whether you like it or not. It's neutral. You're going

to be filled with the fruit of your words. That's the increase. The increase of his lips. With the increase of his lips with the harvest, the return on the words, you shall be filled. You'll get your belly full. Right. I mean, there's a phrase that we use, Doc, about people, you know.

Well, he'll get his belly full of that stuff. Yes. Right. You'll change his mind after you get to a belly full of that person. We use that phrase. And I don't know if people really know what they're saying. You know, it's just kind of a everyday street saying, which you're just saying,

that person continues to act and talk that way. They're going to get a billy full of what they're saying. And then they might change their mind. So he says, shall be filled. It's talking about the totality of the experience that our lives are filled up with the results of our communication. Shall be filled up.

All right. Shall be filled. The ultimately, I mean, at the ultimate interpretation of this verse. To be filled with the increase of your lips is to arrive at the end of your life and see the accumulated impact of your words. That's right. And for the believer, we unrest in our words will be in Christ. For the unbeliever, they're going to give account for every idle word. Think about that. So it's going to draw out of your belly, all those words.

it's a sobering thought well doc let's check the commendators john gill yes john gill said a man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth quoting the proverb here said good words spoken with phrase return and blessings evil words return in grief and shame and it says a man's speech has seed sung which springs up and yields fruit suitable to the nature of the seed he and notice he distinguishes this this, he shall reap what he sows with his licks. And as I said, the wise, they're going to reap wisdom. I mean, they're sowing wisdom. They're going to reap it.

The foolish, they're sowing foolish word, guess what they're going to read. Foolishness. Right. Charles Bridges said, the tongue is a fruitful tree whose fruit returns into a man's own bosom. Let us then take care. what sort of fruit we produce. As our words are, so will be our satisfaction. Gracious words bring peace, corrupt words bring anguish.

He eats what he speak. Right. Spurgeon had this to say, a man shall eat the fruit of his own mouth. Spurgeon said, he cooks his own dinner with his tongue. If he speaks well, he shall eat well. If he speaks ill, he shall eat ill. Gee Campbell Morgan said A man's mouth is his garden

He eats his produce Speech is the seed plot of harvest Amen Knock all these Great old preachers You know They actually could fit on Modern Christian television

Radio today because There'd be people accusing them being a word of faith. Yes. They'd be accusing them of blabbit and grab it. That's right. And verse 21

is companion verse to this one. You really can't do verse 20 without verse 21, can you? No. King James, death and life were in the power of the tongue, and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof. The subtoogen says death and life

are in the power of the tongue, and they that rule it, shall eat the fruits thereof, almost identical. Solomon is saying, look, your tongue is more than a muscle in your mouth. It's an instrument. It's got powerful spiritual force. It's capable of releasing death or life. Amen.

We don't see it that way. What's coming out of our mouth is an energy that's either promoting death, or promoting life. Amen. Words can murder a reputation. Words can crush a spirit. Words can destroy a marriage.

Words also can heal a wound. Words can restore a soul. Words can save a life. So many souls, reputations, families, businesses, ministries, and dreams have either been murdered by mouth or blessed by mouse. Yes. There's the difference. You wonder what happened.

How did it go wrong? Somewhere there's a mouth. Somewhere there's a mouth that spoke death over a family, spoke death over a ministry, spoke death over a business, spoke death over somebody's reputation or you can look at somebody who's blessed and there's a mouth somewhere there's a mouth that's been blessing and blessing and blessing yes and same same same principle it cuts both ways yeah so i hope everybody's getting the understanding um that the tongue is a double-edged sword and doc in the tongue the tongue is a double-edged sword and doc the tongue is the

is swinging between heaven and hell. Constantly, yes. You know, James, you know, say, how can, how can you one minute you're blessing and the next minute you're cursing can't. And yet we do it.

We do it. And it doesn't take much to set us off. That's the thing that bothers me, though. It doesn't. take much to set us off. It's like we have, I think we got a bomb sitting in our inside our mouth. And the slightest incident lights the fuse. I mean, there's where we have to get control of ourselves. Like, what is it? We go back to that breach in the dam. It's that tiny breach that starts the division, the strife. It's that first crack in the dam.

right there's where we got to get the victory that we don't let that first crack happen because after it starts it's almost impossible to fix it and and there's going to be problems so avoid gossipers avoid slanderers avoid dividers avoid dividers to stay away from them They're going to poison you. And if they'll talk about somebody else behind your back, they'll talk about you behind your back. Absolutely. So avoid them.

And don't get that stink on you. And don't let them teach your tongue to speak contrary to the divine order of heaven. Constantly in 2026, as we go into this new year, be thinking about the divine order of heaven is what I'm saying, is what I'm thinking. is what I'm doing. Is it in alignment with the divine order of heaven? If it is, you're going to be blessed.

If it isn't, you're going to have trouble. So change what you think and what you say. And you will change what you're reaping. And when you change what you're reaping, you'll change what you're eating. It brings it home. It delivers it. You know, it's on our, it's on our, it's on our,

shoulders, or I should say it's in our mouth. Doc, let's jump down to the commentators, and we'll wrap it up here for today. I'll let you go first, John Gill. Yes, so John Gill says, A death and life are in the power of the tongue, quoting proverbs there, he can kill or it can cure. A man may destroy his own soul by the sins of his tongue, or he may save it by confessing Christ. They that love to use the tongue shall eat the fruit of it, either pleasant or bitter, Rick.

Charles Bridges said, what a fearful and what a blessed thought that death and life are in the power of the tongue. The tongue is a world of iniquity or a tree of life. Words are seeds which spring up into fruit that the speaker shall eat himself, whether for nourishment, or poison? Yes. Spurgeon said this, death and life are in the power of the tongue.

Speak accordingly. Many a man has been his own poisoner by his own talk. If you love the tongue, you shall eat the fruit of it. Then make sure that the fruit is sweet. And Pastor McLauren said

death and life were in the power of the tongue, the most tremendous power. The toker is his own cook and consumer he eats the fruit of his own lip yes you're cooking your own meal with your word you just think about that all day well we appreciate you being here with us uh on this um almost last lesson for 2025 i have been blessed thank you so much there is nothing i'm telling there's nothing I desire delaying more with the remainder of my life than teaching morning

man I thoroughly love it I enjoy it and I am grateful that God has given me this ministry he has sustained me he has blessed me I am grateful he's given Doc Burkhart as a teaching partner we work well together doc we've been through another year and it's it's been a been an amazing year and i hope all of you have been blessed i hope your lives have been blessed if we read the letters that are coming in people are giving us testimonies about what morning manna has done in their lives it's so encouraging and you know friday this friday will be our last lesson for 2025 we're going to go away for two weeks just take a break Um, I wish I could, I wish it would be a rest for me, but it won't.

I, so much I have to do to do, yes. I need the break to try to catch up. And then at the end of December, we're going to roll out Manna Nation. And then January 5th, we'll be back as Manna Nation. And Manna Nation is, that's the country where the Mannaites go, all right? And it would be fed. all right where the people who desire manna to be sustained and what their souls sustain with mana from heaven manna nation is where they live and our goal in 2026 is to enlarge the population

of manna nation amen tens of thousands of people will come and dwell at manna nation and be fed manna every day. And so I'm excited about what's happening. I thank you for being such wonderful students this year, motivating me to get up every day and prepare, knowing that there's going to be thousands of hungry miles at 8 a.m. wanting to be fed. Yes, amen. And that's been very motivating. Yes, and we're going to do it again tomorrow. Tomorrow's Thursday, and we'll be finishing up chapter 18 tomorrow. And then, of course, Faith Friday will be the last episode for the year, not the last episode of Morning Minute by no means, but the last one of the year. So we invite you to come back tomorrow morning, right and early, and receive another dose

from the Book of Proverbs tomorrow as we finish up chapter 18. Well, God bless you. We love you. Thank you for being here with us and spending time with us, studying the Word of God. And we would appreciate it if you would let others know about this as well. Right, Rick? Amen. Tell people invite them to the new Manna Nation. It will be available by January 1st, probably a couple days before in late December, invite them to become citizens of Manna Nation and dying every day on the Word of God. Praise God. We'll see you tomorrow. We love you. Bye-bye. Thank you.