The World and Everything in It: January 15, 2026

Editor's note: The following text is a transcript of a podcast story. To listen to the story, click on the arrow beneath the headline above.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning!

Today, the British Parliament considers legalizing assisted-suicide, against staunch opposition.

WILLIAMS: You would think that this is a bill about preventing suffering at the end of life. But that’s not actually what’s in the bill.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Also, new dietary guidelines serve up a fresh round of debate.

And why classical architecture is making a comeback.

TATE: We wanted to get into a space that kind of reflected what we're doing.

And WORLD Opinions Editor Albert Mohler.

REICHARD: It’s Thursday, January 15th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

BROWN: And I’m Myrna Brown. Good morning!

REICHARD: Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Iran latest » Conflicting reports today about a violent crackdown by Iran’s government on protesters there.

President Trump on Wednesday said he had it on good authority that Iran would not be executing demonstrators.

TRUMP:  We've been told that the killing, uh, in Iran is stopping and it's stopped. It's stopping, and, uh, there's no plan for executions.

And in an interview with Fox News last night, Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi called claims about protester deaths "baseless." He said his country is not executing peaceful protesters:

ARAGCHI: Hanging is out of the question, as I said.

He claimed Israeli intelligence is the real culprit, claiming the Israelis infiltrated the protests to incite violence.

But human rights groups say the death toll from Iran’s protest crackdown now numbers in the thousands a scale far too great to be explained by Iran’s claims of Israeli involvement. And some observers say the violence against demonstrators is not slowing down.

Israel/Gaza phase-2 » The United States says the ceasefire it brokered in Gaza is now moving into its second phase. WORLD’s Benjamin Eicher reports:

BENJAMIN EICHER: President Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, made the announcement on Wednesday.

Officials say the next steps focus on disarming Hamas and rebuilding Gaza.

It also calls for a group of Palestinian experts to run daily affairs in Gaza, under U.S. oversight.

But major challenges remain. First and foremost: There’s no evidence that Hamas has actually agreed to lay down its weapons.

And reconstruction will be a massive project. U.N. estimates put the price tag at about $50 billion dollars.

For WORLD, I’m Benjamin Eicher.

Venezuela Senate vote » The U.S. Senate last night voted down a resolution that sought to limit President Trump’s authority to conduct another military strike in Venezuela without consent from Congress.

Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote on a measure to dismiss that resolution.

VANCE:  On this vote, the ye are 50, the nays are 50. The Senate being equally divided. The vice president votes affirmative, and the point of order is sustained.

That came after two GOP senators who previously voiced support for the resolution reversed course.

Senators Todd Young and Josh Hawley changed their minds after Secretary of State Marco Rubio promised a public hearing and pledged that the president would seek congressional approval before any major military action, if circumstances allow.

Trump speaks with acting Venezuelan president » But President Trump, for his part, says, he doesn’t foresee that.

He said of Venezuela's new leader Delcy Rodriguez:

TRUMP:  We just had a great conversation today, and she's a terrific person. I mean, she's somebody that we've worked with very well. Marco Rubio is dealing with, I dealt with her this morning. We had a call, a long call. We discussed a lot of things, and I think we're getting along very well with Venezuela.

Officials say the two countries are now talking about restoring diplomatic ties and reopening embassies.

And Venezuela has begun releasing some detained U.S. citizens, a gesture Washington welcomed as a positive step forward.

Both sides are exploring cooperation on oil, trade and security issues.

Greenland and Denmark officials meet at White House » Denmark says it still has a major disagreement with President Trump over Greenland, following talks at the White House on Wednesday.

Greenland’s foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, met with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. She said Denmark and Greenland made their limits clear but want continued cooperation.

MOTZFELDT:  That doesn't mean that we want to be owned by a United State, but, uh, as allies, how we can strengthen our corporation. It's all our interest.

President Trump did not attend the meeting, but later repeated his view that the United States needs Greenland. He said if the United States doesn’t take possession of it, Russia or China will.

But Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who also attended the meeting said threats from the likes of Russia or China is why the NATO alliance exists.

RASMUSSEN: We have been working within NATO toward stronger collective security in Greenland, together with greater proximity to allies. And we are genuinely committed to working with the USA to advance this agenda.

Denmark announced it will increase military activity in the Arctic, working with NATO allies.

The two sides agreed to form a working group to keep talks going.

State Dept pausing visas » The U.S. State Department says it will pause immigrant visa processing for citizens of 75 countries starting next Wednesday. WORLD’s Paul Butler reports.

PAUL BUTLER: The State Department says the pause will remain in place while it reviews and updates its vetting procedures.

Officials say they want to ensure they’re not allowing in immigrants who will rely on taxpayer funded public assistance.

The pause applies only to immigrant visas, which are used for permanent residence. It does not affect tourist, student, or business visas.

Those temporary visas account for most travel to the U.S. and demand is expected to rise ahead of major international events hosted by the country later this decade.

The affected countries are mostly located in Africa and Asia as well as Latin America and the Caribbean region.

For WORLD, I’m Paul Butler.

I'm Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: British lawmakers consider legalizing assisted suicide. Plus: debate surrounding new government dietary guidelines.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Thursday the 15th of January.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Myrna Brown.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

First up: A question of life and death.

A bill in Britain could allow doctors to assist in ending the lives of people who have terminal illnesses.

BROWN: Debated since 2024, the End of Life bill has divided Parliament and the public. The outcome is still uncertain.

WORLD associate correspondent Claire Wilkerson traveled to England for the story.

CLAIRE WILKERSON: In 2022, Allison Fenner was diagnosed with a terminal illness. Soon after she traveled to Switzerland to find a doctor willing to help end her life.

Her daughter, Catie, found out about her mother’s suicide in a text message.

CATIE FENNER: For some people, the thought of a painful death or a death that's out of your control and undignified is just absolutely horrendous. It was for my mum.

For her, the Terminally Ill Adults Bill, also called the End of Life bill, is personal.

Since her mother’s death, Catie has become a champion of the bill. She says it would give people the freedom to choose how they die.

FENNER: Death is inevitable. For all of us, we are going to die.

If passed, the bill will allow people over the age of 18 to request assisted suicide, with strict conditions. They must have only six months left to live, and two doctors must approve them for the procedure. They also must face a panel including a psychiatrist, a senior legal figure, and a social worker.

For Fenner and the bill’s supporters, assisted suicide is about choice. They call it “radical autonomy.”

ALITHEA WILLIAMS: They are saying, this is about autonomy. It's about people given a choice …

Alithea Williams is the Public Policy Manager at the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. She says the bill sets a dangerous precedent, and that “radical autonomy” bears close similarities to the pro-abortion phrase, “my body, my choice.”

WILLIAMS: And I suppose what I mean by radical is that it's not describing the world as it really exists.

Williams sympathizes with stories like Catie’s. But she believes the language of the bill won’t protect the most vulnerable, like low income families without access to good palliative care.

WILLIAMS: You would think that this is a bill about preventing suffering at the end of life, which is a noble goal, even if we don't agree with the methods. But that's not actually what's in the bill.

Williams says ultimately, the bill serves to push “radical autonomy” rather than actually help people with terminal illnesses.

WILLIAMS: The bill doesn't have any mention of suffering. It doesn't have any mention of pain, it's just about autonomy, which doesn't really work, because if it's about autonomy, then why six months? Why any restriction at all?

The bill has widespread support from the public, with one recent poll finding that 75% of respondents support the legislation. Still, it faces strong opposition from members of Britain’s upper chamber.

NIGEL BIGGAR: It is a mess …

Nigel Biggar is a member of the House of Lords. He’s also a former Christian ethicist at Oxford University. Biggar is a vocal critic of the bill, and anticipates that it could turn families against each other.

BIGGAR: I fear that once assisted suicide becomes available on the principle of radical autonomy, where teenagers could choose assisted suicide in defiance of their parents, we end up with a society that becomes indifferent to choices.

Biggar fears the bill will corrode social norms, destroying an already unstable public understanding of what it means to be human.

BIGGAR: I think the result, long term, cultural result, is gradually devaluing of the lives of afflicted human beings and increasing carelessness about it, and people who who cling on to their lives in adverse circumstances and require the help of other people, then become regarded as burdens. And that seems to me to be a more inhumane society, and I don't want it.

Assisted dying for terminally ill people is already legal in 9 other European countries. It’s also legal in Canada, and 12 U.S. states.

Margaret Adams is a Christian Ethicist at the University of Oxford’s St. Stephen’s House. She disagrees with the premise of the bill, but sees it as an opportunity for Christians to offer a better vision of end of life care. One that discourages people from assisted suicide.

MARGARET ADAMS: The primary reason for people wanting to pursue something like assisted dying is not present pain and suffering, but fear of pain and suffering. And I think fear is something we can work with, which is not to say that fears might be wrong, but there are definite ways to care for and be present with people who are afraid.

The House of Lords will sit for 9 more debates to address the record number of proposed amendments from opponents. If the Lords can’t reach a resolution by the end of the Parliamentary session in the spring, the bill will fail. If that happens, Adams says the discussion likely won’t end there.

ADAMS: It's a recognizable idea to most people, that it is possible, or should be possible, to be able to have control over choice about how you die. So if this bill doesn't pass, another one will before too long.

… leaving more opportunities for Christians to advance conversations about end of life care in the future.

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Claire Wilkerson in Oxford.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Up next: what to eat.

For decades, the federal government told Americans to avoid eating fat, load up on grains, and trust the experts.

Meanwhile, rates of obesity and chronic disease soared. Type 2 diabetes spiraled up. High blood pressure, fatty liver…illnesses linked to what’s known as metabolic syndrome became commonplace.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Last week, the federal government released the new 2025-2030 U.S. Dietary Guidelines, put out by two agencies: the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture.

REICHARD: Depending upon who you ask, it’s either overdue progress or the same old, same old with some new mistakes thrown in. And it’s important to remember that this is a policy document, not a scientific paper.

I spoke to three experts who approach nutrition from different angles. Two think the new guidelines are a real improvement. One sees little meaningful change.

Dr. Bret Scher is a cardiologist and medical director for the Coalition for Metabolic Health. He wasn’t involved with creating the guidelines, but says the guidelines move in a better direction.

SCHER: I think the overarching, main message is focus on real food and whole foods, which shouldn't be all that revolutionary, but kind of is in the guidelines…

The guidelines say to eat fewer refined grains, less added sugar, and most critically, more protein. Past guidelines recommended 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. A kilogram is roughly two pounds. So, for a 150 pound person, that’s 55 grams of protein a day. Roughly a large chicken breast or a big can of tuna.

Scher calls that the very minimum just to prevent deficiency.

That resonates with PhD nutritionist and researcher Nina Teicholz.

TEICHOLZ: There is quite a lot to celebrate in these guidelines. There has long been a move in the scientific community arguing that for optimal health, much more protein is needed.

Dr. Scher says a bigger shift is the acknowledgment that one-size-fit-all diets don’t work. This is the first time the guidelines explicitly recognize metabolic dysfunction; things like insulin resistance, obesity, type 2 diabetes…and state that low-carbohydrate diets work for people with those conditions.

Older guidelines were for “healthy” Americans. And there are fewer of those these days:

SCHER: You know, there are studies showing that 93% of Americans have sub optimal metabolic health. So if you're only making a guideline for that 7% of people, that part really never made a whole lot of sense to me.

Teicholz says past guidelines relied on weak evidence. But this time, she says, something unusual happened:

TEICHOLZ: Never before has the agency completely rejected the scientific report put together by the official Dietary Guideline Advisory Committee. That's the expert group that is appointed every five years to review the science and make recommendations. The recommendations from that report were wholesale rejected by HHS. That is unprecedented.

Instead, HHS put together a separate group of scientists who conducted fresh systematic reviews. Those reviews helped form the final changes.

TEICHOLZ: …so these were not just picked out of thin air. I mean they were supported by rigorous evidence.

She also says transparency around conflicts of interest improved this go round. Several members of the panel receive money from beef, dairy and other food industry groups. That invites scrutiny, particularly from proponents of plant-based nutrition.

Dr. Joel Kahn is one of those–he’s a preventive cardiologist who sees the guidelines differently. He agrees that Americans eat too much ultra-processed food. But he doesn’t think the guidelines represent a great breakthrough. He says everyone agrees on the acronym spelled c-r-a-p:

KAHN: ….stands for calorie rich and processed C, R, A, P ….5:10 not at all new, is to cut back added sugar….Stop eating so much garbage food, start cooking real food at home. There's nothing really new about it.

He would like to see more of a focus on plant-based proteins. Things like beans, lentils, legumes, whole grains that are associated with lower rates of heart disease, cancer, and kidney disease.

KAHN: I've never in my life, as a very nutrition- educated cardiologist, measured exactly how many grams per day of protein. I know I'm not protein deficient. I can lift weights, I can exercise, and my lab values are exceptionally good, but I do it by beans and peas and lentils and leafy greens and whole grains.

Red meat and saturated fat sharply divide nutrition experts, as do the benefits of animal versus plant proteins.

But those debates aside, Scher, Teicholz, and Kahn say prior guidelines failed Americans and are at least partially to blame for increased obesity and chronic disease. So why trust them now?

SCHER: I think maybe one of the reasons you can trust it, is because we sort of saw what happened with the old guidelines….And so even if it didn't directly cause it, it certainly led to the environment that contributed to it. And so how do you fix that? Well, you reverse it, you undo it. And that's what this, these new guidelines are doing.

So, where does this leave the average American? All three experts agree we eat way too much ultra-processed food; we should reduce added sugar; and cook real food at home more often.

And in a country where metabolic disease is the norm, maybe it’s a good thing the debate’s out in the open.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: You know the phrase, “Monkey see, monkey do.”

But the last few days in one Saint Louis neighborhood have been more like, “See monkey, what to do?!”

AUDIO: Who opened the Jumanji book? What's going on right now?

The city started getting reports last week about small monkeys on the streets Exotic Vervet monkeys, originally from Africa!

The city swung into action, putting out public calls for help, all to no avail.

Compounding the problem: a skeptical public.

Audio from Fox 2 in St. Louis.

AUDIO: I thought it was a joke. I thought it was a viral joke that was going on.

And some fake, AI-generated images of the animals didn’t help either.

Officials say the monkeys are intelligent and unpredictable. In other words: they’ve outsmarted their pursuers at this point.

It’s The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Wednesday, January 15th. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day.

Good morning. I’m Myrna Brown.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

Coming next on The World and Everything in It: a revival of classical architecture.

Growing numbers of American parents are sending their children to classical schools in a search for truth, beauty and goodness.

In turn, the schools want physical surroundings that reflect those values.

BROWN: To them, rolling back the bad ideas of the 1960s and 1970s also means rolling back that era’s ugly architecture.

WORLD senior writer Emma Freire has the story.

EMMA FREIRE: Washington D.C. is full of modern architecture.

PBS: Everything in L’enfant plaza is this stacked layering of infrastructure. So you have buildings on top but then there’s a parking garage, freeway on-ramps, and below all of that, the metro system.

The Cold War ushered in the Brutalist style to the city—seen with the FBI headquarters and of course the entire metro system.

But that may start to change.

TRUMP: Well, we want to see beautiful buildings.

In August, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Making Federal architecture beautiful again.” It requires that federal buildings in Washington be built in the classical style when possible.

TRUMP: It’s just a standard. We want to have a good standard.

Many people in the classical education movement agree with him. Jeremy Wayne Tate is one of them. He’s the founder and CEO of the Classic Learning Test . … a classical alternative to the SAT and ACT. His organization works out of the Pinkney Callahan house in historical downtown Annapolis, Maryland. It’s a red-brick building in the Georgian architectural style.

TATE: It was built during the American Revolution, early 1780s, and it's been, it's been a joy.

Classical education has made a comeback in recent years. One study found that between 2019 and 2023, over 260 new classical schools launched nationwide.

The Pinkney Callahan house provides a nice work environment for Tate and his staff. But it’s more than that.

TATE: We wanted to get into a space that kind of reflected what we're doing. Physical space communicates so much.

Tate believes our culture’s turn away from classical education went hand-in-hand with rejecting classical architecture.

TATE: The turn in architecture really began in the early 1960s. You look at especially churches. Churches built before 1960 tend to be beautiful and done in the old style. Churches built in the 70s: it's like, ‘what happened there?’

It’s during this same time period that there was a move away from classical education and toward secular, progressive education.

TATE: So I find it amazing that all of the great cathedrals, with no exceptions, were built by architects who had received themselves a classical education.

ARNN: So our central campus is two quads…

Larry Arnn is the president of Hillsdale College in Michigan. He’s making classical architecture on campus a priority.

ARNN: Everything in it is going to be harmonious with everything else and in the classical style, and that should be finished in two years - round numbers. The major things are under construction now.

Under Arnn’s leadership, Hillsdale opened a chapel designed by architect Duncan Stroik and inspired by the English church, St. Martin-in-the-Fields.

CHOIR: I was glad when they said unto me we will go

It was dedicated in 2019 with a large ceremony featuring music from the college choir. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke during the dedication and pointed out why the building itself matters.

THOMAS: The chapel's enduring beauty highlights the transcendence, the sovereignty, and the grace of God. It truly illustrates how architectural design can reflect the character of God and evoke a sense of reverence for his majesty.

Arnn also takes his inspiration from Hillsdale’s original building, Central Hall, which was dedicated in 1853.

ARNN: It is built in a development on the Federalist style, which is a development on the classical style. And the campus looked like that, that whatever was on the campus was harmonious with that.

But just like in D.C., the 1960s and 70s saw the addition of modern buildings to Hillsdale’s campus. Arnn is working to get rid of them.

He stresses that classical architecture doesn’t have to mean white columns and marble buildings. He believes classical architecture has three main components. A building must fit a human scale, it has to function for the activities that will happen inside it. And it has to harmonize with its location.

ARNN: It actually is a form of obedience. And it's not right because I say it's right. It's right because it's right in proportion and function and appearance

But it comes at a steep cost. Hillsdale spent 28.5 million dollars on the chapel. And many fledgling K-12 classical schools don’t have anywhere near that kind of budget. They have to take whatever facility they can afford.

ARNN: It’s a new movement, it is growing very fast. They don't have the dough. One of the best classical schools is in what used to be a Kroger's and there’s the shopping malls going broke. I bet there'll be classic classical schools growing up in those. Well, you do what you can do, right? But they would be improved if they had themselves a classy building.

Arnn is happy to see more people share his passion for classical architecture. And he’s hopeful for the future.

ARNN: You wouldn't sacrifice the ability to continue for it. But we're here to learn beautiful things, and it's better to do that in a beautiful atmosphere

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Emma Freire in Annapolis, Maryland.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

Just one day after the Supreme Court heard arguments over whether states may reserve women’s sports for women, a hearing on Capitol Hill produced a viral moment between a Senator and a physician.

That moment revealed how difficult it remains—even for experts, maybe especially for experts—to answer basic biological questions.

BROWN: Here’s WORLD Opinions editor Albert Mohler.

ALBERT MOHLER: Can men get pregnant? Can you believe such a question would ever be asked in a Senate hearing? Can you imagine that a doctor would refuse to answer the question?

If you have been paying attention to our continuing cultural breakdown, perhaps you can imagine such astounding nonsense. But, thanks to a U.S. Senate hearing yesterday, you don’t even have to use your imagination. You can just watch the insanity unfold.

In a hearing held by the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on the safety of chemical abortion drugs, Sen. Josh Hawley asked Dr. Nisha Verma, an obstetrician, a very simple question: “Can men get pregnant?” But, astoundingly, Dr. Verma would not answer the senator’s question.

NISHA VERMA: I'm not really sure what the goal of the question …

SEN. JOSH HAWLEY: Goal is just to establish a biological reality. You just said a moment ago that science and evidence should control, not politics. So let's just test that proposition, can men get pregnant?

VERMA: I take care of people with many identities, but …

HAWLEY: Can men get pregnant?

VERMA: … many women that can get pregnant. I do take care of people that don't identify as women that …

HAWLEY: Can, can men get pregnant?

VERMA: Again, as I'm saying …

HAWLEY: Let me just, let me just remind you, you testified to a moment ago. Science and evidence should control, not politics. So should, can men get pregnant? You're a doctor, I think.

VERMA: Science and evidence should guide medicine. I …

HAWLEY: Do science and evidence tell us that men can get pregnant? Biological men, can they get pregnant?

VERMA: I also think, yes/no questions like this are a political tool.

HAWLEY: No, yes/no questions are about the truth, Doctor, let's not make a mockery of this proceeding. …

The exchange continued another three and a half minutes but it signals nothing less than the fall of a great civilization. Dr. Verma is a physician, a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist, and an adjunct associate professor at Emory University. She is also a fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and a practicing physician. She is also an abortionist, working with Planned Parenthood, and she appeared before the Senate committee as a fellow of Physicians for Reproductive Health, which is straightforwardly pro-abortion.

Dr. Verma was determined not to answer Sen. Hawley’s question, which could easily have been answered by a first-grader. The exchange between the senator and the physician reveals the utter corruption of modern medicine that has been driven by two horrifying agendas—abortion rights and the LGBTQ revolution. In this single exchange, both of these agendas, mutually driven by the Culture of Death, combine into one agonizing lesson in modern insanity. An obstetrician-gynecologist, highly qualified and associated with a major medical school, refused to say whether men can get pregnant. None of this makes the slightest sense until you insert the issues of abortion and transgender ideologies.

The entire abortion-rights movement wants to insist that an unborn baby isn’t a baby, and the transgender revolution now wants to insist that a man can have a baby. When Dr. Verma referred to “the complex experiences of my patients” and patients “that don’t identify as women,” she is just parroting the transgender and non-binary line.

We do need to take notice of one interesting dimension to the physician’s gynecological and moral insanity: She did not have the courage to come out and answer Sen. Hawley’s question directly. If Dr. Verma is so committed to the new gender ideologies that she would make herself look like an absolute idiot before a national audience, why didn’t she just come out and answer Sen. Hawley directly by saying, “Yes, Senator, men can get pregnant.”

The answer is simple and important. The gender ideologies are absolute insanity, and even those who push them know it. Thus, the doctor made herself appear clueless about basic biology because she is committed to a radical worldview, driven by personal autonomy, individual liberation, and identity politics—and now by the cowardly corruption of the medical profession. But there is something far more basic than ideology, whatever its form, and that is reality—biological reality. Here’s reality: A human baby is never going to pass through a male pelvis. Never. Not a chance. A man is never going to develop eggs and a woman is never going to develop sperm. Not a chance.

The Senate hearing yesterday should serve as an alarm that we are now reaching terminal cultural insanity. We have now some of the nation’s smartest people saying some of the stupidest things ever spoken. We need leaders who will follow the example of Sen. Hawley and press the questions, unceasingly. We need to reveal the insanity for what it is—a determined effort to subvert creation order, biological fact, and moral sanity. We are a culture on the brink of disaster, and this recent Senate hearing just makes that undeniably clear. If this kind of insanity goes on, America is doomed.

For WORLD, I’m Albert Mohler.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Tomorrow: Maria Baer will be here for Culture Friday. And, Max Belz will have some film noir recommendations. That and more tomorrow.

I’m Mary Reichard.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: And I’m Myrna Brown.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

Matthew records this about Jesus: “When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.’”—Matthew 9:36–38

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.