The Reasonable Review
The Reasonable Review of the podcast that rewards your time.
Part 1: Introduction: To the Christian, by Christians
In a landscape flooded with watered-down Christian commentary, podcasts, books, conferences, and even preaching from our church pulpits, all of which tend to avoid, ignore, or distort the truthful realities of Scripture and their implications for Christian living, there is a standout option that offers intellectual and theological rigor. It will not waste your time and, dare I say, is perhaps the best and most reasonable option available.
If you are like me, your time is limited. The problem with limited time is that our world offers unlimited options to fill it. So, if you are going to spend any of your precious free time consuming media in the realm of Christian teaching, there are few better ways than through the Stone Choir (SC) podcast. If I had to summarize the entire purpose and content of this 108-episode series, I would say:
Stone Choir is one of the best podcast resources for forming serious Christians, created by serious Christians.
This seriousness is the show's key character quality. It stands alone amongst hundreds, if not thousands, of other Christian podcast opportunities because of its serious tone from its inception in 2022 to its conclusion in late 2025.
The two hosts of the podcast are Corey J. Mahler and Woe. It is Lutheran in its theological roots and focuses on historical and theological topics and their combined roles in our contemporary society. While I hold to the Reformed Confessions, there are, of course, alignment differences throughout the series becaust of this fact, but like any moment of challenge or disagreement, the way in which the topics were handled in tone and in clarity to allow me, as the listener, a fair reason to research, study, and sometimes question my understandings in a healthy manner before agreeing with them or arriving at my own conclusions.
The theological differences were one aspect of critique for me as I went through the series, but I also wrestled with the severity and urgency of the contemporary application at times. There are moments, upon reflection, that changed my mind about the stakes and consequences of the topics in each episode, and other times I was unconvinced and stayed the same, cemented in disagreement.
I will say, though, that their arguments always made me think and explore the topic even further on my own. Whether my mind was changed or not, I have a better, much more thorough understanding of each of the positions and topics I hold because of the rigor and clarity with which the information was presented.
As a teacher, this is the hope I have for my students, and it would be hypocritical and shameful if I did not hold to it myself.
I began listening to SC in early 2025, when the majority of their catalog had already been released. I listened to the then “new episodes” titled ‘Purpose and Motivation’ and ‘Excellence.’ Both of which are still standouts for me. It was from these two episodes that I decided to start from the beginning of the list and listen my way through. My delay in listening was partially due to the ‘boogeyman’ claims: this podcast was so grave an evil that most online figures would often talk about its supposed wickedness at every minute marker, while being too afraid to mention it by name or exactly what these all-encompassing areas of required avoidance actually were. Stone Choir, thus, is “that particular podcast”. The name that shall not be spoken. This is, of course, just silliness, and after listening through almost the entire catalog, that ‘boogeyman’ notoriety became more obviously untrue by the episode. A scare tactic among many such scare tactics of that variety, like the ever-popular fill-in-the-blank slur—ist, —ism, —obe, the scary reputation is really quite overblown and unnecessary.
My regular listening began with curiosity and grew into an interest in the topics at hand. While there are plenty of other individuals who tackle these issues and topics, the format and style are ones I felt most honored my limited free time and gave me the most information to chew on.
Thus, this review’s main thesis is focused on the style, structure, and delivery of the podcast's content, making it a great listening experience, especially for those with limited time who want to maximize their knowledge of contemporary issues in Christian culture and our society.
Is this the only option a Christian listener should indulge in? Certainly not, but it is good—actually quite good—in several ways, and should be considered one of the top choices if you are interested in Christian teaching and understanding of our times.
My following comments are intended to engage my readers with a reasonable approach, addressing both praise and critique when appropriate, to the most polarizing content creators on the Christian right.
Part 2: What is a Review? A Brief Note Before I Begin
Writing a podcast review is not particularly common. However, because SC has now ended, we can treat it differently from something that is continually ongoing. Their podcast ending allows us to shelf it and return to it like a great book or film, and thus requires a proper review for those who may be interested and to prevent this gold from collecting dust in the future.
I do not typically like precursors of any kind, but I will provide my three philosophies of reviewing here as I want readers to understand my approach in reviewing any subject of the arts, which is my universal standard and not exclusive to this blog post alone:
1. This review will be an overview of the entire catalog. I will not be going episode by episode, as each episode includes a written description.
2. This review describes the contents found in the 108 episodes of its discography alone. This includes the information presented in the episode and its delivery.
3. By number 2's nature, it is not an all-encompassing review of the two hosts, nor any extra written content, videos, blogs, social media posts, etc from them. When I say I am reviewing the podcast, well, that's a review of the podcast.
Regardless of the opinions or conclusions you or even I may hold about Mahler and Woe as individuals, the product they deliver in the podcast itself is the topic of this review, and, given that, my hope is to outline the podcast's attributes fairly.
Let’s begin.
Part 3: Precision: Uniqueness in Style, and a Podcast that is Art
Like any art form, and yes, podcasts are somewhat an art form, there are specific styles in which the “artists,” so to speak, of their content go about releasing their “art” or product.
That said, the style of the episodes is precise—so precise that in the well over 200 hours of content, I could count on one hand the number of times I heard 'ums' or pauses for banter or rabbit trails. As a teacher, I cannot emphasize how difficult public speaking can be at this level of excellence, a level I have not even remotely reached after a decade. This alone shows SC's goal of valuing your time and avoiding overwhelming the listener with endless minutes of filler or content unrelated to the episode's topic.
The entertainment forms we use to laugh or waste our time mindlessly are not among them.
The seriousness I mentioned in the introduction sets the mood, created by both hosts, the subject matter, and the application, often reflecting the hosts' strong sense of urgency to address these issues immediately and directly in our world. It’s this attention to detail and focus on staying on track with each episode’s topic that I appreciate most, which is why I started with this aspect of precision.
I should note that this style of communication may not suit everyone; very few things do. However, it's worth the effort for active listening. Speaking of which, some active listening is necessary to follow the episodes and, like most things, to fully grasp the substance offered. I will add that SC demands more active engagement than most other books or media I consume.
Like many who listen to audiobooks or podcasts, I use that format to do other tasks simultaneously. Personally, I consider myself an average multitasker, and even with that skill, I found the overload of information in the episodes requires close attention or a second listen, which I often did. Unlike most podcasts, there’s no banter normally found in introductions nor any rabbit trails unrelated to the topic, and even very few, but some moments of comic relief. No, in SC, there’s no appetizer to warm you up before the main course; the steak is presented from the first sentence to the last. It is a constant portion of protein from start to finish.
This steak weaves together historical outlines, dates, persons of interest, relevant connections, creeds, confessions, and Scripture verses that bolster the main arguments, often with additional verses supporting the primary Scripture. The episodes incorporate various elements to provide cultural and contemporary context and significance in application.
This approach cycles through individual episodes and the entire series intentionally and precisely, with careful attention to pauses between sentences. They frequently reference previous installments, with no randomness in order. Mahler and Woe often recall the relevance of past episodes in the context of current and upcoming ones.
The point is that SC's precision is highly deliberate, presenting a work of art through exceptional clarity, dedication to historical and Scriptural evidence, and direct application to contemporary life. This pattern is consistent in every episode, never breaking its structure or wasting the listener’s time.
Many podcasts are quite poorly produced, formatted, and delivered. When it comes to Christian podcasts, I believe SC deserves recognition as a top-tier podcast in the genre and, possibly, as the best example of how podcasting as an art form can be achieved at a high level, even beyond podcasts in the Christian category.
This is what distinguishes the podcast—its exact depth. Drawing from church fathers, history, data, and Scriptural exegesis, it builds arguments that are both scholarly and accessible to the average listener, teaching how to apply these insights from global politics to the inner workings of Christian families, churches, and communities. All of which is presented clearly and flows naturally from one episode to the next, creating, in the end, a massive library on the interworkings of Christian culture and living, unlike anything we have available to us thus far.
You may come away with occasional disagreements in the end, just as I have, but you’ll better understand your argument and the subject at hand supremely more because of listening. It is a unique yet tangible listening experience because it is a great work of media art.
Part 4: Content and Delivery: Cultural and Political Critique Through Scripture
Content: Addressing the Fly-Over Topics
As mentioned in the Introduction, no cultural topic is tiptoed around or ignored that needs to be addressed in this podcast. This includes the likes of feminism, abortion, sex crimes, race, IQ, nationalism, dismantling Dispensationalism, usury, historical events, popular figures such as MLK Jr. or Bonhoeffer, and even the very detailed Septuagint vs. Masoretic Text debate.
Speaking from the overall content throughout SC’s discography, there is a rather fair and balanced approach to each episode. The content is biblically grounded and offers listeners the opportunity to think categorically, as Paul did, for example, when discussing racial characteristics among the Creteans. This is not to say that Mahler and Woe are not biased towards a side, because they certainly are; they continually encourage listeners not to just take their word and to do their own research to back up their claims.
They presented topics on Jews, ranging from the history in Scripture to events and outcomes we are witnessing today, again using exegesis to lay out the reasons and points they are making. While this topic has grown in popularity today, I think it would be fair to say that they were among the first in the Christian teaching sphere to draw urgent attention to it.
Speaking of urgency, the content is always structured around an immediate call to action, done so in a way that instills certainty and complete conviction in its listeners. This is often a highlight of the episodes for me, but also contains moments and patterns to be aware of (more on this in Part 5 of my critiques).
One thing is certain when talking about SC’s content: Scripture is referenced constantly. Sometimes so much so that they intentionally overkill their opinions on matters with an outpouring of verses to help cement that their controversial takes are not based on their own volition. This character quality of the podcast should not be ignored: their obsession with biblical resources is a hallmark of the series.
The podcast's content is presented professionally and intelligently at the highest level. No topic is off limits, and is handled non-emotionally, and seeks to use Scripture and as many plausible extra resources to back any and every claim or opinion.
Every episode is worth your time. Seriously, you will get something out of each of them. Some I slightly favored over others, though one could make an argument for a completely different list of favorites than my own. Here is a list of my standout episodes. By 'standout,’ I mean the episodes that stuck with me the most, in both influence and challenge.
In no particular order:
- Ep. 3: “Christian Nationalism Is Submission to God” — 2022
Ep. 6 “Perspicuous and Vulgar: ON the Clarity of Scripture” — 2022
Ep. 7 “Through the Window: On Frame” — 2022
Ep. 8 “Neglected Matters: Shaking off the Dust, Usury, Woman and Work, Head Coverings” — 2022
Ep. 10 “Speaking the Truth Plainly” — 2023
Ep. 14 “The Enemy’s Playbook” — 2023
Ep. 19 “On Human Race: Racism” — 2023
Ep. 22 “On Women: Scripture and Ontology” — 2023
Ep. 24 “All Sins Are Not Equal” — 2023
Ep. 28 “Sweat the Small Stuff” — 2023
Ep. 32 & 33 “Michael ‘Martin Luther’ King: Arch-Heretic & Marxist Agitator” — 2023
Ep. 37 “The Big Lie” — 2023
Ep 43 “A Young Man’s Life” — 2023
Ep. 50 “Dispensing with Dispensationalism” — 2023
Ep. 53 “God’s Gifts, Man’s Duties” — 2023
Ep. 60 “Apostasy: — 2024
Ep. 61 “Galations 3:28” — 2024
Ep. 64 “Technology” — 2024
Ep. 71 “Leadership” — 2024
Ep. 76 “Confronting Sin” — 2024
Ep. 84 “ Land, Place, and Territory” — 2024
Ep. 88 & 89 “Honor and Shame” & “Honor and Loyalty” — 2024
Ep. 93 “Friend and Enemy” — 2025
Ep. 94 “The Magdeburg Confession” — 2025
Ep. 95 & 96 “Purpose and Motivation” & “Excellence” — 2025
Ep. 105 & 106 “The Septuagint — New Testament, Part 1 & Part 2” — 2025
Delivery: Calm and Clear
The episodes are fearless. Not because there is a harsh or aggressive attitude, if anything the episodes slide far down the calm and relaxing end of the scale in terms of tone and pacing, but even in its calm demeanor, SC gives a helpful guide in how to approach very electrically charged topics in a way that is not emotional, but does so relying on evidence, historical figures and research, and ultimately Scripture to do their convincing for them.
I have seen this classification and approach in their demeanor, and it is seen as negative by critics, who say they speak in ways that make them sound more reasonable than they actually are. That the very act of balanced and calm discussion is a subversive tactic to make the gullible listener believe their points.
Regarding this argument, I agree in principle but not in intent. What I mean is that while I acknowledge the calm and balanced manner of their delivery makes them more believable, it’s not because I’m being duped by the style. Instead, the delivery is so refreshingly clear that I can easily engage with the words, points, and evidence presented.
This is a rarity in academic work, of which I am included SC. So rare, in fact, my time isn’t spent merely trying to understand the argument before forming an opinion. Thanks to its clarity, SC is rarely confusing or ambiguous. This enables me as a listener to avoid constant pauses to decipher the message and instead focus on whether I agree with the points made.
The delivery lends itself for less distractions as a listener. I am not distracted by banter, jokes, or rabbit trails that suddenly change the topic. This delivery format allows the listener to fully engage with the content and, I believe, provides the most neutral tone possible for such controversial topics. The neutrality and even-temperedness of the hosts are not meant to convince you; they are an example of a mature way of handling long-form discussions on serious issues—allowing the content to shine all the more brightly and not be hindered by various forms of background noise. Either the arguments and facts will convince you, or they won’t. Those are the two options for delivering this content, and I wish more podcasts would adopt such an approach.
In the delivery, Mahler and Woe have preferences on the topics, which seems rather obvious, as we all do, but the calm, neutral tone does not equate to neutrality or balance on the topics. They present content with conviction, with a point of view, typically associated with historic Lutheranism. Both Mahler and Woe speak in similar ways, Mahler perhaps a bit more in an academic tone, and Woe in a more down-to-earth one. However, those patterns could easily be inverted depending on the episode, as they both offer an equal weight of historical, Scriptural, and practical application and knowledge.
Like any teacher, they present information they hope the student, in this case the listener, will consider and, hopefully, be persuaded by. On this note of persuasion, they often mention that they encourage listeners not to take their word at face value. Just because they said something doesn’t mean they're always right.
Again, what is present here is the idea of teaching listeners to think critically about these subjects. To do the hard work of researching for yourself, to ask tough questions, even if those questions go against what you previously had been taught or thought. It is the idea that you are allowed to disagree with them, but in doing so, they want you to be educated in your disagreement.
Part 5: My Critiques: Remember the Range of Consequences
As someone who has lived my life thus far primarily making and teaching visual art, I hold to the rule that no human creation is 100% perfect. This is, of course, God’s ability alone. However, as humans given creative authority and capacity, we can make great works, even if not perfect. While I categorize SC as a great work of art within the podcast genre, there are areas where I disagree with the content and its application consequences, and I encourage readers of this blog to consider them.
My purpose in this review is to provide a big-picture, overhead view of the podcast series. Regarding my disagreements, I will do likewise, as I understand most of the controversy arises from social media squabbles and posts, which I honestly do not know enough about to comment on. What I do know is the content of the podcast episodes, as that is what I have listened to and given my time to, and thus what is being reviewed and now critiqued.
While there were moments in individual episodes, as I hinted at previously, where I disagreed with the doctrine and its application, my main disagreement and critique lie in the consequences presented in many episodes if one fails to believe the points made.
This sentiment was along the lines of warning listeners about potential hellfire and damnation if they landed on the wrong side of certain issues. A quick note of fairness, this was not the claim in every episode, but it was recurring enough throughout the series to mention as a warning to listeners to be aware of and know that, despite my heavy disagreements with that sentiment in a lot of cases throughout the entirety of the podcast, they certainly made me think.
While I believe the warning of hell to be true for many doctrinal and potentially some cultural issues, like advocating and supporting abortion, I do not see every topic that receives this warning at such an ultimate level as Mahler and Woe present. I agree with them that landing wrongly on many of these cultural and societal issues will have consequences, often severe ones, but I do not believe the consequences are matters of eternal life and death in the majority of cases, unless it involves a denial of God’s essential doctrines in Scripture.
As stated previously, this is not always the tone or end determination of all the episodes; they do leave plenty of room for personal research, but the sentiment is present and recurring enough to address for listeners to pay attention to, and in SC fashion, do the work required to determine where you stand on the severity of the consequences presented.
I see their determination of the consequences is what prevents some parties from engaging in their content. The fixation, at least it appears to me from afar, is hyper-focused on these eternal consequences, which then creates a reason for folks not to engage honestly with the content being presented, which is presented quite well. My hope with this sentiment is to acknowledge that this aspect of disagreement may be present for you, but it should not be an insurmountable hill to climb. There is a great valley of wealth and value over that hill for you to enjoy and collect.
My advice to readers and listeners of the podcast is the same metric I use for any book or educational form I partake in:
1. Do not take every word for fact at face value; we are all infallible and capable of error (Mahler and Woe also direct viewers to do the same).
2. Check for yourself, do the homework on things you are questioning or unsure about. You can still enjoy a Christian podcast even if you do not agree with 100% of it. I do not think there is a single instance of any Christian media or denomination with which I am fully on board in every possible avenue of thought and application.
3. Finally, arrive at the conclusion you see as accurate based on that homework and studying of Scripture, the confessions, or whatever necessary texts and documents fit the topic at hand.
Part 6: Final Thoughts: Why Stone Choir Deserves Your Time
I see three objectives this podcast has set out to achieve. They are:
1. Stone Choir is meant to convert the right-wing pagan into a born-again Christian.
2. Stone Choir is meant to convict the mediocre Christian who may be backsliding.
3. Stone Choir is meant to challenge the mature Christian to know more deeply what they claim to believe and to act on it accordingly.
This is a podcast that will attack your sentiments, regardless of which of the three positions you reside in currently. This is the feature I wish to close with—SC has an immense range. It has something for everyone in the truest sense of that overused phrase. Regardless of where you find yourself in life, in your Christian or non-Christian walk, it assaults NPC programming, which all of us have in some capacity. All while doing so in a manner that values the listener’s time, unlike any other Christian podcast I have come across.
The range of SC is not limited to just Christians, nor to atheists, nor to false idol worshipers seeking the truth, nor even to Christian denominational lines, but it has a remarkably wide net of listeners with the goal of creating Christians who aren't afraid of asking the tough questions as they seek to impact their lives through lots of critical thinking, encouragement of self-research, and through the knowledge and presentational delivery of the podcast itself.
Stone Choir challenges complacency by making you nervous, possibly angered, and even potentially bored (through its soothing delivery). Yet, it always prompts you to think critically and presents a challenge to study further or recognize a need to overcome in your Christian convictions. There are hundreds of hours of content to listen to, wrestle with, and grow in some capacity from your current starting point. Each episode is a standout in some capacity and is worth your time investment, down to the last minute of airtime.
If you are a serious Christian with limited free time for media consumption and consider my critiques and drawbacks, I believe Stone Choir is one of the best Christian podcasts for our age. Its style, depth of content, and clarity of delivery place it among the highly successful, exemplary works of art in this genre. One that will be recognized, I believe, much like a great novel, for decades to come.
Plus, who doesn’t love the synth version of the opening “O the Deep, Deep Love of Jesus”? I think I will conclude here, as I now need to hum the tune continuously.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Rating: 4.8— Classic
Rating Scale:
5.0 — Classic
4.5 — Superb
4.0 — Excellent
3.5 — Great
3.0 — Good
2.5 — Average
2.0 — Poor
1.5 — Very Poor
1.0 — Awful