Podcasts about amounts

Simon's live update for Henry Riley's Sunday afternoon programme on the UK's LBC.

Navigate life's pressure-cooker moments with ease! Join our empowering session designed to guide you through the maze of intense stress. It's all too common to feel swamped by life's demands, losing sight of clarity. But, the secret weapon? Mastery of mindful, deep breathing. Unlock the power to remain calm and collected. #StressManagement #MindfulBreathing #ClarityThroughChaos #PeaceUnderPressureSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/find-your-daily-calm/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Lori Nikkel of Second Harvest on how to change "Best Before" attitudes to save huge amounts of food in Canada.

US President Donald Trump has rejected Iran's response to peace talks as tensions rise ahead of his trip to China, while global powers prepare military plans to restore trade routes through the Strait of Hormuz. CNA938's Daniel Martin speaks with James M. Dorsey, Adjunct Senior Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse dive deep into Matthew 21:33-46, examining Jesus's parable of the wicked tenants. The hosts unpack how Christ masterfully draws the Pharisees into pronouncing their own condemnation, revealing not merely theological error but intentional usurpation of God's authority. Through careful exegesis, they explore the shocking setup of the parable—where the landowner does all the work while the tenants contribute nothing—and how this mirrors God's sovereign initiative in salvation. The discussion touches on confession, the value of full-time ministry, and the scandal of rejecting the Messiah despite recognizing His authority. This episode challenges listeners to examine whether they, like the Pharisees, attempt to claim God's work as their own. Key Takeaways God Does All the Verbs: The parable emphasizes that the landowner planted, built, protected, and prepared everything—the tenants contributed nothing yet claimed ownership of the fruit. Self-Pronounced Condemnation: Jesus draws the Pharisees into declaring their own judgment, demonstrating that even the unregenerate conscience bears witness to divine justice (Romans 2). Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error: The Pharisees weren't well-intentioned but misguided; they recognized Christ's authority as the heir and deliberately murdered Him to seize His inheritance. The Scandal of Grace: The parable's shocking element is that the landowner prepared everything before leasing the land—far exceeding normal agricultural arrangements and illustrating God's unmerited favor. Ecclesial Support for Ministry: The OPC presbytery's decision to fund a full-time call demonstrates how church structure can honor the ministry of Word and sacrament by freeing ministers from worldly distractions. Particular Repentance Matters: Westminster Confession 15.5 teaches that believers should not content themselves with general repentance but "endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly." The Stone Rejected Becomes Chief: Christ's citation of Psalm 118 reveals that the very rejection by the builders (religious leaders) was God's plan to establish the cornerstone of salvation. Key Concepts God Does All the Verbs The concentration of action verbs attributed solely to the landowner in Matthew 21:33 is theologically significant. The landowner plants, builds, digs, and rents—creating a fully functional, productive vineyard before the tenants ever arrive. This arrangement differs radically from typical first-century agricultural practices, where tenants would lease raw land and develop it themselves, sharing profits with the landowner. Jesus deliberately presents an extraordinary scenario where the tenants receive everything prepared and ready, requiring only stewardship of what already exists. This parallels God's sovereign initiative in election and salvation: believers contribute nothing to their standing before God, receiving instead a fully accomplished redemption. The Pharisees' rebellion wasn't against burdensome requirements but against simply acknowledging God's rightful ownership of what He alone created. Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error The hosts challenge the common sympathetic reading of the Pharisees as well-intentioned legalists who simply got sidetracked. Instead, verse 38 reveals the tenants explicitly recognize the son as heir and plot to murder him to "seize his inheritance." This isn't accidental rejection but calculated rebellion. The Pharisees weren't confused about Jesus's identity or authority—they understood precisely who He claimed to be and deliberately chose to destroy Him rather than submit. This interpretation carries significant weight for understanding the nature of unbelief: it's not primarily intellectual confusion but volitional rebellion. The religious leaders didn't need more evidence or clearer teaching; they needed transformed hearts. This same dynamic appears whenever humans recognize divine truth yet choose self-sovereignty over submission to God's rightful claim on their lives. The Scandal of Grace The parable begins with a scandalous premise that would have startled Jesus's original audience. Unlike normal tenant farming arrangements where landowners simply provided land in exchange for a share of whatever the tenants produced through their own labor, this landowner invests everything. He doesn't just own the property—he plants the vineyard, constructs the protective wall, digs the wine press for production, and builds the watchtower for defense. The tenants receive a turnkey operation requiring minimal effort. This extravagant preparation mirrors God's unmerited favor toward Israel and, by extension, the church. God didn't merely create humanity and wait to see what we would produce; He established covenants, sent prophets, preserved His Word, and ultimately sent His Son—all before requiring any response. The only "payment" demanded is acknowledging His ownership of what He created. The parable thus exposes the absurdity and ingratitude of claiming God's work as our own achievement. Memorable Quotes God does all the verbs. All of the verbs are done by the landowner. There is nothing expected of these tenants—they really add nothing to the landowner's land. Christ is not painting the Pharisees as well-intentioned but ultimately wrong. He's painting them as usurpers who recognize the proper authority and rather than submitting to it, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own. Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man's duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (Westminster Confession 15.5) Transcript Welcome to episode 491 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.  [00:01:12] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.  [00:01:17] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.  [00:01:18] Parable of Tenants [00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picture this, Tony, your landlord. You've built the perfect vineyard. We're talking wall watchtower, wine, press, the works like what everybody says. Everybody knows you need all those things. You've got it all set up, and then you hand the keys to some tenants. You take a long trip, you go enjoy yourself. And when the harvest rolls around, you send your servants to collect the rent. And shockingly, your tenants, they beat. Stone. Another, the kill a third. So naturally you think, you know what? I'll fix this. Lemme just send more people. That's obviously the problem. There's some kind of just profound misunderstanding about what's going on here and about our relationship in this business. And then when that doesn't work, you send your son now loved ones. If this were a business strategy, we would already be calling hr. But of course it's not a business strategy, it's a parable. And Jesus is telling it to the very people about to prove the parable true. So welcome back to the Reformed Brotherhood because we're in Matthew Chapter 21 and we're gonna be actually getting all the way into the parable of the Vine growers where the patience of God looks, I would say, to almost anybody else, to humanize at least almost reckless until you realize that's exactly the point. So yeah, grab your beverage of choice, grab your Bible, pull the car over, will you? Because this is gonna get real and we're going to reason together. But before we do all of that, let's do a little affirming with or denying against, what do you got?  [00:02:41] Inside Baseball Affirmation [00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: So this is a sort of inside baseball, uh, affirmation. Um, I'm not sharing anything, although it may feel like I'm sharing something that is private and like, uh, like confidential. It's not No, this is good. Um, so I had the opportunity to visit. Um, my presbytery, um, for those who are listeners of the show or people who like, have been with us a long time, um, I was part of a Baptist church. Uh, I've always kind of been a Presbyterian at heart, but, um, our church closed, uh, a little over a year and a half ago now. And, um, uh, I've joined an OPC congregation in membership now. We've been members there for about a year. And, um, so I've been visiting Presbytery, which is the, the meeting of all of the leadership of all of the churches. So we won't do a polity breakdown here, but basically like, it's, it's the regional meeting. It's the regional business meeting or church meeting for a group of churches in the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. And so a lot of the meetings, you know, have the normal kind of business type stuff. You have reports from different committee committees and stuff. Um.  [00:03:48] Presbytery Call Debate [00:03:48] Tony Arsenal: Where this is affirmation is coming in here is at this most recent presbytery meeting, um, was pretty heavy on, um, licensing or, or, uh, not licensing on approving men who had received a call to formal ministry within the presbytery. And so in the OPC, and I would imagine that other Presbyterian bodies are not like super different, although I'm sure there's some variation in the OPC. Um, when a church intends to extend a call to a pastor, to a teaching elder, um, to a minister, they must have the call, which is. Is both theological but is also eminently practical. Like the call is a physical piece of paper that details, you know, what the pay is, how much vacation time. So it's kind of a combination between like a theological call and also a contract. Um, the presbytery has to approve that call. And so at this most recent one, there was a couple calls that were more or less uncontroversial. There was no question about them, and they were approved pretty quickly. But there was one call, um, one call to ministry that took, I, I, I didn't time it, but it was probably like four or five hours of debate and discussion in various fashion in order to get to a point where the presbytery could approve the call. So this was a call to a minister who is being called part-time, which is unusual in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, the OPC uh, acknowledges the fact that bivocational tent making ministry is sometimes a necessity, but really views the ministry of the word in sacrament as something that should not have. Distractions. And actually our book of church order talks about, doesn't use the word distraction, I think, but it talks about a, a properly ordered call to a full-time minister includes phrasing that the congregation promises to compensate them in a way that allows them to be free of worldly burdens and cares. And I might have not, not have gotten that wording exactly right. But that's the idea. And so this call was. Explicitly, um, not a full-time call it, they actually took the language out of promising to pay him in a way that he's able to ignore or to not be distracted by worldly care. And that was intentional, but there was a lot of question in discussion at presbytery level about the fact that the call did not include the phrase or the wording of part-time or bivocational. So the conversation started out of like, can this call be modified to include that? So it's explicitly known in this man's call that his calling is part-time, which is both theological, to make sure that the call is properly formatted, but also like very practical that the congregation should acknowledge explicitly that they recognize that this person is not, not going to be putting, you know, 40 hours a week or 50 hours a week towards this position. [00:06:34] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:06:34] Tony Arsenal: Um. What I'm affirming is where it got to, right? So there was lots of discussion about that. There was some finagling about the retirement package. The OPC recommends that a, a minister be given a retirement contribution of no less than 5% a year of his salaried package. Um, which there's a couple line items that go into that, but 5%, and this was a little bit less than that. And this is what I'm affirming and this, I, I don't know that this is a super widespread thing that would happen all across the, um, the OPC, but it happened in the presbytery of New York and New England this past week, and it's just amazing. And I just, I just want to lay it out there and then I want to hear your reaction. [00:07:13] Funding Full Time Ministry [00:07:13] Tony Arsenal: And I, I wanna hear your reaction as the son of a minister who labored his entire adult, more or less, his entire adult career in ministry, working two or three additional jobs on top of his ministry, the presbytery decided. That because it did not like the idea of a part-time minister. They didn't think that was appropriate. They didn't think that that was good or that that was really the right goal. The presbytery allocated, I'm not gonna say the figures 'cause they're not super germane, but allocated a significant amount of money to be dis to be dispersed to the church for the next three years in order to take what was a part-time call and enable it to become a full-time call. [00:07:54] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.  [00:07:54] Tony Arsenal: And so there are a lot of, there are a lot of church bodies that would say, yeah, we don't love the idea of bi-vocational ministry. You know, we really think it's ideal that a minister could be full-time. Um, they may even put some, some theological freight behind that. Um, I have never encountered a body, um. That was willing to put a sizable amount of money towards essentially supplementing a part-time call to make it full-time. Um, this was just amazing to me, and the candidate was there. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I would love to talk to him about what he felt. I, I can just imagine the phone call to his wife who was not, not at presbytery, but to his wife, following the outcome of this to be like, you are never gonna believe what just happened. Right? This is a family who was intending to move across country. Right. He's currently a student at Westminster, California in seminary, uh, California, Westminster Seminary in California, finishing his M Div. They're planning a cross country move into a part-time position where she's probably gonna have to find a job, and then also he's gonna have to find a part-time job. He had the ability to call her on the break and be like, you're never gonna guess what just happened? You're never gonna,  [00:09:09] Jesse Schwamb: it's wild.  [00:09:09] Tony Arsenal: Uh, sorry, I'm getting a little emotional here. You're never going to. Believe how faithful God is in this. Right. So I'm interested to hear your reaction to that as the son of a, of a try and quad at times Quad vocational. Yeah,  [00:09:23] Jesse Schwamb: for sure.  [00:09:23] Tony Arsenal: Minister who labored his entire, more or less, his entire adult career, um, working full-time in a call as a part-time, part-time minister. You know, like that's a, that's a crazy situation. So I'm just affirming that again, I don't know how common that kind of thing is in the OPC. I don't wanna make it seem like that's the norm. Um, I actually get the sense that this is probably not the norm, but it was amazing to see and it made me in intensely like. Proud in the right way of being a part of this broader body that would, would so emphasize and so value the ministry of the word and the sacrament, and the importance of a man being able to dedicate himself to that without distraction. That they would put forward this amount of money and this kind of money. They had no reason to do so. And there's no real direct benefit to the presbytery for doing this. I mean, there's an indirect benefit of like not having a church with a part-time minister, but like there's no direct benefit to this. There's no direct return on investments that's gonna come out of this. Um, it was pretty amazing to see. It was, it was, it was super encouraging.  [00:10:28] Jesse Schwamb: That is really encouraging. I, I think it's, there's no doubt that for the called pastor, their heart is in the ministry of the word. That's what they want to be doing. They wanna be doing it all the time and as much time as they possibly can, and they wanna be able to have all of their intentional focus on it. So I. I'm excited for that guy. I mean, that's just an incredible blessing to go in hoping for funding, essentially for a part-time role and to basically be told, no, no, no, no, that's, that's not enough. We want you to be committed to this fully as we know your heart is committed. As we validated that call.  [00:11:00] Why Structure Matters [00:11:00] Jesse Schwamb: I do love being a part of churches, well, lemme say it this way. There is, I think, a benefit of being part of congregations that have like a wide resource network that has like appropriate hierarchy and structure and that can be one of them. I've seen something similar in the Christian Missionary Alliance, which is the church that I'm in, not exactly the same, but I've seen some surprising allocations of resources where they basically said, you know, this is important. Like, it even trumps we're, we're gonna. Allocate or resource something so that this can move forward because it is important in a way that was like better than the person who was bringing it before them could have hoped for. Yeah. And uh, suddenly it's as if everything aligned. And it was really in part because there was this structure to come alongside, to validate as you're saying, and then to authenticate and then again to resource assets that could be used. There's, there's something to be said for that interdependency where there is kind of this hierarchical structure in which all that's happening at a level where things are codified. And again, like there's a structure and a way in which we move through those decisions to make sure that they suit the objective of the entire movement. So I guess there's nothing I'll say, but that's a beautiful thing, isn't it?  [00:12:14] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:12:15] Generosity in Action [00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: It was, it was, it was cool because it was like this, it was like this real. Actualization of the principle of outdoing one another and showing honor. Yeah, sure. Because you know, like the initial debate was like, Hey, you know, I'm not sure we can approve this call because the, the OPCs guidelines tell us not to approve a call that has less than 5% of the retirement benefit. And there was a lot of discussion of like, well, the presbytery can't modify the call, but we don't wanna delay this guy coming in and like, we don't wanna delay his ordination, his installation. And so the initial proposal was a, a. What feels like a large amount of money to me. But after I understood more about the, the budget of what's going on in, in the presbytery was actually a very small amount of money. Started with a very tiny, very modest proposal of basically like supplementing the retirement fund to make sure that like we could, they, I say we, like, I was part of this, I was just observing, but to supplement the retirement fund in a way that allowed the church to still proceed with the call as written, but still also make sure that this person had the appropriate retirement fund. And then that just basically was like, there would be some instruction given to the church that like, you've gotta bump this up in the next budget cycle. Like you've gotta get to the 5%. That's, that's the expectation. It went from that. And like I said, I won't give you the specific numbers, but one of the presbyters and I, I'm, I, um, I, I've known this presbyter from a distance for quite a long time and, and I have an immense amount of respect for him. He stood up and he's like, well, if we're gonna give X, why don't we just give 10 times X instead? And then actually, like the discussion was like, well, is, are we sure that 10 times X is even the right amount? Why don't we have this particular group meet over the lunch break and figure out whether that's the right number and then come back after lunch and we'll vote on it. And then they came back after lunch and it was actually a number that was even greater than 10 times X. So it was like this exercise in like. This very small proposal that was still imminently generous, right? The presbytery has no obligation to do this. There's no obligation from any of the presbyters to stand up and say like, we should. We should supplement this fund. They would've been well within their right, and no one would've looked, I think. I think some people would've been frustrated by it, but I don't think anyone would've looked sideways at it or thought it was sinful. If the presbytery just said like, we can't approve this call. You guys are gonna have to come back with it and we'll vote on it at the next presbytery. Like that would've been problematic. This, this kind of poor guy who's coming outta seminary, his call and his beginning of employment would've been delayed, but like. That would've been good and orderly, but instead they were like, one, we don't want this pulpit to stay empty longer. We don't wanna disadvantage this guy who's just getting done with seminary. We want him to get started. We don't wanna discourage him. So here's a small proposal, a very modest amount of money that we can put forward for this purpose. And then it was like, let's just keep seeing how much closer to a real full-time call we can get. And they finally came back and said like, we're gonna do this. We're gonna do this in a wise fashion. They structured it. So like the first year he gets more, the second year he gets a little bit less. The third year the church gets a little bit less with the idea that like each year the church should be adjusting their budget to compensate and get this guy to that with the, the hope that like with a full-time minister, they're able to grow their congregation to the point where they can support a full-time minister. So it was just this really cool, super encouraging exercise. And what I loved about it is the only real debate that was going on was about do we need to do more? There was no one being like, wait a second, why are we, why are we putting more money to this? The whole thing was like, is this actually enough to accomplish what we think God wants to do with this person's call? Because if, if God is truly calling this man to this, this particular church, and we believe that he is. Then what do we as a, as a people of God need to do to enable that call to look like what we actually believe calls to ministry are supposed to look like, which is a full-time call to ministry that is undistracted by the cares of the world. What do we need to do? The answer in this case was like, I think we need to put a sizable amount of money to it. Um, it's a, I mean, and again. I'm not gonna say it on the air. It was not a small chunk of change. Um, it was, it was a, it was a large amount of money that was devoted to this cause and that just goes to show how much this body values the importance of a full-time minister of the word, so. [00:16:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:16:51] OPC Love and Recommendation [00:16:51] Tony Arsenal: That's enough about that. I, I could gush about how proud I am to be a part of this body and how encouraged I am and how amazing it was and how awesome this, this guy, how, how much this guy must be thanking God for the providence and like, this is the last thing. I'll say this, this young man younger than me, I think he's graduating seminary. I saw him across the room. He looks like he's probably in his mid twenties, right? Young guy. He's got a wife doesn't have kids yet coming into this ministry, not only is he coming into this ministry, but as a Presbyterian minister, when he's installed as the minister of this church. He will be joining this body of presbyters as the, as his brothers like. He is not a member of the local church. He's a member of the presbytery, which is the regional church. So now he's coming into this fully supported by his brothers in the presbytery that he saw go to the mat to make sure he was properly taken care of, that the congregation was not unintentionally taking advantage of his labor, but also that he knows that all of these men are willing to do what they need to do to make sure that his ministry is successful and edifies the church like that is. Uh, I don't want to gush on Presbyterianism too much, but like that is Presbyterianism at peak form, right? This is the body of elders making sure that every church in the region, even the ones they're not directly ministering in, has what it needs to succeed and to honor God and to do what needs to happen. So I'm affirming the presbytery of New York and New England and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, I have been so blessed by knowing many of these presbyters. I've been so blessed by being a part of the congregation that I am. There are lots of really great churches and really great denominations out there. If you are looking for a church and there is an OPC congregation in your area, absolutely go check it out. I know it feels stuffy sometimes, and I will admit, like sometimes it feels a little bit overly traditional in terms of like just the vibe of the congregation,  [00:18:52] Jesse Schwamb: right?  [00:18:52] Tony Arsenal: But press past that because I don't think, I don't think you will find, um. You may find lots of congregations that are as faithful. I don't think you're gonna find many that are more faithful than your average OPC congregation. So I could be wrong. I just, I just love the OPC. I just really, really love it. So that's my affirmation. What do you got for us, Jesse?  [00:19:18] Denial Catholic Confession Math [00:19:18] Jesse Schwamb: I think I got denial, which is maybe a little bit unusual for me. [00:19:21] Tony Arsenal: As long as you're not denying the OPCI think we're fine.  [00:19:23] Jesse Schwamb: No, it's, it's not, it is church related and I, I'll try to keep it short 'cause I think I can make this way longer than it, it probably should be, but lemme think how to phrase this. So, I don't know with a devil negative, I guess when I'm a denying against is maybe not enough confession by your own standard. So the, I'm gonna try to make this so brief. I, I just happened to be out with my wife this afternoon and we had to run errands. We got stuck in traffic and this gave me longer than usual to sit in front of our. Very local and very large Catholic church. So I happen to be looking at their sign. It's a very large congregation. I've been actually been in this one on a couple of occasions for funerals. So not only do I know its size and scope, but again, if you get, if you get on this road at the wrong time on the Lord's day, you're gonna be stuck for a long time because there are so many people that attend. I say that because I noticed on the sign that there were three times for mass on the Lord's Day. So that also says something about the number of people coming through. And then on the sign though, underneath it said for confessions, go to our website. Mm-hmm. So I was like, man, I gotta lick this up because I can't tell if they're telling me I can confess on the website or if it's go to the website for the times. And I said to my wife, only half jokingly, if I can confess online, I'm gonna confess something. So I went to, I went to the website and, and sure enough it was almost disappointingly. It was just the times.  [00:20:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:20:46] Jesse Schwamb: Here's what I've found interesting, which just launched me into this like deep rabbit hole. There were three times for confession. Two of those times were just a half an hour, and the third time was an hour. So, uh, what I did was I went through, actually, I think what they had on there was, was three full hours a week. It was a little bit confusing, but I think it was three full hours. Now I think about it. So I went back, I just couldn't help myself, Tony. So I started to think, alright, let's say. I think it's fair to assume  [00:21:15] Tony Arsenal: math, Jesse is kicking in right now. Yes. You're gonna calculate how many minutes per, per person is what you're doing. I'm thinking, ah,  [00:21:22] Jesse Schwamb: yeah, it's something like that. So what I thought was, I don't think it's, uh, I was gonna be conservative. I wanna be fair. I wanna be fair. So, and now we should say like, I think most people realize that the Catholic understanding of confession and the Protestant one is, is very different. The Catholic sacrament of confession is the right through which Catholics are gonna confess their sins to a priest receive absolution, and it's gonna restore the relationship with God in the church. And, and they're gonna believe that the priest acts as a person of Christ and is bound by the seal of confession and an absolute kind of obligation. Uh, of course never to reveal what was disclosed during that process. So, by the way, the website that I went to, lovely instructions. I mean, I was like, wow. I was reading it to my wife who was, uh, not familiar with this at all, and she was like, they can make you do stuff. And I was like, well, yeah. I mean, obviously like there's, there's a portion of this where there's contrition or penant penance. It could be a prayer, it could be act of charity, like all kinds of stuff. So I went back and I thought. I don't think it's unreasonable that there's 350 persons that would say, let's say an average, uh, that would wanna take part of confession. Now, let's say that they did that at, at least monthly, just once a month. And, and I don't know how people's conviction is on that, but I'm gonna say conservatively once a month. Let's say that, and I don't think this is unreasonable, Tony, but you tell me. Let's say you're, you're trucking, you're moving through confession. Let's say it's five minutes a piece. So we're up to 1,750 minutes, uh, per month. That's the demand on the priest because I was, I was looking at this time and I was thinking something is strange here to me, so. That was the demand then, and I'll spare you the other math, which could be very long and un uninteresting. I'm coming up with, you'd need 2.24, two and a quarter priests, which of course you can't have a quarter priests or a quarter person for any reason. So you'd hire, you'd hire three priests, which satisfy the demand if, and the major assumptions here, that is like everybody can't show up at the same time. Obviously, I'm assuming that like everybody has their own time, they're spreading it out. So everybody gets the confession, but it's just five minutes. And I, I have no idea. I mean, if you're a Luther, that's certainly not sufficient time.  [00:23:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:23:20] Jesse Schwamb: And you would need three priests. Now here's the thing that I just kind of backed into that, besides like three being like, okay, that, that's, you would need three priests just to satisfy this congregation. If they're confessing for five minutes, once per month. Uh, by the way, if you said, well, half the congregation is going to go weekly, uh, then you, you would double the number of priests you need to 5.98 or six. But here's, here's the bottom line for me. This is why the denial comes in about maybe not enough, is. If you were just to distill that down to like, if you could have one priest cover that time, that there's a demand for like 779.4 hours, or excuse me, minutes of confession, that priest would only be allocating approximately like seven and a half percent of their working hours, their work toward handling confession. This seems like not enough confession given the standards of confession in the Catholic church. And again, I know that I'm, I'm now allocating that to one priest and I just told everybody you need three. That's true. So if you had these three now, if you hired three just to meet the demand, that would only be about like three and a half or a little under three and a half percent of their combined time. So the denial is Catholics, I think, unless I'm way off in some of my assumptions here, you might not be confessing enough by your own standards because  [00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, that seems like not enough time.  [00:24:38] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:24:39] Ritual Faithfulness Explained [00:24:39] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think, um. I don't want to be too bombastic here, but I think,  [00:24:46] Jesse Schwamb: I think I already started this on this  [00:24:48] Tony Arsenal: path. Maybe this, maybe this isn't all that bombastic. Um, because this is so much about ritual and actually I say this is gonna sound really, we, we go, but trying to think from the Roman Catholic perspective, it's actually not, and I'll I'll tell you a brief story, uh, to explain it. Um, a lot of Roman Catholics are just going through the motions. [00:25:13] Jesse Schwamb: That's true.  [00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: But the point, the, the, the point of contention actually is that going through the motions is valuable for the Roman Catholic, right? So I, I knew this, uh, this young woman when I was in college who was a Roman Catholic, and we had many discussions about, about the differences between Protestantism and and Roman Catholicism. And what I came to understand is that going to mass for her. Itself was an act of faith. And so for the Roman Catholic, the concept of, of faith is different than the concept that Protestants operate under. So for the Roman Catholic who, um, goes to mass, even when they feel like they're, like, when they think they're just going through the motions, going through the motions is itself the act of faith. And that's because for most of Roman Catholics, most of Roman Catholicism, faith really equals faithfulness, right? So, so doing the act is the act of faithfulness. Doing the act is faith. Where for the Protestant, like faith is about belief and trust and knowledge. Like it's, it's an. Not entirely intellectual, but it's, it's an inward thing for the Roman Catholic faith is an out is primarily an outward thing. It's what you do, it's how you act. It's faith formed in love. It's faith formed in charity.  [00:26:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:26:37] Tony Arsenal: So I think most Roman Catholics going to obligatory confession first. I think once a month is probably like, probably more frequent than most Roman Catholics go to mass or go to confession. Um, I thought I read a stat that it was like every six months is, is pretty average and I think that's what's required by the church maybe even once a year is, is required by the church. Um, I think like most Roman Catholics go into the, the confessional booth and like father forgive me for I've sinned. It's been such and such a number of days since my last confession. Right. And they may bring up a couple particular things that they've done and, and then I think the priest commonly absolves them of all of their sins. Like, almost like in an omnibus fashion and then prescribes their acts of penance, which is it, it like, honestly, it's probably things they should already be doing as a faithful Catholic saying Hail Marys and doing our fathers and acts of charity and things like that. So I think your math is probably right. [00:27:39] Protestant Repentance Particular [00:27:39] Tony Arsenal: I think your, your theory that more confession is probably like, I'm gonna read this from, uh, the Westminster confession, just to, just to say it here, is, this is chapter 15, which is titled of Repentance Under Life. And this is, uh, this is section five or paragraph five. It says, men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but is every man's duty to endeavor, to repent of his particular sins, particularly. And I think that's just such a beautifully phrased sentence like. Not only is it like potent theologically, but like, it just, it just feels good, like in terms of like the English language to repent of your particular sins, particularly. And like the idea is yes, Protestant reform, Christians affirm a general repentance from sin, right? We repent of our sin before the father, uh, as a result of our, of our coming to faith in Christ. And as part of our sanctification, we mortify our sin and we, Viv we are vivified by the spirit and repentance falls in that ongoing sanctification process. And there is this general repentance of like, I repent of the fact that I'm a sinner and that I commit sins, but there is this element in the reformed faith of like, I should be confessing to God. And I think by extension, like we should be confessing to our fellow Christians, our particular sins, our individual sins, and we should be doing that on particular occasion. And I think like. The Luther style confession of like going into the confessor and confessing like every particular sin. Particularly I think most Roman Catholic priests would, priests. Priests would probably have the same reaction Tobits did where he was like, get outta here. Like, come on dude. Like just go live your life and like deal with it. I think that's probably the reaction most Catholic priests would have. But yeah, I think you're right. Like if we're really talking about like. Five, five minutes of confession once a month and that somehow having some sort of spiritual efficacy. I'm not sure I buy that math. Like I think you're, you're probably spot on.  [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:29:47] Confession Hours Oddities [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: I just was curious about how many priests would be required and then the allocation of the duties. By the way, you are right. So I, because I had to check on this, the, the fourth letter in council of 1215 does say that the church requires confession of any grave or mortal sins at least once a year. But the church, yeah, strongly encourages more frequent confession as a spiritual practice, even for, of course, like the venial or the less serious sins in their eyes. So yeah, my thought here was just that. I think it's actually undervalued by way of the math. Like the, as the kids say, the math just isn't math thing for me on this one. But I was more curious about, since this is one of the seven sacraments, even if you just said like, well, it should have at least one seven of the allocation. That's like, what? Like something like 14%. And so this is, um, almost half of that. I just found it a little bit, a little bit odd and yeah, I think you'd have to be, uh, so in other words, when I looked at the, basically, here's the bottom line. When I looked at the hours for confession one, there were weird times and uh, two, I was like, that doesn't seem like enough hours. Like, it was just more like that. Like how that's like saying like, Hey, the post office is open three hours a week, and by the way, one of those hours is from seven to eight o'clock on Friday. Like they had some hours. One hour just on Friday was like, I guess that's the way you wanna start your weekend is like, let's get all of this off my chest. Yeah. And, and do it. Right. And the last thing I'll say by the way, is you're correct. When you look at the instruction they give you, and this is common of course, toward the end, when they say like, here's how you like wrap up your part. Actually everybody should go read, go to the local, local Catholic church website and read the instructions. 'cause in some ways they're just interesting and kind of, um, I don't wanna say funny 'cause I'm not making fun. I'm just saying like, they have to give you instruction if you've never done it before. And so most of us are not really probably familiar with the process and they give you explicit instruction and toward the end it's like, here's how you kinda like hang up the call with the priest. And it's like you said, you know, these are my sins and all others, would you be willing to forgive? So you're right. Right. They just kinda wrap them all up because it's sins of omission, sense of commission, it's all to be together. But I, I wonder, you gotta think there's people in there that are like. The priests are like, okay, man, just yeah. Wrap, come on, wrap, wrap it up.  [00:31:55] Confession Timing Talk [00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: And other people that come in are just like, you know, forgive me father. And uh, lastly to your point, when they give you instruction about how you should start, of course you're always to signify how long it's been since your last confession. Right. Confession. And they say parenthetically, like, reference the days, weeks, months, or years. So you're right. There are gonna be people that probably do it very frequently and probably people who do it infrequently still, I would say I just couldn't believe for a church this large, that there was just three hours a week.  [00:32:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:21] Jesse Schwamb: For everybody else.  [00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:23] Vance and Papal Authority [00:32:23] Tony Arsenal: This leads me to two very brief sub, uh, denials slash affirmations. Uh, I don't know if you saw this, um, this is not a political statement, right? I, I have lots of feelings and thoughts about the current administration and I think most of my feelings and thoughts would surprise. Everybody. But I thought it was hilarious because JD Vance, who is a Roman Catholic, uh, confessed Roman Catholic part of the Roman Catholic Church, uh, he ha I, I'm not sure if I'm affirming or denying this, there was this funny, uh, funny exchange. I think he was at doing like a, doing like a TPU, I don't know, speech. He was doing a speech at some conservative event and he said something like, I think that the Pope should be more careful when he makes theological statements. I'm wanna be like, do you understand what the pope is in your religion? That was one of my sub denials. Uh, I don't remember what the other one is, so it must not have been that important. It'll come back to me at the worst possible moment and I will try very hard not to interrupt our show for it, but I probably will fail.  [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:33:25] Reading Matthew 21 [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we, we gotta get to some scripture because. We're, we're doing this old school style where we take like half the time and just talk about affirmations. It's true in house. It's true. Which is great fun. But let's, let's get back to Matthew 21. And I, I know we did this last time, but I am gonna rock through the passage 'cause of course, that's the best part of any of our discussion, is actually hearing from, from the Holy Spirit through the scripture, uh, which he's given to us. So this is, uh, Matthew 21, starting in verse 33. And you're gonna hear the, the whole thing right here. Uh, this is Jesus speaking. Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard and put a wall around it and dug a wine press in it and built a tower and rented it out to vine growers and went on a journey. Now, when the high risk time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit, and the vine growers took his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Again, he sent another group of slaves larger than the first, and they did the same thing to them. But afterward he sent his son to them saying they will respect my son. But when the vine growers saw the sun, they said among themselves, this is the heir. Come let us kill him and seize his inheritance, and they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine growers? They said to him, he will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons. Jesus said to them, did you ever read in the scriptures the stone, which the builders rejected? This has become the chief cornerstone. This came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it. And he who falls in the stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust. And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that he was speaking about them. And although they were seeking to seize him, they feared the crowds because they're regarding him to be a prophet. [00:35:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:35:30] Pharisees Condemn Themselves [00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: This is like a super heavy parable. Right. And we talked a lot last week about how like the point of this parable is not necessarily to try to instruct the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Like it's not to instruct the people who were going to reject Christ, uh, the, the builders who would reject the cornerstone. It's really a parable to teach those. Who are observing this process happening. But I think it's, I, I think it's really interesting just listening to you read this and reading through it, and I guess this is a question I haven't asked and I, I need to study a little bit more. It's crazy to me in verse 41, um, Christ seems the, the, the, um, Matthew seems to say here, and maybe I need to do a little bit more Greek study, so bear with me and, and have grace if I'm wrong here. Matthew seems to say that like Christ asks the people he's speaking to, the Pharisees he's speaking to, what is he gonna do to these people? And the Pharisees answer, he's gonna put those wretches to a miserable death.  [00:36:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right?  [00:36:37] Tony Arsenal: Like the people listening to this parable understand the outcome, like they understand the. The consequence that the, the, the vineyard owner or the vineyard tenant tenants are facing based on their lack of faithfulness to the covenant. To me, that is like a really striking part of this parable. And, and it's not even like the parable proper, but like the striking element of the context of this is that nobody listening to this parable, including the Pharisees that this parable has basically spoken against, nobody fails to see the gravity of the consequence of rejecting God's emissary, like rejecting the Messiah. That to me is like a really, I dunno, paradigmatic. Portion of this that I think we need to grapple with. This is not an unclear, an unclear outcome. This is not, this is not masked or vague or OPA opaque. Like everybody understands, the people who reject the Messiah are going to face dire and eternal consequences for that act. [00:37:48] Jesse Schwamb: That does make this really interesting, doesn't it? Because it's not just entirely like Romans one adventures or even Romans two. It's that this is what Jesus does and he does it in a profound way that's not trickery like I think kinda like you're saying like the lead up to this isn't as if he's even leading the witness. He's making it very clear, all like the parameters of the story and the characters involved and what should be the proper judgment. And it's not as if like they start saying, they're like, oh, we shouldn't say anything more like we, we plead the fifth because it's gonna condemn ourselves. He draws his audience in to producing and pronouncing like their own sentence. It's very much like, I think I mentioned this last time, the prophet Nathan and David, isn't it? It's the exact same. Yeah. And the verdict is unanswerable, like even in its own terms. These other, like these other vine growers, prefigures of course like the inclusion of the Gentiles and the apostolic office. But I like that what Jesus does here, even before he gets to that point, is he extorts from them an acknowledgement of the punishment which awaited them. And so in this way there's like, I think the Puritans use this passage a lot actually to demonstrate that the natural conscience even of like the unregenerate, still bears witness to divine justice. That's Romans two. Like they, they can't get out from underneath it and Jesus isn't using any trickery on them to get them to say this thing. They are compelled in their own way, even being unregenerate to, like you said, even as they're rejecting the Messiah to recognize that punishment is due these characters in the story, even as they perceive at the end that they are those characters. [00:39:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Saying we'll receive the judgment.  [00:39:24] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:25] Usurpers Not Misguided [00:39:25] Tony Arsenal: And I think too, like, um, this is kind of one of those chicken or the egg scenarios, right? Like Christ is both recognizing the intention of their heart as well as prophesying. And, and not just prophesying, but like inception level prophesying the, the outcome of the intention of their heart. And so like, again, like we've, we spent a whole week kind of like leading into the parable and now we spent a whole week, we're gonna spend a whole week again kind of leading into the parable. This is such a deep parable, and that like Christ is not just laying bare. The fact that the, the people who were going to reject him were doing so out of this sort of like attempt and intention of usurping the kingdom of God for their own purposes. I think that brings a layer to this that we don't often appreciate in. Christ's interaction with the Pharisees. I think sometimes, and maybe this is because I just listened to an episode of where Matt Whitman on the 10 minute Bible hour talked about this. I think sometimes we actually have a tendency to sort of be sympathetic to the Pharisees where we think, you know, they were, they were just trying to obey God's law and they got a little sideways on it and you know, they were putting these boundaries in place, but they were doing it in this sort of like misguided attempt to protect the people. Christ actually here seems to contradict that in that the comparison he's making is not to a, a well-intentioned group of people who just get it wrong, but he's painting the Pharisees, the, the religious leaders, the Sadducees, the chief priests. He's painting them as these usurpers who recognize the proper authority of right. The master and his emissaries and ultimately of his son, they recognize this proper authority and rather than submitting to it and submitting to the covenant obligations that they, they already actually agreed to, instead of doing that, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own right. It's not just that they do the wrong thing, it's that they recognize the heir, which is Christ. They recognize this heir and they kill him to try to take his place. That is a really heavy element of this parable. Christ is not painting. Um, the, the, the Pharisees here, the, the religious leaders. He's not painting them as um, well-intentioned, but ultimately wrong, which is I think a lot of times, and I think there's reason to do this right. I'm not being overly critical and I've done this, I've actually done this myself, and I think there's some. Space for it. Like the Pharisees were wrong, but they were wrong, kind of in the right direction sometimes. Um, Christ is not really on board with that, at least in this parable. Right. This isn't about them thinking that the heir was a threat, and so killing the threat in, you know, inadvertently this is them absolutely seeing who the hair, who the heir is, and intentionally deciding to reject that heir and to murder him and to try to take his inheritance. Mm-hmm. That's an affront to not only the heir who they murder, but an affront to the owner of the vineyard himself, which of course in this parable is figured to be God the father primarily. But God in sort of general terms, like the whole Godhead, um, with Christ as the second Adam has, as his representative, as his heir. This is a really heavy parable and I think where this comes into play for us in our own Christian life is. Are there times where we. Sort of do the same thing in refusing to, maybe it's tie into your denial a little bit. Like refusing to acknowledge our own sinfulness, refusing to acknowledge the ways that God has provided for us. Um, do we at times look at what we have and lay claim to it as though it is our own inheritance that we've taken? Um, right. Do we kind of crucify the son of God anew in, in refusing to repent of our sins particularly? I dunno. I think those are some open questions for us to kind of explore as we dig into this a bit more. [00:43:54] Jesse Schwamb: And that may relate as well to, well eventually at some point, I dunno, like 2040, get to like the parable of the talents. There's some similarity there with a little bit, right? You're saying? I think you're right.  [00:44:06] God Does All the Verbs [00:44:06] Jesse Schwamb: And where I think we can anchor some of that is in those first couple of verses. I'm really always impressed by really the number of action verbs that are packed within, like that just initial statement of Jesus explaining the situation. [00:44:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:44:19] Jesse Schwamb: So he sets it all up and he's saying there's a planting that goes on, this landowner puts up a wall, digs a wine press. Builds a tower and then RINs it. So there's all these like amazing things being done, all this action verb. And I, I think in part why he comes against the Pharisees so hard in the same way that we're looking at like the parable that, uh, the, uh, talents for instance of saying like, what did you do with that was entrusted to you was like this great treasure which Christ has entrusted or God has entrusted to his people, which is, is the gospel essentially is, is all a prophetic witness, is like the truth of who God is and his revelation of himself. And so I think. The first thing we gotta see in those verbs is that there's this emphasis that the vineyard was God's sovereign creation. You know, he plants it, he chose it, he established it. Israel didn't plant herself. She was planted. And that sovereign initiative is foundational, I think in, like you're saying, the parables indictment, because these vine growers, they don't possess anything that they did not receive. Right. You know, they did not find a vineyard already planted, but God himself made it from the wilderness that all his glory, all the glory might be his. So. I think it's helpful for us to observe that the church is always the planting of the Lord and that no congregation flourishes that is not first planted by God. And so there is a major offense here when those who are to care for it, who know, like you're saying, that they ought to care for it, who understand something about the hierarchy and the way it has been entrusted to them. Not to only break that covenant, but then seek to try to usurp the power in the roles of those whom they should be, quite frankly, in our own language, like under shepherds too. And so it starts with all, all those verbs. Like I think we could probably spend a. A lot of times just speaking about what does it mean? Why? Why is there all this explicit in particular language about the fact that there's a hedge and there's a press besides just these are part in piece mail or part and parcel of what it means to have a vineyard, apparently, but that they're all part of this narrative of God talking about how he protects and cares for his people and sets them in a place and chooses them and is particular about the construction and does so with great volition and authority and care and concern and creative ability. And then again, you have those who are meant there to do the very job that he's entrusted them with. And not only are they not doing that, and of course you're right. Jesus elsewhere, comes in, comes in hot, right, with a Pharisees saying like, listen, you set burdens on people's backs that you yourselves cannot lift. You're twice as in the hell as anybody else, and that's who you are. Yeah. It's not just hypocrisy, but you're literally setting people up to fail in this. So you can see how you're right. It's not just like, guys, I appreciate that. Like you wanted to set up some additional boundaries and maybe you took it a little bit too far. This parable is just scorched earth. It's, it's nuclear. Yeah.  [00:47:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:47:11] Scandalous Vineyard Setup [00:47:11] Tony Arsenal: And you know, I think, um, we are obviously gonna spend another week on this 'cause we still have not really addressed a single verse in this parable. I, I think like a lot of ink has been spilled on explaining sort of like the feal agricultural arrangements of this passage. What it represents. M my understanding is. A typical arrangement would be that a, a landowner would basically just lease out land and the tenants would be responsible for the planting, for the development. Right. And the, the, the landowner would essentially just collect a portion of whatever they produce. Right. This parable is actually taking this a step further. Exactly. That it's not as though the landowner just says like, all right, you can use this land. Right. And I own the land, so I get a portion of the pro, the profit. He's actually done all the work. Yes. And all that. The, all that the, the tenants need to do essentially is reap the harvest and then provide the portion of the harvest that belongs to the landowner, and so there is a greater investment. Of the landowner into this land than would be expected. We've commented in the past about how a lot of times the, the parables start on sort of a premise of shock. Like there's a, there's an element of the setup of the, of the parable where the audience would kind of like sit back and gasp or kind of be like, wait a second. Like that's not normal. Right. In the parable of the, the, um, lost son, it was the idea that like the son demanded his inheritance. And that wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part was that the father just granted it. Right. Or, um, the lost sheep, like the, there's actually a sort of a shocking element to the fact that like the, the land, the like sheep owner would just go get this other sheep. So we've, we've commented on there's kind of like. There's sort of like a scandalous setup. The scandalous setup in this is not that the land has been leased to tenants, right? It's that the land has been prepared for the tenants before it was leased out in the first place. And I think that's something we might miss if we read over this too quickly, is. The landowner has prepared everything for these, these tenants.  [00:49:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So the, the, at the, the punchline of the parable where they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of, um, sovereignty and maybe a lowercase s in the, in the context of the parable, they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty and the rightful claim of the tenant or of the landowner on the, the profit of the land. And sort of like highlighter emphasized by the fact that they actually didn't do any of the work. There's a certain kind of like Amer, like American rugged individualism where we're kind of like, yeah, like if I planted all the crops, then it's kind of lame that this guy's coming in expecting to take a portion of it, right? Like, yeah, I guess he owns the land, so maybe he gets a little piece of it, but like, who does he think he is? All of that already is already short circuited. Like I. The, these tenants are not actually, um, portrayed as doing anything in this parable. That's right. Like they just lease the land. They, they, um, and leased is not really like the right. The right word, the, the Greek word is omi, which is like he gave over the land to them. Um, when we say leased, we have this idea that like the tenants pay to use the land and then like part of their contract is that whatever profits they reap, uh, off the land goes back to the, to the landowner. This is really more like the landowner graciously allowed them to live on this land, and the only payment he required was that they would eventually provide him part of the profit back. Like he's planted the land, he's put up the fence around it. He dug the wine press so that they could make a product out of it. He built the tower so it would be defended. Yes. And he gave it over to them essentially just to like live on until it was time for the harvest. And all he is asking for is basically like, alright, so this is my land. I've planted the vineyards, the profit is mine to have. And so when the time came for him to come claim that that's where they have now rejected him. Yes. That's where they've now said like, I know you did all the work and really graciously allowed us to live in this land, but we're gonna keep all of it for ourselves. That's the scandal of this. That's what I think like the original audience would've set up and like, wait a second here. Like, hold on. They didn't even plant the vineyards themselves. They didn't even build the tower themselves. That's really the force of this that I think we miss when we, when we overemphasize, trying to think through like what the original agricultural arrangements were. 'cause this is painted. Very different than what the original arrangements would've been typical for. Like this is a different scenario and I think intentionally so,  [00:52:09] Jesse Schwamb: and we need those words like rented, at least in English, to help us understand that it didn't belong to them. It wasn't a gift, right? It wasn't as if like it was just turned over in the sense that it belongs to you now do with it what you will. And it's very clear in the passage one, like you said, that the landowner does all those things. So it was a, you know, he completely set it up. I mean, this is just such a beautiful, I think, depiction of the hold of prophetic, you know, understanding of God's word here, but it's very clear that says the, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit. So you're right. The scandal is that they're like, well, obviously. They need to give him his fruits, like  [00:52:48] Tony Arsenal: right.  [00:52:48] Jesse Schwamb: It was all set up before he left on this long journey. He then turned it over to them to care for, and that was really all that they were supposed to do. They had no role in this. And so it does like lead us in into this weird space where it's like, well, well what, what did the Pharisees think they were trying to do themselves? What does actually Jesus commenting on, on their own, like licit on their own initiative here, is he basically saying that not only are they not respecting his sovereignty, but they were trying to claim for themselves what only rightly belongs to God that even their position right. Society in culture as their representatives, God himself, they wanted to take that over for themselves, which he does bring that condemnation upon them in other parts of the scripture. So again, this is really hot. I think it's a, it's both heat and light, but there's no doubt that there's fire to this, right? Because it's a direct indictment that God the father set all of this up. You yourselves are on rented property, but guess what? Even the property that you've rented, I'm not exacting a tax from you as if like you have put forward and grown or supplied or created some kind of profitable outcome here. And I just want a piece of that. He's not even talking about tithing in that sense. What he's basically saying is, none of this belongs to you. Like how? Right? How dare you? None of this is yours. I set all of this up and in fact, because you've done so poor poorly at this, I'm gonna take it away from you and give it to those who actually produce fruit and guess what's gonna be the Gentiles? So it's, there's a wild. Amounts of condemnation packed into a very small story.  [00:54:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It really is.  [00:54:22] Tenants Add Nothing [00:54:22] Tony Arsenal: Um, there is nothing expected of these tenants. Right. There's no contract, like there's no terms, they, they really add nothing to the, the landowner's land, except I guess maybe they're the ones harvesting these, this fruit. Right. But even that's not explicit in the parable.  [00:54:43] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.  [00:54:43] Tony Arsenal: Right. Right. He, he does all just to steal your thunder, like he does all the verbs. Yes. All of the ves are done by the landowner.  [00:54:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Right  [00:54:51] Tony Arsenal: on. There is an implication that the, the tenants are somehow like the ones harvesting this, or they're the ones producing the wine, I guess, in the wine vat or the wine press. But at the end of the day. A normal tenant landowner agreement would be, I'm, you're, first of all, you're probably gonna pay me to use this land, right? You're paying me to use this land, and the way you pay me is you're gonna plant the, the gr the crop. You're gonna harvest it. You're gonna make the produce, and all I'm gonna do is let you live on this land. I'm gonna take the pro, like the profit, you're gonna pay me outta that profit. There is nothing asked or expected of these, th

In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse dive deep into Matthew 21:33-46, examining Jesus's parable of the wicked tenants. The hosts unpack how Christ masterfully draws the Pharisees into pronouncing their own condemnation, revealing not merely theological error but intentional usurpation of God's authority. Through careful exegesis, they explore the shocking setup of the parable—where the landowner does all the work while the tenants contribute nothing—and how this mirrors God's sovereign initiative in salvation. The discussion touches on confession, the value of full-time ministry, and the scandal of rejecting the Messiah despite recognizing His authority. This episode challenges listeners to examine whether they, like the Pharisees, attempt to claim God's work as their own. Key Takeaways God Does All the Verbs: The parable emphasizes that the landowner planted, built, protected, and prepared everything—the tenants contributed nothing yet claimed ownership of the fruit. Self-Pronounced Condemnation: Jesus draws the Pharisees into declaring their own judgment, demonstrating that even the unregenerate conscience bears witness to divine justice (Romans 2). Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error: The Pharisees weren't well-intentioned but misguided; they recognized Christ's authority as the heir and deliberately murdered Him to seize His inheritance. The Scandal of Grace: The parable's shocking element is that the landowner prepared everything before leasing the land—far exceeding normal agricultural arrangements and illustrating God's unmerited favor. Ecclesial Support for Ministry: The OPC presbytery's decision to fund a full-time call demonstrates how church structure can honor the ministry of Word and sacrament by freeing ministers from worldly distractions. Particular Repentance Matters: Westminster Confession 15.5 teaches that believers should not content themselves with general repentance but "endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly." The Stone Rejected Becomes Chief: Christ's citation of Psalm 118 reveals that the very rejection by the builders (religious leaders) was God's plan to establish the cornerstone of salvation. Key Concepts God Does All the Verbs The concentration of action verbs attributed solely to the landowner in Matthew 21:33 is theologically significant. The landowner plants, builds, digs, and rents—creating a fully functional, productive vineyard before the tenants ever arrive. This arrangement differs radically from typical first-century agricultural practices, where tenants would lease raw land and develop it themselves, sharing profits with the landowner. Jesus deliberately presents an extraordinary scenario where the tenants receive everything prepared and ready, requiring only stewardship of what already exists. This parallels God's sovereign initiative in election and salvation: believers contribute nothing to their standing before God, receiving instead a fully accomplished redemption. The Pharisees' rebellion wasn't against burdensome requirements but against simply acknowledging God's rightful ownership of what He alone created. Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error The hosts challenge the common sympathetic reading of the Pharisees as well-intentioned legalists who simply got sidetracked. Instead, verse 38 reveals the tenants explicitly recognize the son as heir and plot to murder him to "seize his inheritance." This isn't accidental rejection but calculated rebellion. The Pharisees weren't confused about Jesus's identity or authority—they understood precisely who He claimed to be and deliberately chose to destroy Him rather than submit. This interpretation carries significant weight for understanding the nature of unbelief: it's not primarily intellectual confusion but volitional rebellion. The religious leaders didn't need more evidence or clearer teaching; they needed transformed hearts. This same dynamic appears whenever humans recognize divine truth yet choose self-sovereignty over submission to God's rightful claim on their lives. The Scandal of Grace The parable begins with a scandalous premise that would have startled Jesus's original audience. Unlike normal tenant farming arrangements where landowners simply provided land in exchange for a share of whatever the tenants produced through their own labor, this landowner invests everything. He doesn't just own the property—he plants the vineyard, constructs the protective wall, digs the wine press for production, and builds the watchtower for defense. The tenants receive a turnkey operation requiring minimal effort. This extravagant preparation mirrors God's unmerited favor toward Israel and, by extension, the church. God didn't merely create humanity and wait to see what we would produce; He established covenants, sent prophets, preserved His Word, and ultimately sent His Son—all before requiring any response. The only "payment" demanded is acknowledging His ownership of what He created. The parable thus exposes the absurdity and ingratitude of claiming God's work as our own achievement. Memorable Quotes God does all the verbs. All of the verbs are done by the landowner. There is nothing expected of these tenants—they really add nothing to the landowner's land. Christ is not painting the Pharisees as well-intentioned but ultimately wrong. He's painting them as usurpers who recognize the proper authority and rather than submitting to it, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own. Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man's duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (Westminster Confession 15.5) Transcript Welcome to episode 491 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.  [00:01:12] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.  [00:01:17] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.  [00:01:18] Parable of Tenants [00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picture this, Tony, your landlord. You've built the perfect vineyard. We're talking wall watchtower, wine, press, the works like what everybody says. Everybody knows you need all those things. You've got it all set up, and then you hand the keys to some tenants. You take a long trip, you go enjoy yourself. And when the harvest rolls around, you send your servants to collect the rent. And shockingly, your tenants, they beat. Stone. Another, the kill a third. So naturally you think, you know what? I'll fix this. Lemme just send more people. That's obviously the problem. There's some kind of just profound misunderstanding about what's going on here and about our relationship in this business. And then when that doesn't work, you send your son now loved ones. If this were a business strategy, we would already be calling hr. But of course it's not a business strategy, it's a parable. And Jesus is telling it to the very people about to prove the parable true. So welcome back to the Reformed Brotherhood because we're in Matthew Chapter 21 and we're gonna be actually getting all the way into the parable of the Vine growers where the patience of God looks, I would say, to almost anybody else, to humanize at least almost reckless until you realize that's exactly the point. So yeah, grab your beverage of choice, grab your Bible, pull the car over, will you? Because this is gonna get real and we're going to reason together. But before we do all of that, let's do a little affirming with or denying against, what do you got?  [00:02:41] Inside Baseball Affirmation [00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: So this is a sort of inside baseball, uh, affirmation. Um, I'm not sharing anything, although it may feel like I'm sharing something that is private and like, uh, like confidential. It's not No, this is good. Um, so I had the opportunity to visit. Um, my presbytery, um, for those who are listeners of the show or people who like, have been with us a long time, um, I was part of a Baptist church. Uh, I've always kind of been a Presbyterian at heart, but, um, our church closed, uh, a little over a year and a half ago now. And, um, uh, I've joined an OPC congregation in membership now. We've been members there for about a year. And, um, so I've been visiting Presbytery, which is the, the meeting of all of the leadership of all of the churches. So we won't do a polity breakdown here, but basically like, it's, it's the regional meeting. It's the regional business meeting or church meeting for a group of churches in the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. And so a lot of the meetings, you know, have the normal kind of business type stuff. You have reports from different committee committees and stuff. Um.  [00:03:48] Presbytery Call Debate [00:03:48] Tony Arsenal: Where this is affirmation is coming in here is at this most recent presbytery meeting, um, was pretty heavy on, um, licensing or, or, uh, not licensing on approving men who had received a call to formal ministry within the presbytery. And so in the OPC, and I would imagine that other Presbyterian bodies are not like super different, although I'm sure there's some variation in the OPC. Um, when a church intends to extend a call to a pastor, to a teaching elder, um, to a minister, they must have the call, which is. Is both theological but is also eminently practical. Like the call is a physical piece of paper that details, you know, what the pay is, how much vacation time. So it's kind of a combination between like a theological call and also a contract. Um, the presbytery has to approve that call. And so at this most recent one, there was a couple calls that were more or less uncontroversial. There was no question about them, and they were approved pretty quickly. But there was one call, um, one call to ministry that took, I, I, I didn't time it, but it was probably like four or five hours of debate and discussion in various fashion in order to get to a point where the presbytery could approve the call. So this was a call to a minister who is being called part-time, which is unusual in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, the OPC uh, acknowledges the fact that bivocational tent making ministry is sometimes a necessity, but really views the ministry of the word in sacrament as something that should not have. Distractions. And actually our book of church order talks about, doesn't use the word distraction, I think, but it talks about a, a properly ordered call to a full-time minister includes phrasing that the congregation promises to compensate them in a way that allows them to be free of worldly burdens and cares. And I might have not, not have gotten that wording exactly right. But that's the idea. And so this call was. Explicitly, um, not a full-time call it, they actually took the language out of promising to pay him in a way that he's able to ignore or to not be distracted by worldly care. And that was intentional, but there was a lot of question in discussion at presbytery level about the fact that the call did not include the phrase or the wording of part-time or bivocational. So the conversation started out of like, can this call be modified to include that? So it's explicitly known in this man's call that his calling is part-time, which is both theological, to make sure that the call is properly formatted, but also like very practical that the congregation should acknowledge explicitly that they recognize that this person is not, not going to be putting, you know, 40 hours a week or 50 hours a week towards this position. [00:06:34] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:06:34] Tony Arsenal: Um. What I'm affirming is where it got to, right? So there was lots of discussion about that. There was some finagling about the retirement package. The OPC recommends that a, a minister be given a retirement contribution of no less than 5% a year of his salaried package. Um, which there's a couple line items that go into that, but 5%, and this was a little bit less than that. And this is what I'm affirming and this, I, I don't know that this is a super widespread thing that would happen all across the, um, the OPC, but it happened in the presbytery of New York and New England this past week, and it's just amazing. And I just, I just want to lay it out there and then I want to hear your reaction. [00:07:13] Funding Full Time Ministry [00:07:13] Tony Arsenal: And I, I wanna hear your reaction as the son of a minister who labored his entire adult, more or less, his entire adult career in ministry, working two or three additional jobs on top of his ministry, the presbytery decided. That because it did not like the idea of a part-time minister. They didn't think that was appropriate. They didn't think that that was good or that that was really the right goal. The presbytery allocated, I'm not gonna say the figures 'cause they're not super germane, but allocated a significant amount of money to be dis to be dispersed to the church for the next three years in order to take what was a part-time call and enable it to become a full-time call. [00:07:54] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.  [00:07:54] Tony Arsenal: And so there are a lot of, there are a lot of church bodies that would say, yeah, we don't love the idea of bi-vocational ministry. You know, we really think it's ideal that a minister could be full-time. Um, they may even put some, some theological freight behind that. Um, I have never encountered a body, um. That was willing to put a sizable amount of money towards essentially supplementing a part-time call to make it full-time. Um, this was just amazing to me, and the candidate was there. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I would love to talk to him about what he felt. I, I can just imagine the phone call to his wife who was not, not at presbytery, but to his wife, following the outcome of this to be like, you are never gonna believe what just happened. Right? This is a family who was intending to move across country. Right. He's currently a student at Westminster, California in seminary, uh, California, Westminster Seminary in California, finishing his M Div. They're planning a cross country move into a part-time position where she's probably gonna have to find a job, and then also he's gonna have to find a part-time job. He had the ability to call her on the break and be like, you're never gonna guess what just happened? You're never gonna,  [00:09:09] Jesse Schwamb: it's wild.  [00:09:09] Tony Arsenal: Uh, sorry, I'm getting a little emotional here. You're never going to. Believe how faithful God is in this. Right. So I'm interested to hear your reaction to that as the son of a, of a try and quad at times Quad vocational. Yeah,  [00:09:23] Jesse Schwamb: for sure.  [00:09:23] Tony Arsenal: Minister who labored his entire, more or less, his entire adult career, um, working full-time in a call as a part-time, part-time minister. You know, like that's a, that's a crazy situation. So I'm just affirming that again, I don't know how common that kind of thing is in the OPC. I don't wanna make it seem like that's the norm. Um, I actually get the sense that this is probably not the norm, but it was amazing to see and it made me in intensely like. Proud in the right way of being a part of this broader body that would, would so emphasize and so value the ministry of the word and the sacrament, and the importance of a man being able to dedicate himself to that without distraction. That they would put forward this amount of money and this kind of money. They had no reason to do so. And there's no real direct benefit to the presbytery for doing this. I mean, there's an indirect benefit of like not having a church with a part-time minister, but like there's no direct benefit to this. There's no direct return on investments that's gonna come out of this. Um, it was pretty amazing to see. It was, it was, it was super encouraging.  [00:10:28] Jesse Schwamb: That is really encouraging. I, I think it's, there's no doubt that for the called pastor, their heart is in the ministry of the word. That's what they want to be doing. They wanna be doing it all the time and as much time as they possibly can, and they wanna be able to have all of their intentional focus on it. So I. I'm excited for that guy. I mean, that's just an incredible blessing to go in hoping for funding, essentially for a part-time role and to basically be told, no, no, no, no, that's, that's not enough. We want you to be committed to this fully as we know your heart is committed. As we validated that call.  [00:11:00] Why Structure Matters [00:11:00] Jesse Schwamb: I do love being a part of churches, well, lemme say it this way. There is, I think, a benefit of being part of congregations that have like a wide resource network that has like appropriate hierarchy and structure and that can be one of them. I've seen something similar in the Christian Missionary Alliance, which is the church that I'm in, not exactly the same, but I've seen some surprising allocations of resources where they basically said, you know, this is important. Like, it even trumps we're, we're gonna. Allocate or resource something so that this can move forward because it is important in a way that was like better than the person who was bringing it before them could have hoped for. Yeah. And uh, suddenly it's as if everything aligned. And it was really in part because there was this structure to come alongside, to validate as you're saying, and then to authenticate and then again to resource assets that could be used. There's, there's something to be said for that interdependency where there is kind of this hierarchical structure in which all that's happening at a level where things are codified. And again, like there's a structure and a way in which we move through those decisions to make sure that they suit the objective of the entire movement. So I guess there's nothing I'll say, but that's a beautiful thing, isn't it?  [00:12:14] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:12:15] Generosity in Action [00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: It was, it was, it was cool because it was like this, it was like this real. Actualization of the principle of outdoing one another and showing honor. Yeah, sure. Because you know, like the initial debate was like, Hey, you know, I'm not sure we can approve this call because the, the OPCs guidelines tell us not to approve a call that has less than 5% of the retirement benefit. And there was a lot of discussion of like, well, the presbytery can't modify the call, but we don't wanna delay this guy coming in and like, we don't wanna delay his ordination, his installation. And so the initial proposal was a, a. What feels like a large amount of money to me. But after I understood more about the, the budget of what's going on in, in the presbytery was actually a very small amount of money. Started with a very tiny, very modest proposal of basically like supplementing the retirement fund to make sure that like we could, they, I say we, like, I was part of this, I was just observing, but to supplement the retirement fund in a way that allowed the church to still proceed with the call as written, but still also make sure that this person had the appropriate retirement fund. And then that just basically was like, there would be some instruction given to the church that like, you've gotta bump this up in the next budget cycle. Like you've gotta get to the 5%. That's, that's the expectation. It went from that. And like I said, I won't give you the specific numbers, but one of the presbyters and I, I'm, I, um, I, I've known this presbyter from a distance for quite a long time and, and I have an immense amount of respect for him. He stood up and he's like, well, if we're gonna give X, why don't we just give 10 times X instead? And then actually, like the discussion was like, well, is, are we sure that 10 times X is even the right amount? Why don't we have this particular group meet over the lunch break and figure out whether that's the right number and then come back after lunch and we'll vote on it. And then they came back after lunch and it was actually a number that was even greater than 10 times X. So it was like this exercise in like. This very small proposal that was still imminently generous, right? The presbytery has no obligation to do this. There's no obligation from any of the presbyters to stand up and say like, we should. We should supplement this fund. They would've been well within their right, and no one would've looked, I think. I think some people would've been frustrated by it, but I don't think anyone would've looked sideways at it or thought it was sinful. If the presbytery just said like, we can't approve this call. You guys are gonna have to come back with it and we'll vote on it at the next presbytery. Like that would've been problematic. This, this kind of poor guy who's coming outta seminary, his call and his beginning of employment would've been delayed, but like. That would've been good and orderly, but instead they were like, one, we don't want this pulpit to stay empty longer. We don't wanna disadvantage this guy who's just getting done with seminary. We want him to get started. We don't wanna discourage him. So here's a small proposal, a very modest amount of money that we can put forward for this purpose. And then it was like, let's just keep seeing how much closer to a real full-time call we can get. And they finally came back and said like, we're gonna do this. We're gonna do this in a wise fashion. They structured it. So like the first year he gets more, the second year he gets a little bit less. The third year the church gets a little bit less with the idea that like each year the church should be adjusting their budget to compensate and get this guy to that with the, the hope that like with a full-time minister, they're able to grow their congregation to the point where they can support a full-time minister. So it was just this really cool, super encouraging exercise. And what I loved about it is the only real debate that was going on was about do we need to do more? There was no one being like, wait a second, why are we, why are we putting more money to this? The whole thing was like, is this actually enough to accomplish what we think God wants to do with this person's call? Because if, if God is truly calling this man to this, this particular church, and we believe that he is. Then what do we as a, as a people of God need to do to enable that call to look like what we actually believe calls to ministry are supposed to look like, which is a full-time call to ministry that is undistracted by the cares of the world. What do we need to do? The answer in this case was like, I think we need to put a sizable amount of money to it. Um, it's a, I mean, and again. I'm not gonna say it on the air. It was not a small chunk of change. Um, it was, it was a, it was a large amount of money that was devoted to this cause and that just goes to show how much this body values the importance of a full-time minister of the word, so. [00:16:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:16:51] OPC Love and Recommendation [00:16:51] Tony Arsenal: That's enough about that. I, I could gush about how proud I am to be a part of this body and how encouraged I am and how amazing it was and how awesome this, this guy, how, how much this guy must be thanking God for the providence and like, this is the last thing. I'll say this, this young man younger than me, I think he's graduating seminary. I saw him across the room. He looks like he's probably in his mid twenties, right? Young guy. He's got a wife doesn't have kids yet coming into this ministry, not only is he coming into this ministry, but as a Presbyterian minister, when he's installed as the minister of this church. He will be joining this body of presbyters as the, as his brothers like. He is not a member of the local church. He's a member of the presbytery, which is the regional church. So now he's coming into this fully supported by his brothers in the presbytery that he saw go to the mat to make sure he was properly taken care of, that the congregation was not unintentionally taking advantage of his labor, but also that he knows that all of these men are willing to do what they need to do to make sure that his ministry is successful and edifies the church like that is. Uh, I don't want to gush on Presbyterianism too much, but like that is Presbyterianism at peak form, right? This is the body of elders making sure that every church in the region, even the ones they're not directly ministering in, has what it needs to succeed and to honor God and to do what needs to happen. So I'm affirming the presbytery of New York and New England and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, I have been so blessed by knowing many of these presbyters. I've been so blessed by being a part of the congregation that I am. There are lots of really great churches and really great denominations out there. If you are looking for a church and there is an OPC congregation in your area, absolutely go check it out. I know it feels stuffy sometimes, and I will admit, like sometimes it feels a little bit overly traditional in terms of like just the vibe of the congregation,  [00:18:52] Jesse Schwamb: right?  [00:18:52] Tony Arsenal: But press past that because I don't think, I don't think you will find, um. You may find lots of congregations that are as faithful. I don't think you're gonna find many that are more faithful than your average OPC congregation. So I could be wrong. I just, I just love the OPC. I just really, really love it. So that's my affirmation. What do you got for us, Jesse?  [00:19:18] Denial Catholic Confession Math [00:19:18] Jesse Schwamb: I think I got denial, which is maybe a little bit unusual for me. [00:19:21] Tony Arsenal: As long as you're not denying the OPCI think we're fine.  [00:19:23] Jesse Schwamb: No, it's, it's not, it is church related and I, I'll try to keep it short 'cause I think I can make this way longer than it, it probably should be, but lemme think how to phrase this. So, I don't know with a devil negative, I guess when I'm a denying against is maybe not enough confession by your own standard. So the, I'm gonna try to make this so brief. I, I just happened to be out with my wife this afternoon and we had to run errands. We got stuck in traffic and this gave me longer than usual to sit in front of our. Very local and very large Catholic church. So I happen to be looking at their sign. It's a very large congregation. I've been actually been in this one on a couple of occasions for funerals. So not only do I know its size and scope, but again, if you get, if you get on this road at the wrong time on the Lord's day, you're gonna be stuck for a long time because there are so many people that attend. I say that because I noticed on the sign that there were three times for mass on the Lord's Day. So that also says something about the number of people coming through. And then on the sign though, underneath it said for confessions, go to our website. Mm-hmm. So I was like, man, I gotta lick this up because I can't tell if they're telling me I can confess on the website or if it's go to the website for the times. And I said to my wife, only half jokingly, if I can confess online, I'm gonna confess something. So I went to, I went to the website and, and sure enough it was almost disappointingly. It was just the times.  [00:20:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:20:46] Jesse Schwamb: Here's what I've found interesting, which just launched me into this like deep rabbit hole. There were three times for confession. Two of those times were just a half an hour, and the third time was an hour. So, uh, what I did was I went through, actually, I think what they had on there was, was three full hours a week. It was a little bit confusing, but I think it was three full hours. Now I think about it. So I went back, I just couldn't help myself, Tony. So I started to think, alright, let's say. I think it's fair to assume  [00:21:15] Tony Arsenal: math, Jesse is kicking in right now. Yes. You're gonna calculate how many minutes per, per person is what you're doing. I'm thinking, ah,  [00:21:22] Jesse Schwamb: yeah, it's something like that. So what I thought was, I don't think it's, uh, I was gonna be conservative. I wanna be fair. I wanna be fair. So, and now we should say like, I think most people realize that the Catholic understanding of confession and the Protestant one is, is very different. The Catholic sacrament of confession is the right through which Catholics are gonna confess their sins to a priest receive absolution, and it's gonna restore the relationship with God in the church. And, and they're gonna believe that the priest acts as a person of Christ and is bound by the seal of confession and an absolute kind of obligation. Uh, of course never to reveal what was disclosed during that process. So, by the way, the website that I went to, lovely instructions. I mean, I was like, wow. I was reading it to my wife who was, uh, not familiar with this at all, and she was like, they can make you do stuff. And I was like, well, yeah. I mean, obviously like there's, there's a portion of this where there's contrition or penant penance. It could be a prayer, it could be act of charity, like all kinds of stuff. So I went back and I thought. I don't think it's unreasonable that there's 350 persons that would say, let's say an average, uh, that would wanna take part of confession. Now, let's say that they did that at, at least monthly, just once a month. And, and I don't know how people's conviction is on that, but I'm gonna say conservatively once a month. Let's say that, and I don't think this is unreasonable, Tony, but you tell me. Let's say you're, you're trucking, you're moving through confession. Let's say it's five minutes a piece. So we're up to 1,750 minutes, uh, per month. That's the demand on the priest because I was, I was looking at this time and I was thinking something is strange here to me, so. That was the demand then, and I'll spare you the other math, which could be very long and un uninteresting. I'm coming up with, you'd need 2.24, two and a quarter priests, which of course you can't have a quarter priests or a quarter person for any reason. So you'd hire, you'd hire three priests, which satisfy the demand if, and the major assumptions here, that is like everybody can't show up at the same time. Obviously, I'm assuming that like everybody has their own time, they're spreading it out. So everybody gets the confession, but it's just five minutes. And I, I have no idea. I mean, if you're a Luther, that's certainly not sufficient time.  [00:23:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:23:20] Jesse Schwamb: And you would need three priests. Now here's the thing that I just kind of backed into that, besides like three being like, okay, that, that's, you would need three priests just to satisfy this congregation. If they're confessing for five minutes, once per month. Uh, by the way, if you said, well, half the congregation is going to go weekly, uh, then you, you would double the number of priests you need to 5.98 or six. But here's, here's the bottom line for me. This is why the denial comes in about maybe not enough, is. If you were just to distill that down to like, if you could have one priest cover that time, that there's a demand for like 779.4 hours, or excuse me, minutes of confession, that priest would only be allocating approximately like seven and a half percent of their working hours, their work toward handling confession. This seems like not enough confession given the standards of confession in the Catholic church. And again, I know that I'm, I'm now allocating that to one priest and I just told everybody you need three. That's true. So if you had these three now, if you hired three just to meet the demand, that would only be about like three and a half or a little under three and a half percent of their combined time. So the denial is Catholics, I think, unless I'm way off in some of my assumptions here, you might not be confessing enough by your own standards because  [00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, that seems like not enough time.  [00:24:38] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:24:39] Ritual Faithfulness Explained [00:24:39] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think, um. I don't want to be too bombastic here, but I think,  [00:24:46] Jesse Schwamb: I think I already started this on this  [00:24:48] Tony Arsenal: path. Maybe this, maybe this isn't all that bombastic. Um, because this is so much about ritual and actually I say this is gonna sound really, we, we go, but trying to think from the Roman Catholic perspective, it's actually not, and I'll I'll tell you a brief story, uh, to explain it. Um, a lot of Roman Catholics are just going through the motions. [00:25:13] Jesse Schwamb: That's true.  [00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: But the point, the, the, the point of contention actually is that going through the motions is valuable for the Roman Catholic, right? So I, I knew this, uh, this young woman when I was in college who was a Roman Catholic, and we had many discussions about, about the differences between Protestantism and and Roman Catholicism. And what I came to understand is that going to mass for her. Itself was an act of faith. And so for the Roman Catholic, the concept of, of faith is different than the concept that Protestants operate under. So for the Roman Catholic who, um, goes to mass, even when they feel like they're, like, when they think they're just going through the motions, going through the motions is itself the act of faith. And that's because for most of Roman Catholics, most of Roman Catholicism, faith really equals faithfulness, right? So, so doing the act is the act of faithfulness. Doing the act is faith. Where for the Protestant, like faith is about belief and trust and knowledge. Like it's, it's an. Not entirely intellectual, but it's, it's an inward thing for the Roman Catholic faith is an out is primarily an outward thing. It's what you do, it's how you act. It's faith formed in love. It's faith formed in charity.  [00:26:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:26:37] Tony Arsenal: So I think most Roman Catholics going to obligatory confession first. I think once a month is probably like, probably more frequent than most Roman Catholics go to mass or go to confession. Um, I thought I read a stat that it was like every six months is, is pretty average and I think that's what's required by the church maybe even once a year is, is required by the church. Um, I think like most Roman Catholics go into the, the confessional booth and like father forgive me for I've sinned. It's been such and such a number of days since my last confession. Right. And they may bring up a couple particular things that they've done and, and then I think the priest commonly absolves them of all of their sins. Like, almost like in an omnibus fashion and then prescribes their acts of penance, which is it, it like, honestly, it's probably things they should already be doing as a faithful Catholic saying Hail Marys and doing our fathers and acts of charity and things like that. So I think your math is probably right. [00:27:39] Protestant Repentance Particular [00:27:39] Tony Arsenal: I think your, your theory that more confession is probably like, I'm gonna read this from, uh, the Westminster confession, just to, just to say it here, is, this is chapter 15, which is titled of Repentance Under Life. And this is, uh, this is section five or paragraph five. It says, men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but is every man's duty to endeavor, to repent of his particular sins, particularly. And I think that's just such a beautifully phrased sentence like. Not only is it like potent theologically, but like, it just, it just feels good, like in terms of like the English language to repent of your particular sins, particularly. And like the idea is yes, Protestant reform, Christians affirm a general repentance from sin, right? We repent of our sin before the father, uh, as a result of our, of our coming to faith in Christ. And as part of our sanctification, we mortify our sin and we, Viv we are vivified by the spirit and repentance falls in that ongoing sanctification process. And there is this general repentance of like, I repent of the fact that I'm a sinner and that I commit sins, but there is this element in the reformed faith of like, I should be confessing to God. And I think by extension, like we should be confessing to our fellow Christians, our particular sins, our individual sins, and we should be doing that on particular occasion. And I think like. The Luther style confession of like going into the confessor and confessing like every particular sin. Particularly I think most Roman Catholic priests would, priests. Priests would probably have the same reaction Tobits did where he was like, get outta here. Like, come on dude. Like just go live your life and like deal with it. I think that's probably the reaction most Catholic priests would have. But yeah, I think you're right. Like if we're really talking about like. Five, five minutes of confession once a month and that somehow having some sort of spiritual efficacy. I'm not sure I buy that math. Like I think you're, you're probably spot on.  [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:29:47] Confession Hours Oddities [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: I just was curious about how many priests would be required and then the allocation of the duties. By the way, you are right. So I, because I had to check on this, the, the fourth letter in council of 1215 does say that the church requires confession of any grave or mortal sins at least once a year. But the church, yeah, strongly encourages more frequent confession as a spiritual practice, even for, of course, like the venial or the less serious sins in their eyes. So yeah, my thought here was just that. I think it's actually undervalued by way of the math. Like the, as the kids say, the math just isn't math thing for me on this one. But I was more curious about, since this is one of the seven sacraments, even if you just said like, well, it should have at least one seven of the allocation. That's like, what? Like something like 14%. And so this is, um, almost half of that. I just found it a little bit, a little bit odd and yeah, I think you'd have to be, uh, so in other words, when I looked at the, basically, here's the bottom line. When I looked at the hours for confession one, there were weird times and uh, two, I was like, that doesn't seem like enough hours. Like, it was just more like that. Like how that's like saying like, Hey, the post office is open three hours a week, and by the way, one of those hours is from seven to eight o'clock on Friday. Like they had some hours. One hour just on Friday was like, I guess that's the way you wanna start your weekend is like, let's get all of this off my chest. Yeah. And, and do it. Right. And the last thing I'll say by the way, is you're correct. When you look at the instruction they give you, and this is common of course, toward the end, when they say like, here's how you like wrap up your part. Actually everybody should go read, go to the local, local Catholic church website and read the instructions. 'cause in some ways they're just interesting and kind of, um, I don't wanna say funny 'cause I'm not making fun. I'm just saying like, they have to give you instruction if you've never done it before. And so most of us are not really probably familiar with the process and they give you explicit instruction and toward the end it's like, here's how you kinda like hang up the call with the priest. And it's like you said, you know, these are my sins and all others, would you be willing to forgive? So you're right. Right. They just kinda wrap them all up because it's sins of omission, sense of commission, it's all to be together. But I, I wonder, you gotta think there's people in there that are like. The priests are like, okay, man, just yeah. Wrap, come on, wrap, wrap it up.  [00:31:55] Confession Timing Talk [00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: And other people that come in are just like, you know, forgive me father. And uh, lastly to your point, when they give you instruction about how you should start, of course you're always to signify how long it's been since your last confession. Right. Confession. And they say parenthetically, like, reference the days, weeks, months, or years. So you're right. There are gonna be people that probably do it very frequently and probably people who do it infrequently still, I would say I just couldn't believe for a church this large, that there was just three hours a week.  [00:32:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:21] Jesse Schwamb: For everybody else.  [00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:23] Vance and Papal Authority [00:32:23] Tony Arsenal: This leads me to two very brief sub, uh, denials slash affirmations. Uh, I don't know if you saw this, um, this is not a political statement, right? I, I have lots of feelings and thoughts about the current administration and I think most of my feelings and thoughts would surprise. Everybody. But I thought it was hilarious because JD Vance, who is a Roman Catholic, uh, confessed Roman Catholic part of the Roman Catholic Church, uh, he ha I, I'm not sure if I'm affirming or denying this, there was this funny, uh, funny exchange. I think he was at doing like a, doing like a TPU, I don't know, speech. He was doing a speech at some conservative event and he said something like, I think that the Pope should be more careful when he makes theological statements. I'm wanna be like, do you understand what the pope is in your religion? That was one of my sub denials. Uh, I don't remember what the other one is, so it must not have been that important. It'll come back to me at the worst possible moment and I will try very hard not to interrupt our show for it, but I probably will fail.  [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:33:25] Reading Matthew 21 [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we, we gotta get to some scripture because. We're, we're doing this old school style where we take like half the time and just talk about affirmations. It's true in house. It's true. Which is great fun. But let's, let's get back to Matthew 21. And I, I know we did this last time, but I am gonna rock through the passage 'cause of course, that's the best part of any of our discussion, is actually hearing from, from the Holy Spirit through the scripture, uh, which he's given to us. So this is, uh, Matthew 21, starting in verse 33. And you're gonna hear the, the whole thing right here. Uh, this is Jesus speaking. Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard and put a wall around it and dug a wine press in it and built a tower and rented it out to vine growers and went on a journey. Now, when the high risk time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit, and the vine growers took his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Again, he sent another group of slaves larger than the first, and they did the same thing to them. But afterward he sent his son to them saying they will respect my son. But when the vine growers saw the sun, they said among themselves, this is the heir. Come let us kill him and seize his inheritance, and they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine growers? They said to him, he will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons. Jesus said to them, did you ever read in the scriptures the stone, which the builders rejected? This has become the chief cornerstone. This came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it. And he who falls in the stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust. And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that he was speaking about them. And although they were seeking to seize him, they feared the crowds because they're regarding him to be a prophet. [00:35:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:35:30] Pharisees Condemn Themselves [00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: This is like a super heavy parable. Right. And we talked a lot last week about how like the point of this parable is not necessarily to try to instruct the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Like it's not to instruct the people who were going to reject Christ, uh, the, the builders who would reject the cornerstone. It's really a parable to teach those. Who are observing this process happening. But I think it's, I, I think it's really interesting just listening to you read this and reading through it, and I guess this is a question I haven't asked and I, I need to study a little bit more. It's crazy to me in verse 41, um, Christ seems the, the, the, um, Matthew seems to say here, and maybe I need to do a little bit more Greek study, so bear with me and, and have grace if I'm wrong here. Matthew seems to say that like Christ asks the people he's speaking to, the Pharisees he's speaking to, what is he gonna do to these people? And the Pharisees answer, he's gonna put those wretches to a miserable death.  [00:36:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right?  [00:36:37] Tony Arsenal: Like the people listening to this parable understand the outcome, like they understand the. The consequence that the, the, the vineyard owner or the vineyard tenant tenants are facing based on their lack of faithfulness to the covenant. To me, that is like a really striking part of this parable. And, and it's not even like the parable proper, but like the striking element of the context of this is that nobody listening to this parable, including the Pharisees that this parable has basically spoken against, nobody fails to see the gravity of the consequence of rejecting God's emissary, like rejecting the Messiah. That to me is like a really, I dunno, paradigmatic. Portion of this that I think we need to grapple with. This is not an unclear, an unclear outcome. This is not, this is not masked or vague or OPA opaque. Like everybody understands, the people who reject the Messiah are going to face dire and eternal consequences for that act. [00:37:48] Jesse Schwamb: That does make this really interesting, doesn't it? Because it's not just entirely like Romans one adventures or even Romans two. It's that this is what Jesus does and he does it in a profound way that's not trickery like I think kinda like you're saying like the lead up to this isn't as if he's even leading the witness. He's making it very clear, all like the parameters of the story and the characters involved and what should be the proper judgment. And it's not as if like they start saying, they're like, oh, we shouldn't say anything more like we, we plead the fifth because it's gonna condemn ourselves. He draws his audience in to producing and pronouncing like their own sentence. It's very much like, I think I mentioned this last time, the prophet Nathan and David, isn't it? It's the exact same. Yeah. And the verdict is unanswerable, like even in its own terms. These other, like these other vine growers, prefigures of course like the inclusion of the Gentiles and the apostolic office. But I like that what Jesus does here, even before he gets to that point, is he extorts from them an acknowledgement of the punishment which awaited them. And so in this way there's like, I think the Puritans use this passage a lot actually to demonstrate that the natural conscience even of like the unregenerate, still bears witness to divine justice. That's Romans two. Like they, they can't get out from underneath it and Jesus isn't using any trickery on them to get them to say this thing. They are compelled in their own way, even being unregenerate to, like you said, even as they're rejecting the Messiah to recognize that punishment is due these characters in the story, even as they perceive at the end that they are those characters. [00:39:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Saying we'll receive the judgment.  [00:39:24] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:25] Usurpers Not Misguided [00:39:25] Tony Arsenal: And I think too, like, um, this is kind of one of those chicken or the egg scenarios, right? Like Christ is both recognizing the intention of their heart as well as prophesying. And, and not just prophesying, but like inception level prophesying the, the outcome of the intention of their heart. And so like, again, like we've, we spent a whole week kind of like leading into the parable and now we spent a whole week, we're gonna spend a whole week again kind of leading into the parable. This is such a deep parable, and that like Christ is not just laying bare. The fact that the, the people who were going to reject him were doing so out of this sort of like attempt and intention of usurping the kingdom of God for their own purposes. I think that brings a layer to this that we don't often appreciate in. Christ's interaction with the Pharisees. I think sometimes, and maybe this is because I just listened to an episode of where Matt Whitman on the 10 minute Bible hour talked about this. I think sometimes we actually have a tendency to sort of be sympathetic to the Pharisees where we think, you know, they were, they were just trying to obey God's law and they got a little sideways on it and you know, they were putting these boundaries in place, but they were doing it in this sort of like misguided attempt to protect the people. Christ actually here seems to contradict that in that the comparison he's making is not to a, a well-intentioned group of people who just get it wrong, but he's painting the Pharisees, the, the religious leaders, the Sadducees, the chief priests. He's painting them as these usurpers who recognize the proper authority of right. The master and his emissaries and ultimately of his son, they recognize this proper authority and rather than submitting to it and submitting to the covenant obligations that they, they already actually agreed to, instead of doing that, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own right. It's not just that they do the wrong thing, it's that they recognize the heir, which is Christ. They recognize this heir and they kill him to try to take his place. That is a really heavy element of this parable. Christ is not painting. Um, the, the, the Pharisees here, the, the religious leaders. He's not painting them as um, well-intentioned, but ultimately wrong, which is I think a lot of times, and I think there's reason to do this right. I'm not being overly critical and I've done this, I've actually done this myself, and I think there's some. Space for it. Like the Pharisees were wrong, but they were wrong, kind of in the right direction sometimes. Um, Christ is not really on board with that, at least in this parable. Right. This isn't about them thinking that the heir was a threat, and so killing the threat in, you know, inadvertently this is them absolutely seeing who the hair, who the heir is, and intentionally deciding to reject that heir and to murder him and to try to take his inheritance. Mm-hmm. That's an affront to not only the heir who they murder, but an affront to the owner of the vineyard himself, which of course in this parable is figured to be God the father primarily. But God in sort of general terms, like the whole Godhead, um, with Christ as the second Adam has, as his representative, as his heir. This is a really heavy parable and I think where this comes into play for us in our own Christian life is. Are there times where we. Sort of do the same thing in refusing to, maybe it's tie into your denial a little bit. Like refusing to acknowledge our own sinfulness, refusing to acknowledge the ways that God has provided for us. Um, do we at times look at what we have and lay claim to it as though it is our own inheritance that we've taken? Um, right. Do we kind of crucify the son of God anew in, in refusing to repent of our sins particularly? I dunno. I think those are some open questions for us to kind of explore as we dig into this a bit more. [00:43:54] Jesse Schwamb: And that may relate as well to, well eventually at some point, I dunno, like 2040, get to like the parable of the talents. There's some similarity there with a little bit, right? You're saying? I think you're right.  [00:44:06] God Does All the Verbs [00:44:06] Jesse Schwamb: And where I think we can anchor some of that is in those first couple of verses. I'm really always impressed by really the number of action verbs that are packed within, like that just initial statement of Jesus explaining the situation. [00:44:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:44:19] Jesse Schwamb: So he sets it all up and he's saying there's a planting that goes on, this landowner puts up a wall, digs a wine press. Builds a tower and then RINs it. So there's all these like amazing things being done, all this action verb. And I, I think in part why he comes against the Pharisees so hard in the same way that we're looking at like the parable that, uh, the, uh, talents for instance of saying like, what did you do with that was entrusted to you was like this great treasure which Christ has entrusted or God has entrusted to his people, which is, is the gospel essentially is, is all a prophetic witness, is like the truth of who God is and his revelation of himself. And so I think. The first thing we gotta see in those verbs is that there's this emphasis that the vineyard was God's sovereign creation. You know, he plants it, he chose it, he established it. Israel didn't plant herself. She was planted. And that sovereign initiative is foundational, I think in, like you're saying, the parables indictment, because these vine growers, they don't possess anything that they did not receive. Right. You know, they did not find a vineyard already planted, but God himself made it from the wilderness that all his glory, all the glory might be his. So. I think it's helpful for us to observe that the church is always the planting of the Lord and that no congregation flourishes that is not first planted by God. And so there is a major offense here when those who are to care for it, who know, like you're saying, that they ought to care for it, who understand something about the hierarchy and the way it has been entrusted to them. Not to only break that covenant, but then seek to try to usurp the power in the roles of those whom they should be, quite frankly, in our own language, like under shepherds too. And so it starts with all, all those verbs. Like I think we could probably spend a. A lot of times just speaking about what does it mean? Why? Why is there all this explicit in particular language about the fact that there's a hedge and there's a press besides just these are part in piece mail or part and parcel of what it means to have a vineyard, apparently, but that they're all part of this narrative of God talking about how he protects and cares for his people and sets them in a place and chooses them and is particular about the construction and does so with great volition and authority and care and concern and creative ability. And then again, you have those who are meant there to do the very job that he's entrusted them with. And not only are they not doing that, and of course you're right. Jesus elsewhere, comes in, comes in hot, right, with a Pharisees saying like, listen, you set burdens on people's backs that you yourselves cannot lift. You're twice as in the hell as anybody else, and that's who you are. Yeah. It's not just hypocrisy, but you're literally setting people up to fail in this. So you can see how you're right. It's not just like, guys, I appreciate that. Like you wanted to set up some additional boundaries and maybe you took it a little bit too far. This parable is just scorched earth. It's, it's nuclear. Yeah.  [00:47:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:47:11] Scandalous Vineyard Setup [00:47:11] Tony Arsenal: And you know, I think, um, we are obviously gonna spend another week on this 'cause we still have not really addressed a single verse in this parable. I, I think like a lot of ink has been spilled on explaining sort of like the feal agricultural arrangements of this passage. What it represents. M my understanding is. A typical arrangement would be that a, a landowner would basically just lease out land and the tenants would be responsible for the planting, for the development. Right. And the, the, the landowner would essentially just collect a portion of whatever they produce. Right. This parable is actually taking this a step further. Exactly. That it's not as though the landowner just says like, all right, you can use this land. Right. And I own the land, so I get a portion of the pro, the profit. He's actually done all the work. Yes. And all that. The, all that the, the tenants need to do essentially is reap the harvest and then provide the portion of the harvest that belongs to the landowner, and so there is a greater investment. Of the landowner into this land than would be expected. We've commented in the past about how a lot of times the, the parables start on sort of a premise of shock. Like there's a, there's an element of the setup of the, of the parable where the audience would kind of like sit back and gasp or kind of be like, wait a second. Like that's not normal. Right. In the parable of the, the, um, lost son, it was the idea that like the son demanded his inheritance. And that wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part was that the father just granted it. Right. Or, um, the lost sheep, like the, there's actually a sort of a shocking element to the fact that like the, the land, the like sheep owner would just go get this other sheep. So we've, we've commented on there's kind of like. There's sort of like a scandalous setup. The scandalous setup in this is not that the land has been leased to tenants, right? It's that the land has been prepared for the tenants before it was leased out in the first place. And I think that's something we might miss if we read over this too quickly, is. The landowner has prepared everything for these, these tenants.  [00:49:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So the, the, at the, the punchline of the parable where they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of, um, sovereignty and maybe a lowercase s in the, in the context of the parable, they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty and the rightful claim of the tenant or of the landowner on the, the profit of the land. And sort of like highlighter emphasized by the fact that they actually didn't do any of the work. There's a certain kind of like Amer, like American rugged individualism where we're kind of like, yeah, like if I planted all the crops, then it's kind of lame that this guy's coming in expecting to take a portion of it, right? Like, yeah, I guess he owns the land, so maybe he gets a little piece of it, but like, who does he think he is? All of that already is already short circuited. Like I. The, these tenants are not actually, um, portrayed as doing anything in this parable. That's right. Like they just lease the land. They, they, um, and leased is not really like the right. The right word, the, the Greek word is omi, which is like he gave over the land to them. Um, when we say leased, we have this idea that like the tenants pay to use the land and then like part of their contract is that whatever profits they reap, uh, off the land goes back to the, to the landowner. This is really more like the landowner graciously allowed them to live on this land, and the only payment he required was that they would eventually provide him part of the profit back. Like he's planted the land, he's put up the fence around it. He dug the wine press so that they could make a product out of it. He built the tower so it would be defended. Yes. And he gave it over to them essentially just to like live on until it was time for the harvest. And all he is asking for is basically like, alright, so this is my land. I've planted the vineyards, the profit is mine to have. And so when the time came for him to come claim that that's where they have now rejected him. Yes. That's where they've now said like, I know you did all the work and really graciously allowed us to live in this land, but we're gonna keep all of it for ourselves. That's the scandal of this. That's what I think like the original audience would've set up and like, wait a second here. Like, hold on. They didn't even plant the vineyards themselves. They didn't even build the tower themselves. That's really the force of this that I think we miss when we, when we overemphasize, trying to think through like what the original agricultural arrangements were. 'cause this is painted. Very different than what the original arrangements would've been typical for. Like this is a different scenario and I think intentionally so,  [00:52:09] Jesse Schwamb: and we need those words like rented, at least in English, to help us understand that it didn't belong to them. It wasn't a gift, right? It wasn't as if like it was just turned over in the sense that it belongs to you now do with it what you will. And it's very clear in the passage one, like you said, that the landowner does all those things. So it was a, you know, he completely set it up. I mean, this is just such a beautiful, I think, depiction of the hold of prophetic, you know, understanding of God's word here, but it's very clear that says the, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit. So you're right. The scandal is that they're like, well, obviously. They need to give him his fruits, like  [00:52:48] Tony Arsenal: right.  [00:52:48] Jesse Schwamb: It was all set up before he left on this long journey. He then turned it over to them to care for, and that was really all that they were supposed to do. They had no role in this. And so it does like lead us in into this weird space where it's like, well, well what, what did the Pharisees think they were trying to do themselves? What does actually Jesus commenting on, on their own, like licit on their own initiative here, is he basically saying that not only are they not respecting his sovereignty, but they were trying to claim for themselves what only rightly belongs to God that even their position right. Society in culture as their representatives, God himself, they wanted to take that over for themselves, which he does bring that condemnation upon them in other parts of the scripture. So again, this is really hot. I think it's a, it's both heat and light, but there's no doubt that there's fire to this, right? Because it's a direct indictment that God the father set all of this up. You yourselves are on rented property, but guess what? Even the property that you've rented, I'm not exacting a tax from you as if like you have put forward and grown or supplied or created some kind of profitable outcome here. And I just want a piece of that. He's not even talking about tithing in that sense. What he's basically saying is, none of this belongs to you. Like how? Right? How dare you? None of this is yours. I set all of this up and in fact, because you've done so poor poorly at this, I'm gonna take it away from you and give it to those who actually produce fruit and guess what's gonna be the Gentiles? So it's, there's a wild. Amounts of condemnation packed into a very small story.  [00:54:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It really is.  [00:54:22] Tenants Add Nothing [00:54:22] Tony Arsenal: Um, there is nothing expected of these tenants. Right. There's no contract, like there's no terms, they, they really add nothing to the, the landowner's land, except I guess maybe they're the ones harvesting these, this fruit. Right. But even that's not explicit in the parable.  [00:54:43] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.  [00:54:43] Tony Arsenal: Right. Right. He, he does all just to steal your thunder, like he does all the verbs. Yes. All of the ves are done by the landowner.  [00:54:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Right  [00:54:51] Tony Arsenal: on. There is an implication that the, the tenants are somehow like the ones harvesting this, or they're the ones producing the wine, I guess, in the wine vat or the wine press. But at the end of the day. A normal tenant landowner agreement would be, I'm, you're, first of all, you're probably gonna pay me to use this land, right? You're paying me to use this land, and the way you pay me is you're gonna plant the, the gr the crop. You're gonna harvest it. You're gonna make the produce, and all I'm gonna do is let you live on this land. I'm gonna take the pro, like the profit, you're gonna pay me outta that profit. There is nothing asked or expected of these, th

Thank you for joining us for our 2nd Cabral HouseCall of the weekend!   I'm looking forward to sharing with you some of our community's questions that have come in over the past few weeks…   Maria: Hello. I have terrible joint pain in my hands. Some days are worse than others. I am a 50 year old female and was wondering if you can suggest a supplement and maybe foods to stay away from.      Bea: Hi Doc, Thanks so much for everything that you do. I have been wondering about dosage on the back of supplement labels. I am a 5'3 115 pound woman. Do I take the recommended amount on the back or less? For example, I take proteolytic enzymes. Should I take 2 as instructed on the back or just 1? thank you!!      Skip: Hello Dr C, thanks for all you do! I keep hearing this tick season is going to be really bad. I know you generally say to strengthen the immune system with Lyme. I'm wondering what specifics you have for preventing/ repelling ticks (with humans and dogs) and for someone who has Lyme- how can they get to the root cause in addition to supporting the immune system?      Karla: Hi Dr. Cabral, I want to first thank you for sharing all of your thoughts and research with us. It has truly been invaluable to me and my family. I wanted to ask about a recent supplement I heard about on my local radio. It's called Astaxanthin. They claimed it would help with skin, vision, energy and many other things. I searched your previous podcasts and didn't see anything about it, so I was hoping you could comment on whether it's worth adding to my current supplement regimen. Thanks in advance!      Louise: Hi Dr. Cabral. I have been attempting to do the CBO Protocol for about 3 weeks now, but have had to pause multiple times because I experienced pretty intense die off symptoms. The most troubling one is restless leg syndrome. I believe it is related to the inflammation caused by the die off. It is so severe that I can only do half the dose a day, and I still get pretty bad RLS. Do you have any suggestions on how I can make it through the protocol with this problem? Would asking for temporary RLS medication be a bad idea? Is there anything natural I can take? I have tried megaigg2000 to bind the LPS, and now high dose curcumin to help the inflammation levels but I don't know what else I can do. Thank you for your time and input!    Thank you for tuning into this weekend's Cabral HouseCalls and be sure to check back tomorrow for our Mindset & Motivation Monday show to get your week started off right! - - - Show Notes and Resources: StephenCabral.com/3747 - - - Get a FREE Copy of Dr. Cabral's Book: The Rain Barrel Effect - - - Join the Community & Get Your Questions Answered: CabralSupportGroup.com - - - Dr. Cabral's Most Popular At-Home Lab Tests: > Complete Minerals & Metals Test (Test for mineral imbalances & heavy metal toxicity) - - - > Complete Candida, Metabolic & Vitamins Test (Test for 75 biomarkers including yeast & bacterial gut overgrowth, as well as vitamin levels) - - - > Complete Stress, Mood & Metabolism Test (Discover your complete thyroid, adrenal, hormone, vitamin D & insulin levels) - - - > Complete Food Sensitivity Test (Find out your hidden food sensitivities) - - - > Complete Omega-3 & Inflammation Test (Discover your levels of inflammation related to your omega-6 to omega-3 levels) - - - Get Your Question Answered On An Upcoming HouseCall: StephenCabral.com/askcabral - - - Would You Take 30 Seconds To Rate & Review The Cabral Concept? The best way to help me spread our mission of true natural health is to pass on the good word, and I read and appreciate every review!  

Brian Whitlark joined me to talk about sand topdressing of putting greens and especially about sand amounts.The blog post we discussed is: https://www.asianturfgrass.com/post/standard-sand-amounts/Listen to Brian's recent appearance on the Frankly Speaking podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/lt/podcast/firm-fast-desert-with-brian-whitlark/id1793571091?i=1000743219832OM246 calculator web app with sand quantity conversion calculator: https://asianturfgrass.shinyapps.io/om246/How to measure topdressing rates: https://youtu.be/6LurONpyg5M?si=LW4IPwzzXbVAOn-mManaging salinity in putting greens article by Brian: https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/course-care/green-section-record/64/issue-08/managing-salinity-in-putting-greens.htmlTerminology of turfgrass organic matter: https://youtu.be/tMfby5xR2IM?si=8aOQ-Ju6A_cLib8MWhitlark and Thompson article from 2019 on topdressing: http://gsrpdf.lib.msu.edu/ticpdf.py?file=/article/whitlark-thompson-light-5-3-19.pdfRead more about all kinds of turfgrass topics at https://www.asianturfgrass.com/Find a suite of decision-making tools at https://www.paceturf.org/Get free ATC newsletters at https://www.asianturfgrass.com/newsletter/ Find out more about soil tests with ATC at https://www.asianturfgrass.com/project/soil-tests/

Conestoga college is taken over by the Ontario government Hauntavirus is a new psyop,Government of Canada keeping tabs on people,Reform wins local elections big. Snowbirds no more,Sign Up for the Full ShowLocals (daily video)Sample Showshttps://canadapoli2.locals.com/ Spotify https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/canadapoli/subscribePrivate Full podcast audio https://canadapoli.com/feed/canadapoliblue/Buy subscriptions here (daily video and audio podcast):https://canadapoli.cm/canadapoli-subscriptions/Youtubehttps://www.youtube.com/c/CanadaPoli/videosMe on Telegramhttps://t.me/realCanadaPoliMe on Rumblehttps://rumble.com/user/CanadaPoli Me on Odysseyhttps://odysee.com/@CanadaPoli:f Me on Bitchutehttps://www.bitchute.com/channel/l55JBxrgT3Hf/ Podcast RSShttps://anchor.fm/s/e57706d8/podcast/rsshttps://LinkRoll.co Submit a link. Discuss the link. No censorship. (reddit clone without the censorship

2025-2026 Petersfield Golf Club captains were delighted to raise a record amount of £18,296.13 for Dementia Friendly Petersfield. They both wanted to recognise the generosity of all their club members, who made this a record year. Jackie Carter and Iain Thompson both have their own personal reasons to support this local charity.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trump DOJ issues a warrant for former FBI Director James Comey making this the second time he's been indicted this past year. Plus, ABC and the Trump administration face off over Jimmy Kimmel.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The DOJ secures another indictment against Trump foe James Comey over his post that made waves. Plus, the FCC targets ABC with an extraordinary move after Jimmy Kimmel's joke infuriates the White House.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Please subscribe to Patreon (through a web browser so Apple doesn't take 30%) for all bonus content plus one extra episode per week! Merch: https://topbananausa.com/durag-and-the-deertag/ Support the show & get simple, online access to personalized, affordable care with HIMS @ http://hims.com/DURAG Visit https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/DURAG & use code DURAG to get $50 in lineups when you play your first $5 lineup! Dru Montana https://www.instagram.com/dru_montana/ https://x.com/dru_montana47 Na'im Ali https://www.instagram.com/naim__ali/ https://x.com/Naim__Ali Kerryn Feehan https://www.instagram.com/kerrynfeehan/ https://x.com/FeehanKerryn Good Boy Comedy https://www.instagram.com/goodboy_comedy/ https://www.instagram.com/dannydubz/  

3/28/26 show

Send us Fan MailLooking for a simple way to build a Betfair trading shortlist?In this video, I break down the Matched Amount Betfair Trading Strategy Shortlist and show you how to use matched amount data to spot potential trading opportunities faster.This is a useful angle for traders who want to filter markets, reduce noise, and focus on races or matches where the money and activity suggest there could be something worth looking at.Inside this video, I cover:What matched amount means in Betfair tradingWhy it can help you build a better shortlistHow to use it as part of your daily processWhy a shortlist is only the start and not the full strategyHow to test and track whether this angle actually worksIf you want a more structured way to find possible trades instead of guessing, this video will help.For more Betfair trading strategy videos, software tutorials, and practical ways to test your ideas, make sure you subscribe.Support the showTwitter: @BetfairTCWebsite: https://betfairtradingcommunity.com/en/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/betfairtradingcommunity

This episode is sponsored by Flipping 50 Menopause Fitness Specialist. Become a health & fitness coach who finally speaks midlife women's language. Learn how to design workouts that balance hormones that actually get results for women in menopause. Other Episodes You Might Like: Previous Episode - The Teen Health Revolution Next Episode - Navigating Unexpected Health Challenges in Midlife More Like This - The Menopause Gut Health Fix You Did Not See Coming Resources: Don't know where to start? Book your Discovery Call with Debra. Leave this session with insight into exactly what to do right now to make small changes, smart decisions about your exercise time and energy. You are trying to build muscle but dealing with muscle loss with various diets, you may not know it's the diet itself.  If you've ever wondered whether you're eating enough protein, eating too little, or following the wrong diet for muscle, this episode clears it up. From intermittent fasting to keto, plant-based diets to protein intake, this conversation breaks down what actually preserves muscle—especially for women in midlife. We're answering questions you may not know to ask about muscle loss with various diets or amounts of protein.  My Guest: Esther Blum is an Integrative Dietitian, Menopause Expert, host of The Midlife Realignment podcast, and TEDx speaker. She helps women find the light at the end of the vaginal tunnel through nutrition, hormones and self-advocacy. Esther is the bestselling author of See ya later, Ovulator, Cavewomen Don't Get Fat, Eat, Drink and Be Gorgeous, Secrets of Gorgeous, and The Eat, Drink, and Be Gorgeous Project. Known as Gwyneth Paltrow's menopause mentor, Esther has appeared on the Today Show, ABC-TV, and Good Day NY and is frequently quoted in goop, Oprah Daily, Well + Good, and Forbes. Questions We Answer in This Episode: Does protein timing matter or is total daily intake enough? Can intermittent fasting lead to muscle loss if protein is too low? How can you tell if you're losing fat or losing muscle? How much protein do women really need to prevent muscle loss? Is eating too little actually slowing your metabolism and fat loss? Do diets like keto or plant-based affect muscle and hormones differently?

Want to Start or Grow a Successful Business? Schedule a FREE 13-Point Assessment with Clay Clark Today At: www.ThrivetimeShow.com   Join Clay Clark's Thrivetime Show Business Workshop!!! Learn Branding, Marketing, SEO, Sales, Workflow Design, Accounting & More. **Request Tickets & See Testimonials At: www.ThrivetimeShow.com  **Request Tickets Via Text At (918) 851-0102   See the Thousands of Success Stories and Millionaires That Clay Clark Has Helped to Produce HERE: https://www.thrivetimeshow.com/testimonials/ Download A Millionaire's Guide to Become Sustainably Rich: A Step-by-Step Guide to Become a Successful Money-Generating and Time-Freedom Creating Business HERE: www.ThrivetimeShow.com/Millionaire   See Thousands of Case Studies Today HERE: www.thrivetimeshow.com/does-it-work/  

Swiss food giant Nestlé is facing criticism over the sugar content of Cerelac, its infant cereal brand sold in Africa. An investigation by the NGO Public Eye found that while the product is sold without added sugar in Europe, African versions can contain up to 15 percent sugar.

More young people are opting out of marriage — and even sex — than any generation before them. Dr. Debra Soh, neuroscientist and author of Sextinction, joins me to talk about the quiet collapse no one wants to admit is happening. The women who are having sex say roughness and blurred lines between consent and coercion have become “normal,” while Gen Z calls it empowerment after growing up on pornography. Meanwhile, testosterone is tanking, antidepressant use is soaring, and half of young adults say they probably won't have kids.Thank you to our sponsors!ZEBRA: Use code ALEX for 10% off any orderA'DEL NATURAL COSMETICS: Use code ALEX for 25% off first-time ordersMASA CHIPS: Use code ALEXCLARK for 25% offBRANCH BASICS: Use code ALEX15 for 15% off Starter KitsCROWDHEALTH: Use code CULTURE to get your first three months for only $99/monthPALEOVALLEY: Use code ALEX for 15% off your first orderOur Guest:Dr. Debra Soh, PhDDr. Debra's Links:Dr. Debra's WebsiteXYouTube

The All Local 4PM Update for Monday, February 23rd 2026

A report came out recently that stated that an abnormal amount of cocain found in the water in one very specific city in the United States. The crazy part is, it isn't a city that you would expect!It's Throwback Thrusday so we have to play our favorite game, Throwback Trivia! Things get a little wild tough when some over confidence in the room starts to backfire...A guy recently got back some unfavorable medical reports. The doctor said there wan't much to worry about but his wife thought differently... She decided to put him on a diet which got him thinking... what would happen if he did that to her...

A report came out recently that stated that an abnormal amount of cocain found in the water in one very specific city in the United States. The crazy part is, it isn't a city that you would expect!It's Throwback Thrusday so we have to play our favorite game, Throwback Trivia! Things get a little wild tough when some over confidence in the room starts to backfire...A guy recently got back some unfavorable medical reports. The doctor said there wan't much to worry about but his wife thought differently... She decided to put him on a diet which got him thinking... what would happen if he did that to her...

Are you overwhelmed by all the health information in 2026? Wearables… at-home labs… AI tools… fast acting drugs… We've never had more data, yet why do so many of us feel more confused than ever when it comes to health and longevity? In this episode of The Health Made Simple Show, Dr. Bart tackles an escalating conversation he's seeing in his clinic and answers questions like:  Why more data doesn't automatically mean better health How overwhelm leads to inaction Why having a clear health philosophy changes everything The hidden limitation of AI-driven lab analysis How nervous system regulation impacts long-term healing Why you need a "health quarterback" to coordinate your plan Health and longevity doesn't have to feel chaotic, but it does require coordination. And if you're ready to build a personalized strategy instead of chasing trends:

Carl Erickson, Meteorologist for AccuWeather, joins Chris and Amy to put rumors of a massive (14-18 inches) snowfall for the region this coming weekend, to rest. He says the larger amounts of snow will likely stay to the south of St Louis, but it will be incredibly cold.

The insured felt like she did everything right. She insured the ring when she bought it, kept it scheduled on her policy, kept up with maintenance, and filed a claim right away when it was stolen. She even submitted the original appraisal for $22,000 so the insurance company would know how much to write on the check. So she was shocked when the insurance payout was only $14,000. Apparently diamonds are cheaper today, but she thinks: "shouldn't the appraisal lock in the cost?"   Notable Timestamps [ 00:45 ] - An insured may assume an appraisal amount guarantees payout, but jewelry claims often hinge on policy type and current replacement cost, not the dollar figure listed on the appraisal. [ 02:00 ] - Jewelry appraisals lack a single governing standard; credentials vary widely, making it critical for carriers to evaluate who prepared the appraisal and whether it meets insurer expectations. [ 04:20 ] - Premiums may be based on a scheduled value, yet replacement cost policies aim to restore the item itself, which can result in payouts lower or higher than the original appraisal. [ 06:10 ] - Clear communication from agents and adjusters about agreed value versus replacement cost policies can prevent frustration and disputes when a jewelry claim is settled. [ 08:10 ] - Replacement cost focuses on replicating the exact item—cut, color, clarity, and materials rather than paying the appraisal number, which can change with market conditions. [ 09:30 ] - It is the insured's responsibility to keep appraisals updated; insurers do not automatically adjust jewelry values for inflation or market shifts in metals and gemstones. [ 11:40 ] - Outdated or inflated appraisals can create claim friction, while modern update tools and reminders help carriers reduce underinsurance and improve customer satisfaction. [ 14:45 ] - Early education about policy limits, valuation methods, and appraisal updates builds trust, supports smoother claims handling, and leads to a more positive claims experience. [ 17:12 ] - Brennan summarizes the key points above. Your PLRB Resources CE Course: Jewelry Valuation & Adjustment - https://members.plrb.org/education/courses/jewelry-valuation-amp-adjustment Coverage Question: Agreed Value Settlement For Repair Of Jewelry - https://www.plrb.org/documents/wedding-ring-diamond-replaced-w-o-notifying-insurer-acv-for-original-ring-pcq-2009-10-08/?search=diamond%20value https://members.plrb.org/education/courses/a-deep-dive-into-a-premises-liability-claim-part-1 Employees of member companies also have access to a searchable legal database, hundreds of hours of video trainings, building code materials, weather data, and even the ability to have your coverage questions answered by our team of attorneys (https://www.plrb.org/ask-plrb/) at no additional charge to you or your company. Subscribe to this Podcast Your Podcast App - Please subscribe and rate us on your favorite podcast app YouTube - Please like and subscribe at @plrb LinkedIN - Please follow at "Property and Liability Resource Bureau" Send us your Scenario! Please reach out to us at 630-509-8704 with your scenario! This could be your "adjuster story" sharing a situation from your claims experience, or a burning question you would like the team to answer. In any case, please omit any personal information as we will anonymize your story before we share. Just reach out to scenario@plrb.org.  Legal Information The views and opinions expressed in this resource are those of the individual speaker and not necessarily those of the Property & Liability Resource Bureau (PLRB), its membership, or any organization with which the presenter is employed or affiliated. The information, ideas, and opinions are presented as information only and not as legal advice or offers of representation. Individual policy language and state laws vary, and listeners should rely on guidance from their companies and counsel as appropriate. Music: "Piece of Future" by Keyframe_Audio. Pixabay. Pixabay License. Font: Metropolis by Chris Simpson. SIL OFL 1.1. Icons: FontAwesome (SIL OFL 1.1) and Noun Project (royalty-free licenses purchased via subscription). Sound Effects: Pixabay (Pixabay License) and Freesound.org (CC0).

On today's Friday Q&A we cover: 1:00 How things are progressing with Life of Fred 14:47 How much foreign currency to have after moving abroad 28:39 A day in Joshua's life The Future of the Retirement Course

A lot of people seem to think you need lots of money to get started investing, but this week Tash and Ana are breaking down why that's definitely not the case. They chat about how you can start with small amounts of money, especially with the rise of micro-investing apps, and how these tools can make getting started way less intimidating.They also talk through the different options out there and unpack ownership structures in a super simple way, including the difference between CHESS-sponsored accounts, micro-investing platforms, and custodial investing, plus a few things to keep in mind before you dive in.If investing is one of your 2026 goals, this episode gives you a clear and easy path to take your first step!Sign up to Pearler in January for a year of free brokerage

How do I navigate the rent determination process for Section 8 applicants in Chicagoland? ============= Connect with Mark and Tom: StraightUpChicagoInvestor.com Guest: Mark Ainley, Straight Up Chicago Investor Podcast Email the Show: StraightUpChicagoInvestor@gmail.com Properties for Sale on the North Side?  We want to buy them. Email: StraightUpChicagoInvestor@gmail.com Have a vacancy? We can place your next tenant and give you back 30-40 hours of your time. Learn more: GCRealtyInc.com/tenant-placement Has Property Mgmt become an opportunity cost for you? Let us lower your risk and give you your time back to grow. Learn more: GCRealtyinc.com ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of Straight Up Chicago Investor 2025.

JUDGE JESS: Do Couples Need To Spend Equal Amounts On Gifts? full 550 Mon, 08 Dec 2025 14:40:30 +0000 NOofwQwxn7CLvX527GjMePc8uRicf5Zl advice,couples,judge jess,couples fight,music,society & culture,news Kramer & Jess On Demand Podcast advice,couples,judge jess,couples fight,music,society & culture,news JUDGE JESS: Do Couples Need To Spend Equal Amounts On Gifts? Highlights from the Kramer & Jess Show. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. Music Society & Culture News False https://player.amperwavepodcasti

See i t

NEVILLE GODDARD COURSE: Law of Assumption Mastery  LAW OF ATTRACTION COURSE: Law of Attraction Mastery  PRIVATE 1:1 COACHING W/ JOSH: joshuatongol.com/coaching

This week Ryan debates the best seasons, why Sydney Sweeney is important, his large of amounts of pain and the government. E-Mail:RyanWoodspod@gmail.comYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1Nu1XWTHMOjA9--Eb3Ry-ATwitter: https://twitter.com/Ryan_WoodssInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/ryanwoodss/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IntoTheWoodspod/

We close the Hour out with a Marcos Mixed Bag! Aaron Rodgers claims his career will begin and end in Green Bay FBI director gets theatrical when discussing fraudulence

Fentanyl Cash Laundering and the Role of Chinese Nationals. Josh Birenbaum (Foundation for Defense of Democracies) discusses with John Batchelor the challenge of laundering the enormous amounts of cash generated by fentanyl drug smugglers and drug lords. This multibillion-dollar process often utilizes Chinese nationals residing in the United States. Because of capital controls imposed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), diaspora populations use internet chat rooms and WeChat to find opportunities to access dollars. Drug cartels capitalize on this by giving the Chinese nationals money to spend lavishly, thus laundering the drug cash. While these individuals may know they are circumventing CCP controls, they usually do not know the illegal origin of the funds which ultimately finance the cartels.

Rideshare Rodeo Roundtable Podcast October 17th, 2025 GHOST JOB POSTINGS Ai CRUSHING JOB OPPORTUNITIES INSURANCE DRONES (roofs & cars) DO NOT PUSH FOR LEGISLATION INVOLVING MONEY CALIFORNIA GIG DRIVER STATUS STARTING 2026 Rideshare Rodeo Brand & Podcast: Rideshare Rodeo Podcast  

The (Huge) Amounts of Risk Sam Altman and Elon Musk Are Taking—and Dragging in with Them an Entire Investor Base and the AI Industry??

Ignoring your tax debt wont make it go away - that message from IRD as it cracks down on people owing relatively small amounts. The department is phoning people who owe more than $1000 and have had the debt for more than 6 months. IRD Customer Segment leader Tony Morris spoke to Lisa Owen.

This hour, Scoot talks about if a study showing that 40% of victims in car accidents had high amounts of THC in their system should be used to prevent the legalization of marijuana.

Joyce talks about how the Left has even had to admit that Far Left violence has gotten out of control since President Trump took office. She also talks about many Democrats still blame the Trump Administration for gun violence due to current policies.Joyce also talks about an unwillingness to debate and have real conversations, influencers are taking crazy amount of Tylenol to protest MAHA, and more. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Foreigners continue their epic buying binge in USTs and US$ assets, totally defying the narrative everyone around the world is ditching America. Despite the intent of so many to make this political, there is nothing political about this, purely economics (small "e"). We keep more evidence and data showing what those really are, and foreigners know it only too well. Eurodollar University's conversation w/Steve Van Metre**************************************Eurodollar University's One Big Weekly ThemeIn a world where markets swing on every headline, focus matters. That's why Eurodollar University offers One Big Weekly Theme — a disciplined, thematic analysis you can count on.If you don't have the time to go all the way to the depth of Eurodollar University's comprehensive Deep Dive Analysis and want the next best thing, One Big Weekly Theme is for you. To sample or sign up straight away, go to:  eurodollaruniversity.substack.com**************************************Bloomberg Foreign Holdings of Treasuries Climb to Record Levelhttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-18/foreign-holdings-of-treasuries-reach-record-even-as-china-sellshttps://www.eurodollar.universityTwitter: https://twitter.com/JeffSnider_EDU

Keith discusses the impact of political rhetoric on mortgage rates, emphasizing the importance of central bank independence.   President of Ridge Lending Group and GRE Icon, Caeli Ridge, joins in to explain the benefits of 30-year mortgages over 15-year ones, advocating for extra principal payments to be reinvested rather than accelerating loan payoff.  They also cover the potential effects of Fannie and Freddie going public, predicting higher mortgage rates. Caeli Ridge elaborates on cross-collateralization strategies, highlighting the advantages of commercial blanket loans for real estate investors.  Resources: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/568 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREinvestmentcoach.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Keith Weinhold  0:01   welcome to GRE I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, the President has called the Fed chair a dummy and worse. How does this all affect the future of mortgage rates? Also, I discuss 30 year versus 15 year loans. Can you bundle multiple properties into one loan? Then how Fannie and Freddie going public could permanently increase mortgage rates today on get rich education   Keith Weinhold  0:28   since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors and delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads in 188 world nations. He has a list show guests and key top selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast, or visit get rich education.com   Speaker 1  1:14   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  1:24   Welcome to GRE from Pawtucket, Rhode Island to Poughkeepsie, New York and across 188 nations worldwide. I'm your host. Keith weinholdin, this is get rich education, not to inflate a sense of self importance, but each episode is an even bigger deal than a New York Jets preseason football game. You might have thought you knew real estate until you listened to this show, from street speak to geek speak. I use it all to break down how with investment property, you don't have to live below your means. You can grow your means as we're discussing the mortgage landscape this week. You know, I recently had a bundle of my own single family rental homes transfer mortgage servicers from Wells Fargo over to Mr. Cooper. And that was easy. I didn't have to do anything. The automatic payments just automatically transferred over. And yes, Mr. Cooper, it's sort of a funny sounding name that you don't exactly see them putting the naming rights on stadiums out there, but the new servicer prominently wanted to point out the effect of me making extra $100 monthly principal payments and how much in interest that would save me over time, sort of suggesting that it would be a good idea for me to do so. Oh, as you know, like I've discussed extensively, extra principal pay down is a really poor use of your capital. It's a lot like how in the past, now you've probably seen it like I have, your mortgage company promotes you making bi weekly payments all year, so you'd effectively make some extra principal pay down each year. That way. Don't fall for it. Banks promote biweekly payments because it sounds borrower friendly, it encourages an earlier loan payoff. Well, that actually reduces lender risk and increases your risk. And the whole program can come with extra fees too. It just ties up more of your money in something that's unsafe, illiquid, and with a rate of return that's always zero, since that's exactly what home equity is. As we're about to talk mortgages with an expert today, I will be sure to surface that topic. We'll also talk about the housing market effect of a president firing a Fed chair. When you're living under the rule of a president that desperately and passionately wants lower interest rates, you've got to wonder what would happen if a president just had the power to go lower them himself, which is actually what most any president would want to do, but you almost don't have to wonder what would happen. You can just look at what actually did happen in Turkey. Now, yes, Turkey already did have an inflation problem, worse than us, for sure, but Turkish President Erdogan went ahead and lowered Turkey's interest rates despite persistent inflation. I mean, that's a situation where most would raise rates in order to combat inflation. Well, lowering rates like that soon resulted in substantially higher inflation to the tune of almost 60. Yes, six 0% per year before cooler heads prevailed and the Turkish government was forced to drastically raise rates. But it was too late. The damage was already done to the reputation of Turkey's economy and its everyday citizens and consumers. I mean, that was a painful, real world example of how critical central bank independence is. You've also got to ask yourself a question here, do you really want to live in the type of economy where we would need a bunch of rate cuts? Because when rate cuts happen, it usually results from the fact that people are no longer employed, or we're in a recession, or financial markets are really unstable. So there are certainly worse maladies out there than where we are today, which is with moderate inflation, pretty strong employment and interest rates that are actually a little below historic levels. I mean, that is not so bad. Before we talk both long term mortgage lessons and more nascent mortgage trends today coming up on future episodes of the show here, a lot of info and resources to help you build wealth as usual. Also an A E TELEVISION star of a real estate reality show will make his debut here on GRE.    Keith Weinhold  6:24   Hey, do you like or even live by any of the enduring GRE mantras, like, Don't live below your means, grow your means, or financially free, beats debt free, or even, don't quit your Daydream. Check out our shop. You can own merch with sayings like that on them, or simply with our GRE logo on shirts and hats and mugs. And I don't really make any income from it. The merch is sold at near cost, and it actually took a fair bit of our team's time to put that together for you. So check out the GRE merch. You can find it at shop.getricheducation.com that's shop.getricheducation.com   Keith Weinhold  7:18   today we're talking to the longtime president of ridge lending group. They specialize in providing income property loans to real estate investors like you, and she's also a long time real estate investor herself. I've shared with you before that ridge is where I get my own loans. They've worked with 10s of 1000s of real estate investors, not just primary residence owners, but real estate investors as well as homeowners all over the country, and at this point, she's like a GRE icon, a fixture regularly with us since 2015 Hey, welcome back to get rich education the inimitable Chaley Ridge,    Caeli Ridge  7:54   ooh, Mr. Keith Weinhold, thank you, sir. So good to see you, my friend. Thanks for having me   Keith Weinhold  8:00   opening up that thesaurus tab right about now, I think maybe JAYLEE, why don't we have the chat everyone wants to have? Let's discuss interest rates, starting with the vitriol from Trump to Powell has reached new heights. This year, Trump has called Powell a numbskull, Mr. Too late, a real dummy, a complete moron, a fool and a major loser, among other names. And you know, at times, I've seen Realtors even blasting Jerome Powell for not cutting rates. Well, the Fed doesn't directly control mortgage rates, and it's also not the Fed's job to boost Realtors summer sales. It's to protect the long term stability of the US economy. Tell us your thoughts.    Caeli Ridge  8:48   So this is a rather complicated topic, okay, and there's a lot that under the hood that goes into how a long term mortgage bond interest rate is going to go up or going to go down. As you said, it's not necessarily just the Fed and the fed fund rate, which, by the way, for those that are not familiar with this, the fed fund rate is the intra daily trading rate between banks. So while there is a connection between that and that of the 30 year long term fixed rate mortgage, they are not the same thing. And in fact, statistically, I believe I read this last week, the last three fed fund rate reductions did the opposite to long term rates, right? So we went the other direction. So please be clear that the viral, as you say, of President Trump and what his opinions are about Mr. Powell and his decisions to keep that fed fund rate unchanged for the last several meetings that they've had, I think, is more of a distraction, but that's another conversation overall. I would say that, is he too late? Is he right on time? You know, there's so much data and so many data points that they're looking at, and there's this thing in the industry called a Lag that, in truth, they're not getting the actual data points that they need real time. It's lagging, so the data that's coming out to them today isn't going to be what's relevant and necessary to make changes tomorrow, next month and next week. Most recently, you probably saw in the news the BLS Bureau of Labor and Statistics and the jobs report came in far under what the expectation was. So that might have been the catalyst. I think that will drive Powell and group to reduce that is the overwhelming expectation that the fed fund rate is going to come down by how much. We don't know. Secondary markets are already baking that in, by the way. So when we talk about long term interest rates, I'm starting to see some changes on the day to day. I get access to that stuff, and I'm looking at it daily, the ticker tape of where the treasury bonds and things are. So I'm starting to see some slight improvement to interest rates in preparation of that market expectation, interest rate on the fed fund level will probably reduce. But I think overall, Keith that the Fed is in a really difficult position, because when you think about what really is going to drive the fed fund rate, and then potentially the long term rate, is counterintuitive to what most people or consumers expect, right? They think if the fed fund rate reduces by a quarter of a percentage point, then a long term 30 year fixed should probably reduce by the same amount. It does not go hand in hand like that. Now, while there are trends right, that doesn't happen that way, and more often than not, the worse our economy is doing, the better a 30 year interest rate will be. So in my industry, I'm kind of always playing on the fence, thinking I don't want anything bad for our country and the economy. However, the worse it does, the better interest rates are going to become. And if you've been paying attention, the economy is in decent shape. We're not doing that bad. Inflation is still up, so the metrics that they're using to kind of gage and predict that lag and where we're going to be are not in line to say that interest rates are going to drop a half or a point or a point and a half in the next year to 18 months. Those signs are not out there for me. All of that said, I know that interest rate is top of mind for I mean, I'm on the phone all day long. I like that part of my job where I'm still interfacing with investors on day to day. Big chunk of my day is spent talking to clients, and that is one of the top questions, probably one of the first questions that come out of their mouth, where interest rates? What are interest rates? And what I have sort of started to really form and say to that question is, if interest rates are the catalyst to your success in real estate, you probably need to do a little bit more research, because interest rates should not be the make or break for your success. Well, as a real estate investor   Keith Weinhold  12:45   the Fed has a dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices. Inflation, though still somewhat elevated, has stayed about the same the past few months. History shows us that the Fed is more comfortable with inflation floating up than they are with suppressed employment levels. To your point about recent reports about us not adding many jobs, and the Fed being concerned about that, the translation for those that don't know is, if the job market is weak, lowering rates, which is what increasingly people think they tend to do later this year. Lowering rates helps encourage businesses. It's more likely that businesses will borrow and expand and hire more people. Therefore, if rates are low now, whether that translates into a lower mortgage rate or not, by lowering that fed funds rate? Yes, there is that positive correlation. Generally, the lower the Fed funds rate goes, the lower mortgage rates tend to go although that isn't always the case. To your point. Shailene, late last year, there were three Fed funds rate cuts, and mortgage rates actually went up, which is somewhat of an aberration that usually doesn't happen that way, but that's the environment we're in. Most people think Fed rate cuts are coming later this year.   Caeli Ridge  14:04   Yeah. And I would say, you know, the other thing too, when we talk about the pressure that the Fed is under right now, specifically, Powell, he's being attacked, fine, and whether I agree or disagree, really important for listeners to understand that the indifference that the Fed is supposed to have right bipartisan, it's not supposed to have a dog in that fight. If it did the calamity, I think what would happen economically in this country would be devastating if other economic powers were to see that our particular financial institutions are swayed one way or another. Politically, that would be devastating to us. So I think Powell has done a decent job at staying the course. He's continued to do what he says, says what he does. So so far, I'm okay. Is he late to reduce rates? I don't know that I'm qualified to say that, maybe. But at the same time, I think that his impartiality has been consistent, and that for that part of it, I'm. Grateful   Keith Weinhold  15:00   for those who don't understand if Trump just told Powell what to do and Powell followed Trump's orders, how does that devastate the economy?    Caeli Ridge  15:09   It shows partiality to or Fieldy to one particular party, right? It's not an independent institution where financial policy quantitative easing, quantitative tightening, all of those different things that are necessary to keep the pistons pumping. It isn't it's very specific to Fieldy and the leader of telling based on potentially ego or other elements that have not a lot to do with fiduciary responsibility.   Keith Weinhold  15:37   If Powell did everything Trump said, I feel like we would have negative interest rates right now   Caeli Ridge  15:43   that could be a problem, especially if the economy and inflation is on the rise, and then you get the tariffs. I mean, there's so much layering to this. I mean, we could go on and on about it, but overall, let me close with this. I think that interest rates are probably on the run, if I had to guess. Now, there's all kinds of variables that could make that statement untrue, but overall, in the next year to two years, I do think we'll see some relief in interest rates, barring any major catastrophe. But again, investors, if your success, if you're tying your real estate portfolio, your real estate investing, whatever modality you're interested in, if you're tying that to an interest rate, and there's a certain number that you have ethereal in your mind, you're going to lose your success in real estate. Interest rate is a component of it, but it should not be tied to your success or failure. You should be able to do the math and look at the differences in real estate opportunities, investment, whether it be long term, short term, midterm, single family, two to four appreciation, cash flow, all those things should be considered, and you will find adequate returns independent of an interest rate. If you're diversifying that way   Keith Weinhold  16:49   there is more evidence that Americans have warmed up and gotten somewhat used to normal mortgage rates. This normalization of mortgage rates, they are pretty close to their historic norms. In fact, a recent housing sentiment survey done by turbo home found that in q1 of this year, 41% of homeowners surveyed said that a 6% mortgage rate was the highest they would accept on their next purchase. Right that was back in q1 today, up from 41%, 52% of respondents now say a 6% mortgage rate is the highest that they would accept. Evidence that people are warming up and normalizing this.   Caeli Ridge  17:30   The other thing too is the pandemic rates. Right? That's been a very hard shell to crack. The people that got these two and 3% interest rates during 2020 2021, part of 22 they're really reticent to let those go, and I think that they're doing themselves a disservice as a result. If you can get a second lean HELOC, okay, fine, but overall, if you're just going to let that untapped equity sit, it's going to be to your disadvantage. If you have any desire to increase your portfolio and your long term financial stability and wealth   Keith Weinhold  17:59   you're listening to get rich education. Our guest is Ridge lending Group President Cheley, Ridge much more when we come back, including 30 year versus 15 year loans. Which one is better and more things that the administration is doing to shake up the mortgage market. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold.    Keith Weinhold  18:15   the same place where I get my own mortgage loans is where you can get yours. Ridge lending group and MLS, 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than anyone because they specialize in income properties. They help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. Start your prequel and even chat with President Cheley Ridge personally while it's on your mind, start at Ridge lendinggroup.com. That's Ridge lendinggroup.com.    Keith Weinhold  18:46   You know what's crazy? Your bank is getting rich off of you. The average savings account pays less than 1% it's like laughable. Meanwhile, if your money isn't making at least 4% you're losing to inflation. That's why I started putting my own money into the FFI liquidity fund. It's super simple. Your cash can pull in up to 8% returns and it compounds. It's not some high risk gamble like digital or AI stock trading. It's pretty low risk because they've got a 10 plus year track record of paying investors on time in full every time. I mean, I wouldn't be talking about it if I wasn't invested myself. You can invest as little as 25k and you keep earning until you decide you want your money back. No weird lockups or anything like that. So if you're like me and tired of your liquid funds just sitting there doing nothing. Check it out. Text family 266, 866, to learn about freedom. Family investments, liquidity fund again. Text family to 66866,   Rick Sharga  19:58   this is Rick sharga housing market. Intelligence Analyst, listen to get rich education with Keith Weinhold, and don't quit your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  20:05   Welcome back to get rich Education. I'm your host, Keith Weinhold. We're talking with a familiar guest this week. That's Ridge lending Group President, Caeli. Ridge wealth is built through compound leverage faster than compound interest. And leverage means using loans. I think most everyone the first time in their life they look at loan amortization tables and learn things like, oh, with a 15 year loan, you pay substantially less interest, perhaps hundreds of 1000s of dollars less interest with a 15 year loan and its lower mortgage rate than you do with a 30 year loan and its higher mortgage rate. But a lot of people don't take that next step and look that Oh, rather than paying down my home loan with extra principal payments, if I just invested the difference, I would be substantially better off down the road. So in a lot of cases, the more sophisticated investor chooses that longer loan duration, the 30 year. That's the way I see it. What do you see? Most of your prefer there.   Caeli Ridge  21:12   It's one of my favorite topics to cover, because there's quite a few layers that I think can all connect. If an individual wants to pay less in interest very easily, I'm going to strenuously advise them to take a 30 year over a 15 year and just simply apply the difference. So let's just start with the applicable version of 15 versus 30 and how it can benefit or harm. Because this is what a lot of times people that go for the 15 year and wanting to pay less in interest. Don't understand, and it's never been delivered to them in a reasonable way, I guess. So just looking at those two, and then we'll get to the strategy of potentially reinvesting those dollars elsewhere. But just look at a 30 year and a 15 year. I am a massive deterrent against a shorter term amortization. I hate a shorter term amortization, because all that's going to do to the individual is limit their ability to qualify later on down the road. And the reason for that is, is that the shorter term, as you had described, is going to yield a higher monthly payment. So when we pull credit for an individual, that's a higher monthly payment that the debt to income ratio has to support, when in fact, if we simply just look at the two side by side, 15 year and a 30 year equal, equal loan sizes. The 15 year is going to have a lower interest rate. It's true, but the amortization is obviously half the amount. We've gone from 360 months, 30 years to 180 months, 15 years. So the payment obviously is going to be much, much higher if you take the payment difference between those two mortgage products and apply it with a 30 year fixed payment. Let's just call it 500 bucks a month, whatever the number is, and you are disciplined to send that extra 500 bucks every single month with your 30 year fixed mortgage payment. You will cross the finish line in 15.4 years, I think, is the average when you run the amortization, so you'll pay a few extra months worth of interest, but whatever, you'll never pay the higher interest that the 30 year has locked at because you've accelerated the payoff of the debt so quickly, and you've maximized your debt to income ratio and future qualifications never take the shorter term amortization. It is to your greatest disadvantage. I hate them. That's part one. Did you have a comment? I can see that your wheels are spinning.   Keith Weinhold  23:24   That is a great answer. If you get the 30 year loan instead of the 15 if you apply an extra principal payment, whatever it would be, call it 500 plus dollars, that you will kill off that loan, that 30 year loan in something like 15.4 years. Yes, and you'll have the lower payment amount for your qualification, going forward, you'll have more flexibility in your life. That's great. I didn't realize the difference 15.4 versus 15 was that small? That's a great takeaway.   Caeli Ridge  23:50   Yeah, absolutely. And the other piece, you kind of just hit on it, the individual's feet are not held to the fire at that higher payment. So let's say it's a rental, okay, whatever. It goes vacant for a month, or a couple months, God forbid, or whatever may be happening. You now get to choose. You are not obligated at that higher monthly payment. You can say, Okay, this month, I'm not going to pay the extra. I don't da, da, da. It's all within your control. So you're killing like four birds with one stone. I really prefer the 30 year amortization for all those reasons. So now let's take it and move into how I believe, and I agree with your philosophy, taking those dollars and applying them, because when we talk about mortgage interest, especially on investment property, okay, it's probably a slightly different conversation when we're talking about somebody's primary residence, home, but for an investment property to take that difference and apply it toward another investment, because the interest remember, you guys, we're investors. We want that Schedule E deduction, that interest deduction, as money goes a 30 year fixed mortgage, even today, as interest rates are elevated beyond the two and three percents that people somehow fixated on, that that's where interest rates should just be forever. You've got Mass. Amounts of interest deduction, so you're paying less in taxes. For that reason, there's so many reasons to stretch out that mortgage on an investment property versus extinguishing that debt, not to mention, you want to constantly be harvesting equity, ideally, pulling cash out. Borrowed funds are non taxable, deploying them, but then taking that extra cash flow and stockpiling it for another investment, whether that just be the down payment or for other things. I just think there's so many better places that those funds can go to produce more wealth than accelerating the payoff of that debt that's benefiting you, from a tax perspective, and several other ways. There's lots of other ways to apply that money. I   Keith Weinhold  25:43   I often ask, why accelerate the payoff on a, say, 7% mortgage interest rate loan, when instead you can take those savings, reinvest them into other real estate, where it sounds preposterous on its face to think of the rate of return that you can get from an income property, but when you add up all the five ways you're paid, appreciation, cash flow, loan pay down, made by the tenant, tax benefits and the inflation profiting benefit on the long term fixed interest rate debt, a return of 20% plus is not out of the question at all. So if it's 20, why would you pay off extra on a seven? That's 13 points of arbitrage that you could gain there by not aggressively paying down a property and instead making a down payment on another income property. Chaeli, when it comes to these type of questions and accelerating a payoff, why do banks seem to encourage that you make bi weekly payments rather than monthly payments, therefore accelerating your principal pay down.   Caeli Ridge  26:42   I'm not sure the reason behind that. I don't know that I've even seen a lot of that from my lens and my perspective. It's definitely not something I ever comment or preach on. But the overall, what's happening there when you do it the bi weekly, so instead of making $1,000 at the first of the month, you make 500 and then 500 right, middle of them on first of the month. What's happening there is, because of the way the annual calendar goes, it ends up being an extra payment per year, right? I think that's the math. Is, when you do it that way, you end up making an extra payment per year, so you can accelerate. And there's you're not doing anything different, necessarily, to in your cash flow, etc. So I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I don't know what the benefit is to the institution that would in communicate that to its consumer. Yeah,   Keith Weinhold  27:27   Yeah, it ends up being 26 bi weekly payments, which has the effect of making 13 monthly payments in a 12 month year, accelerating your pay down. In my experience, it seems that banks encourage this. They contact borrowers. They've contacted me in the past, laying out a welcome mat. Hey, would you like this plan here? And in my mind, accelerating the payoff. We already talked about how that's typically not a good investment. The more you know about the trade off between loans and equity, really, I'm transferring more of the risk onto myself and less they're onto the bank when I accelerate my payoff. So I agree. I'm not interested in doing that at all.    Caeli Ridge  28:06   You know, maybe Keith, it could be, because I people talk about this a lot, those people, and let's say that there are a group of individuals that might benefit. Let's say they're in phase three, right? They're well into retirement. They just want to start paying off. They're not maybe investing anymore. They just want to leave that legacy, perhaps, or whatever their circumstances are, and they don't want to take additional capital and apply it to the principal and lock up those funds and make them illiquid. So maybe, just as an easy sidebar, they just make two payments month versus one. I get a lot of people asking that question. I mean, over the years, I know that like at the closing table, we'll have clients say, Hey, is the servicer going to be set up to accept bi weekly payments? And a lot of times they don't like SLS. I mean, there's a lot of servicers out there that will not accept or don't have the infrastructure to collect those bi weekly so maybe just as a consumer desire out there, the servicers have gotten wise to it, and they just offer it. I can't think of the reason behind why they would promote that to their database. I don't know.   Keith Weinhold  29:09   Another question that I hear quite often, and probably do as well there is about bundling multiple properties into one loan. Can you tell us about that?   Caeli Ridge  29:20   Yeah, that's called cross collateralization. So we're taking residential property, okay, and putting them into a commercial blanket loan. So any combination of single family, up to four unit, five Plex and above is now considered commercial. So it's got to be single family, condo, duplex, triplex, fourplex, right? It's residential property, and they're taking any combination of that and putting it into one blanket loan, cross collateralizing it. Now, I believe the most incentivized way or desire to want to do this is probably for two reasons. One, to free up golden tickets, right? Golden tickets are those Fannie Freddie loans that we talk about a lot. There are 10 of these per qualified individual, if. If someone has maxed out their golden tickets, let's say they've got 12, 1314, properties, they could take five or 10 or 13, whatever the number, and put them into a commercial blanket cross collateralized loan, as long as it's non recourse. That means no personal guarantee is attached to it. The rule per golden ticket will free up all those spaces. So usually this applies to an individual that has a portfolio that has stabilized. This will usually work when the portfolio has had a couple of years to make sure that you've got your consistent tenants and anything that may come up, repairs, maintenance, et cetera, stabilized portfolios and then putting them into that cross collateralization, because the terms are not going to be the same as just a 30 year fixed Okay, especially if you're going to be looking to take cash out and harvest equity that way, that may be a real opportune time to borrow funds. Borrowed funds are non taxable once again, pull the cash out, put it into a non recourse loan. You've got half a million dollars of capital now that you can then go and get a whole new set of golden tickets for expanding your portfolio. So that's something that we focus on for individuals that have maybe maxed out of that that conventional landscape and or are looking to scale and acquire more properties, but they don't want to necessarily look at some of the DSCR loans. They want to get back into the Fannie Freddie box.    Keith Weinhold  31:22   Yeah, so someone could bundle and get cash out simultaneously, potentially, is there anything else that qualifies or disqualifies one for bundling many loans into one like this?   Caeli Ridge  31:35   It's a commercial underwrite. So they should be aware of that. Now, certainly, we're looking at the individual typically in those loans, the underwriting of those loans, the individual's liquidity and credit are most what we're focusing on, but it's about the property in the portfolio, DSCR, that debt service coverage ratio is a big factor. So we're looking at the income against the monthly expense. Generally. That's going to be the principal, interest, tax and insurance on a commercial basis, they throw in the maintenance, vacancy, et cetera, averages. So you want to see, generally speaking, about 1.2 on those when you divide the incomes and the expenses and then otherwise, yeah, LTV might be a little bit restricted on something like that, 70% usually, maybe you can get as much as 75 if you've got a really strong portfolio. But otherwise, for you, individually, liquidity, some liquidity there, and good credit is what is important. As long as the portfolio is operating at a gain, then you're good to go.    Keith Weinhold  32:32   Yeah, that cross collateralization could be really attractive. Well, Chile, we've been in this presidential administration that has shaken things up like few, if any, prior administrations have. One of those things is that they have pushed for cryptocurrency holdings to be recognized as assets in mortgage loan qualification. Now that's something that would probably pend approval by the FHFA and critics cite volatility. I mean, there's been a pattern where every few years, Bitcoin drops 80% before rebounding, and I'm not exaggerating, and that has happened a number of times. And another administration desire is this potential Fannie Mae Freddie Mac merger, or an IPO an initial public offering. Can you tell us what that's about   Caeli Ridge  33:21   let's start with the crypto first, whether or not this, this gets through the Congress and or FHFA, however, that that develops and becomes actualized, that may be different than what the lending institutions decide to take a risk on, right the allowance of that crypto so it even if it's approved and they say that, Yes, that we can use this for asset depletion or reserve requirements, or whatever it may be. I don't know necessarily that you're going to see a lot of the lending institutions jump on board. I think they'll probably have overlays. It's just kind of the layering of risk on the crypto side to ensure that the asset and the underwrite is less likely to default. I don't see a lot of lending institutions that are probably going to jump on that bandwagon immediately. That's probably going to need more time and consistency with that particular asset class. That's the crypto thing. So that's a TBD on the other side, we're talking about conservatorship. So post, oh 809, right? The housing crash and Dodd Frank, if you've not heard of those names before, they're just the last names of individuals that that rewrote that sweeping legislation across all sectors of finance. Once we saw housing and lending implode upon each other, Fannie Freddie, as a result, went into conservatorship. Now what they're saying, what the administration is saying is, is that they are going to say that the implicit guarantee actually, let me back up really, really quickly. I will not take too much time on this so Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac The reason that those products are the golden tickets, as we call them, and we're just focused on investor products right now is because highest leverage, lowest interest rate. And why is it like that? That's because it has a United States government guarantee. Against default. So this mortgage backed security is bundled up with other mortgage backed securities and sold, bought and sold on the secondary market to investors, foreign and domestic. Right? Investors that are buying mortgage backed securities, they know that that paper is secure. If it defaults. We've got the United States government that's giving us a guarantee against default. So that's why it's such a secure investment. If we come out of conservatorship, technically, that would normally mean that you may not have that implicit guarantee. However, the Trump administration and those that are in that space, FHFA, Pulte and all those guys, they're saying that that guarantee should still apply if that happens, if that's how they release this, I don't see anything wrong if they do it without all of the volatility. You know, let's use the tariffs as an example. It was all over the place. It was there, and then it was gone. It was up, and then it was down. It was 30% then it was two right? It was it was just so much, and the markets really had a hard time with it. And as a result, I think a lot of people lost massive amounts of wealth in the stock market because of that. So I think that there is some real benefits to getting the Fannie, Freddie, the GSCs, government sponsored enterprises, out of conservatorship. I think it just opens up for more fair trade in the market. But they have to do it the right way, and as long as they keep that guarantee, that government guarantee, and then they take their time and apply the steps appropriately, I think it could be a good thing, ultimately, for the consumer. Now, if they don't, it could really have devastating impacts, and I think it could even raise interest interest rates higher. I know Trump and folks don't want that, so I think they're mindful of it. That's just kind of the take I get. But we'll see,   Keith Weinhold  36:42   yeah, because that's my preeminent thought with this. Shaylee, if Fannie and Freddie come out of conservatorship, and there's no government backstop on those loans, it seems like the banks are exposed to more risk, and consequently would have to compensate for that, potentially with a higher interest   Caeli Ridge  36:57   rate. You said it better than I did. Yes, I get too technical when I go down those rabbit holes. That's exactly right. I do not think that they will go down that that path without that implicit guarantee. I expect, if this thing comes to fruition, I expect that that guarantee will be there.   Keith Weinhold  37:13   Yeah, it does seem likely, with as much administration concern as there is about the housing market and the level of mortgage rates and all kinds of interest rates out there. Well, JAYLEE, this has been a great, wide ranging conversation all the way from strategy to what the administration is doing in interfacing with the mortgage market. If someone wants to learn more about you and your products, tell us what you offer, including your very popular all in one loan there at ridge.    Caeli Ridge  37:41   Ooh, thank you for teeing that up. Yeah, especially right now, when people have a lot of concern about interest rates right or wrong, the all in one is a very unique product that removes that fear. It's a way that investors, especially can take control of their equity, pay less in interest, and sometimes hundreds of 1000s of dollars less in interest, while maintaining equity and flexibility and liquidity. Cannot say enough about this product. The all in one. First lien HELOC is my very favorite. For the right individuals, we've talked about it many, many times. They can find us talking about it all over YouTube. You and I have quite a few conversations about that. So that and so much more, guys. So the all in one, you've got the Fannie Freddie's, our debt service ratio products, our bank statement loans, our asset depletion loans, ground up construction bridge loans for fix and flip or fix and hold. We really run the gamut there in terms of loan product diversity. There's very little we can't do for real estate investors. So we're uniquely qualified in that space   Keith Weinhold  38:36   and you offer loans in nearly all 50 states. Now tell us more and how one can get a hold of your company. Yes, we are   Caeli Ridge  38:44   licensed in 49 states. The only state we're not licensed in residentially is New York. We can still do commercial there. But to reach us, you can find us on the web, Ridge lendinggroup.com you can email us info@ridgelendinggroup.com and feel free to call us at 855, 74 Ridge 855-747-4343,   Keith Weinhold  39:04   I'm so familiar with all those avenues because, again, that's where I get my own loans myself. Chaley Ridge has been valuable as always. Thanks so much for coming back onto the show.    Caeli Ridge  39:13   Thanks, Keith.   Keith Weinhold  39:21   A lot of experts believe that stripping Fannie and Freddie's public backing and taking them public, yeah, that that will increase mortgage rates. See, besides there being more risk, like we touched on there during the interview, Fannie and Freddie would face strong incentives to increase profitability, to make an IPO appealing to potential investors, that's just another reason that would probably increase mortgage rates. But if you're the type that truly champions free marketeerism, then the government would get out of Fannie and Freddie and let them IPO, and you would want. To see that happen now you as an investor, you probably resonate with the fact that rather than having to methodically and even painfully save money for your next property, instead you can just borrow funds, tax free, out of your existing property, and that way, you're using more of other people's money, the bank's money, in this case, and less of your own. Similarly, if you avoid aggressive principal pay down well, you would just retain those funds in the first place. As you can see, Chely is really good at taking a deep look at what you've got to work with and helping you lay out a strategy that might make sense, keeping in mind and evaluating your cash, cash flow, equity DTI and loan to value ratios, they offer free 30 minute strategy sessions. You can book one right there on their homepage at Ridge lendinggroup.com Until next week, I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, don't quit. Sure. Daydream.   Speaker 2  41:07   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  41:31   You know, whenever you want the best written real estate and finance info, oh, geez, today's experience limits your free articles access, and it's got pay walls and pop ups and push notifications and cookies disclaimers, it's not so great. So then it's vital to place nice, clean, free content into your hands that adds no hype value to your life. That's why this is the golden age of quality newsletters, and I write every word of ours myself. It's got a dash of humor, and it's to the point because even the word abbreviation is too long, my letter usually takes less than three minutes to read. And when you start the letter, you also get my one hour fast real estate video. Course, it's all completely free. It's called the Don't quit your Daydream. Letter, it wires your mind for wealth, and it couldn't be easier for you to get it right now. Just text gre 266, 866, while it's on your mind, take a moment to do it right now. Text, gre 266, 866   Keith Weinhold  42:47   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, get richeducation.com.

There is Vast Amounts of Evidence of Trump's Seedy Ties to the Despicable Epstein by Ian Masters

It can be hard to not eat a large amount of food if you WANT to eat a large amount of food. So, why do you want to? That's the question I'm helping you answer in this episode. Listen in to understand this want and to learn how you can change it so you actually want to eat a moderate amount more than a large amount.     Interested in working with me? Go to http://www.coachkir.com/group to get all the information you need!   Find show notes and more information at https://coachkir.com/362   FEATURED IN THIS EPISODE   Awesome Free Stuff FREE TRAINING – Quiet Your Food Noise Naturally Episode #112: The Pleasure Cap

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Dexter B. Jenkins. The uploaded document features an insightful conversation with Dexter B. Jenkins, a real estate entrepreneur, financial strategist, and pastor, on Money Making Conversations Masterclass hosted by Rashawn McDonald. Here’s a breakdown of the key topics and highlights: Key Themes & Highlights Overcoming Fear in Real Estate Jenkins explains that fear is the biggest obstacle for first-time buyers. He emphasizes education and networking as tools to overcome fear. Faith & Financial Success He discusses the intersection of faith and wealth creation, referencing biblical principles. Jenkins highlights how faith can guide financial decisions and real estate investments. The Real Estate Wealth Creator Blueprint Jenkins shares his personal journey as a second-generation real estate investor. He outlines strategies for building wealth through real estate ownership. The Importance of Partnerships He stresses the value of teaming up with others to invest in real estate. Jenkins explains how clear roles and agreements can prevent conflicts in partnerships. Common Myths About Real Estate Investing He debunks the misconception that large amounts of money are required to invest. Jenkins highlights programs like VA loans and FHA loans that make real estate accessible. Financial Literacy & Generational Wealth He advocates for financial education to ensure wealth is preserved and passed down. Jenkins discusses mentorship and how learning from experienced investors can accelerate success. About Dexter B. Jenkins Dexter B. Jenkins is a faith-based financial mentor, pastor, and real estate investor. He is the author of The Real Estate Wealth Creator Blueprint, which provides strategies for overcoming fear, financial limitations, and inexperience in real estate. Through his work, Jenkins helps individuals build generational wealth by combining faith, financial literacy, and strategic investing. #BEST #STRAW #SHMS Support the show: https://www.steveharveyfm.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Dexter B. Jenkins. The uploaded document features an insightful conversation with Dexter B. Jenkins, a real estate entrepreneur, financial strategist, and pastor, on Money Making Conversations Masterclass hosted by Rashawn McDonald. Here’s a breakdown of the key topics and highlights: Key Themes & Highlights Overcoming Fear in Real Estate Jenkins explains that fear is the biggest obstacle for first-time buyers. He emphasizes education and networking as tools to overcome fear. Faith & Financial Success He discusses the intersection of faith and wealth creation, referencing biblical principles. Jenkins highlights how faith can guide financial decisions and real estate investments. The Real Estate Wealth Creator Blueprint Jenkins shares his personal journey as a second-generation real estate investor. He outlines strategies for building wealth through real estate ownership. The Importance of Partnerships He stresses the value of teaming up with others to invest in real estate. Jenkins explains how clear roles and agreements can prevent conflicts in partnerships. Common Myths About Real Estate Investing He debunks the misconception that large amounts of money are required to invest. Jenkins highlights programs like VA loans and FHA loans that make real estate accessible. Financial Literacy & Generational Wealth He advocates for financial education to ensure wealth is preserved and passed down. Jenkins discusses mentorship and how learning from experienced investors can accelerate success. About Dexter B. Jenkins Dexter B. Jenkins is a faith-based financial mentor, pastor, and real estate investor. He is the author of The Real Estate Wealth Creator Blueprint, which provides strategies for overcoming fear, financial limitations, and inexperience in real estate. Through his work, Jenkins helps individuals build generational wealth by combining faith, financial literacy, and strategic investing. #BEST #STRAW #SHMS See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rapper Kid Cudi — who had a brief relationship with Cassie Ventura — testified about his interactions with Combs. Ventura testified last week that she endured physical and sexual abuse from Combs and detailed how he orchestrated drug-fueled sex performances called “Freak Offs.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Want to Start or Grow a Successful Business? Schedule a FREE 13-Point Assessment with Clay Clark Today At: www.ThrivetimeShow.com   Join Clay Clark's Thrivetime Show Business Workshop!!! Learn Branding, Marketing, SEO, Sales, Workflow Design, Accounting & More. **Request Tickets & See Testimonials At: www.ThrivetimeShow.com  **Request Tickets Via Text At (918) 851-0102   See the Thousands of Success Stories and Millionaires That Clay Clark Has Helped to Produce HERE: https://www.thrivetimeshow.com/testimonials/ Download A Millionaire's Guide to Become Sustainably Rich: A Step-by-Step Guide to Become a Successful Money-Generating and Time-Freedom Creating Business HERE: www.ThrivetimeShow.com/Millionaire   See Thousands of Case Studies Today HERE: www.thrivetimeshow.com/does-it-work/  

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.