Podcasts about Arminius

In episode 465 of The Reformed Brotherhood, hosts Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb explore Jesus's parable of the wheat and tares (weeds) from Matthew 13. This thought-provoking discussion examines Christ's startling teaching that good and evil will always coexist within the visible church until the end of time. The brothers carefully unpack the theological implications of Jesus's command not to separate wheat from weeds prematurely, challenging our natural tendency to judge others while offering wisdom about God's sovereign plan for final judgment. This episode wrestles with difficult questions about church purity, assurance of salvation, and how believers should approach the reality of false professors within Christ's church—providing biblical guidance for faithfully enduring in a mixed communion. Key Takeaways The Coexistence of True and False Believers: Jesus teaches that the visible church will always contain a mixture of genuine believers and false professors until the final judgment. The Danger of Premature Judgment: Christ explicitly warns against attempting to completely purify the church before the harvest (end of age) because doing so would damage the wheat (true believers). Proper Biblical Interpretation: Unlike some parables, Jesus provides a detailed allegorical explanation of this parable—the sower is Christ, the field is the world, the good seed represents believers, and the weeds are the sons of the evil one. The Challenge of Discernment: One of the most difficult theological pills to swallow is that it's often impossible to perfectly distinguish between true and false believers. Final Judgment as God's Prerogative: The separation of wheat from weeds is reserved for the angels at the end of the age, not for current church leaders or members. The Reality of False Assurance: Some professing Christians may have false assurance of salvation while genuinely believing they are saved. The Importance of Theological Integrity: Public theologians and pastors have a moral responsibility to be transparent about their theological convictions and changes in their beliefs. Deeper Explanations The Difficult Reality of a Mixed Church Jesus's teaching in the parable of the wheat and weeds directly challenges our natural desire for a perfectly pure church. By instructing the servants not to pull up the weeds lest they damage the wheat, Christ is establishing an important ecclesiological principle that will hold true until His return. This means that no matter how rigorously we apply church discipline or how carefully we examine profession of faith, we will never achieve a perfectly pure communion this side of eternity. The visible church—which can be understood as those who profess faith and are baptized—will always include both true and false believers. This reality should cultivate humility in how we approach church membership and discipline. Jesus isn't suggesting that all attempts at church purity are wrong (as other Scripture passages clearly call for church discipline), but rather that perfect purification is impossible and attempts at achieving it will inevitably damage true believers. This teaching directly refutes movements throughout church history (like Donatism) that have sought absolute purity in the visible church. The Problem of Discernment and Assurance One of the most challenging aspects of this parable is Christ's implicit teaching that true and false professors can appear nearly identical, especially in their early development. Like tares growing alongside wheat, false believers can profess orthodox doctrine, participate in church life, and exhibit what appears to be spiritual fruit. This creates profound implications for how we understand assurance of salvation. As Tony notes, while "assurance is the proper and rightful possession and inheritance of every Christian," there's also the sobering reality of false assurance. Some may sincerely believe they are saved when they are not, raising difficult questions about self-examination and spiritual discernment. This doesn't mean believers should live in perpetual doubt, but rather that we should approach assurance with both confidence in God's promises and healthy self-examination. True assurance must be grounded in the finished work of Christ rather than merely in our experiences or behaviors, while false assurance often lacks this proper foundation. The brothers wisely note that final judgment belongs to God alone, who perfectly knows who belongs to Him. Memorable Quotes "The visible church is set before us as a mixed body. Maybe everybody else's churches, but certainly not my church, like the one that I actually go to on the Lord's day. So it seems like there might be this shocking statement possibly that he has for us, whether you're Episcopalian or Presbyterian or independent or Baptist or Christian life assembly, whatever it is, that no matter what we do to purify the church, our churches, we're never gonna succeed in obtaining a perfectly pure communion." - Jesse Schwamb "I think that's what I find shocking. It is like a massive statement of reality that is at equal points totally sensible. And other times we would think, 'well, surely not in the church Lord, like of all the places, like aren't we talking about a kind of purity of your people?' ...and what I think he's striking at, which I do find a little bit wild, is that Jesus is essentially saying, at least to my ear, anything we try to do, even the purest preaching of the gospel, is not gonna prevent this in every age of the church." - Jesse Schwamb "I'm affirming that assurance is the proper and rightful possession and inheritance of every Christian." - Tony Arsenal Full Transcript Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 465 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I am Jesse. Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother. Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. Guess what? It looks like you and I are taking another trip back to the farm on this episode. Tony Arsenal: Yes. For a couple episodes. Jesse Schwamb: For a couple episodes. Yeah. [00:01:01] Exploring Jesus' Parables in Matthew 13 Jesse Schwamb: Because what, Jesus will not stop leading us there. We're looking at his teachings, specifically the parables, and we're gonna be looking in Matthew chapter 13, where it seems like, is it possible that Jesus, once again has something very shocking for us to hear? That is for all the ages. 'cause it seems like he might actually be saying, Tony, that good and evil will always be found together in the professing church until the end of the world. Like in other words, that the visible church is set before a mixed body. I mean. Maybe everybody else chose churches, but certainly not my church, like the one that I actually go to on the Lord's day. So it seems like there might be this shocking statement possibly that he has for us, whether you're Episcopalian or Presbyterian or independent or Baptist or Christian life assembly, whatever it is, that no matter what we do to purify the church, our churches, we're never gonna succeed in obtaining a perfectly pure communion. Could that possibly be what Jesus is saying to us? I don't know what we're gonna find out. Tony Arsenal: We are. We are gonna find out. Jesse Schwamb: It's gonna be definitive. And if now that makes sense. If you don't even know why we're looking at Jesus' teachings, you could do us a favor even before you go any further. And that is just head on over in your favor, interwebs browser to or reform brotherhood.com, and you can find out all of the other episodes, all 464 that are living out there. There's all kinds of good stuff, at least we think so, or at least entertaining stuff for you to listen to. And when you're done with all of that in a year or two, then we'll pick it up right back here where we're about to go with some affirmations or some denials. [00:02:39] Affirmations and Denials Jesse Schwamb: So Tony, before we figure out what Jesus has for us in Matthew 13, in the parable of the weeds, or the tears, or the tears in the weed, what gets all of that? Are you affirming with, are you denying against, Tony Arsenal: I am denying. First of all, I'm denying whatever this thing is that's going on with my throat. Sorry for the rest of the episode, everyone. Um, I'm denying something that I, I think it is. How do I want to phrase this? Um, maybe I'll call it theological integrity, and maybe that's too strong of a word, but maybe not. So the listener who's been with us for a little while will remember that a while back. Um, you know, we've, we've talked about Matthew Barrett and he was a Baptist, uh, who's heavily involved in sort of the theology, proper controversies. He wrote Simply Trinity, which is just a fantastic book. He was a teacher or a professor at Midwestern, um, Baptist Theological Seminary. And he recently, um, uh, converted is not the right word. I hate calling it a conversion when you go from one faithful Bible tradition to another. But he recently, um, changed his perspective and joined the Anglican Church. And at the time I kind of, you know, I kind of talked about it as like, it's a little bit disappointing, like the reasons he cited. [00:03:57] Theological Integrity and Public Disclosure Tony Arsenal: Where I'm bringing this into a matter of sort of theological integrity. And it's not, it's not just Matthew Barrett. Um, there's other elements of things going on that I'll, I'll point to too is it's often the case when someone who is in some form of professional theological work or professional vocational ministry, that as they start to change perspectives, um, there comes to be like an inflection point where they should notify whoever it is that they are accountable to in that job or vocation, uh, uh, and then do the right thing and step down. Right? And so with Matthew Barrett, um. He continued to teach systematic theology at a Baptist Theological Seminary, which has a faith statement which he was obligated to affirm and hold in good faith. He continued to teach there for quite some time, if, you know, when he, when he published the timeline and he's the one that put all the timelines out there. So it's not like people had to go digging for this. Um, he continued to teach under contract and under that, that faith statement, um, for quite some time after his positions changed. I remember in college, um, sim very similar situation, one of my professors, um, and I went to a Baptist college. It was a General Baptist college. Um, one of my professors became Roman Catholic and for quite some time he continued to teach without telling anyone that he had converted to Roman Catholicism. Um. And I think that there's a, there's a, a level of integrity that public theologians need to have. Um, and it, it really makes it difficult when something like this happens to be able to say that this is not a moral failing or some sort of failure. Um, you know, James White has jumped on the bandwagon very quickly to say, of course we told you that this was the way it was gonna lead. That if you affirm the great tradition, you know, he was very quick to say like, this is the road to Rome. And I think in his mind, um, Canterbury is just sort of one, one stop on that trip. Um, it becomes very hard after the fact to not have this color and tarnish all of your work before. 'cause it starts to be questions like, well, when, when did you start to hold these views? Were you writing, were you, were you publicizing Baptist theology when you no longer believed it to be the truth? Were you teaching theology students that this is what the Bible teaches when you no longer thought that to be true? Um. Were you secretly attending Anglican services and even teaching and, and helping deliver the service when you were, you know, still outwardly affirming a Baptist faith statement. And the reason I, I'll point out one other thing, 'cause I don't want this to be entirely about Matthew Barrett, but there's a big, uh, hub glue going on in the PCA right now. Um, a guy named Michael Foster, who some of our audience will probably be familiar with, um, he and I have had our desktops in the past, but I think he and I have come to a little bit of a, of a uneasy truce on certain things. He, uh, went to work compiling a, a list and there's some problems with the data, like it's, it's not clean data, so take it for what it's worth. But he compiled a list of. Every publicly available church website in the PCA. So something like 1800 websites or something like that. Huge numbers. And he went and looked at all of the staff and leadership directories, and he cataloged all the churches that had some sort of office or some sort of position that appeared to have a, a woman leading in a way that the Bible restricts. And that more importantly, and starting to say it this way, but more importantly, that the PCA itself restricts. So we're not talking about him going to random church websites and making assessments of their polity. We're talking about a, a denomination that has stated standards for who can bear office and it's not women. Um. So he compiled this and people in the PCA are coming out of the woodwork to basically defend the practice of having shepherdess and deacons. There was one that he cataloged where, um, the website actually said, uh, that was the pastor's wife and the title was Pastor of Women. Um, and then as soon as it became public that this was the case, they very quickly went in and changed the title to Shepherd of Women or Shepherdess of Women or something like that. So it's, it's really the same phenomena, not commenting, you know, I think we've been clear where we stand on the ordination of female officers and things like that, but not that all that withstanding, um, when you are going to be a part of a body that has a stated perspective on something and then just decide not to follow it, the right thing to do the, the upstanding morally. Uh, in full of integrity move would be to simply go to another denomination where your views align more closely. PCA churches, it's not super easy, but it's not impossible to leave the PCA as an entire congregation and then go somewhere like the EPC, which is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, which still on the spectrum of things is still relatively conservative, but is in general is in favor of, uh, female officers, elders, and diegans. So I, I think, you know, and you see this with podcasters, there was the big, there was a big fu and Les became a Presbyterian, and then when Tanner became a Presbyterian on the pub, I think it is, um, incumbent on people who do any form of public theology and that that would include me and Jesse when our views change. There comes a point where we need to disclose that, be honest about it, um, and not try to pretend that we continue to hold a view that we don't be just because it's convenient or because it might be super inconvenient to make a change. I don't even want to pretend to imagine the pressures, uh, that someone like Matthew Barrett would face. I mean, you're talking about losing your entire livelihood. I, I understand that from an intellectual perspective, how difficult that must be, but in some ways, like that kind of comes with the territory. Same thing with a pastor. You have a Baptist pastor or a Presbyterian pastor. It can go both ways, I think. I'm more familiar with Baptist becoming Presbyterians. I don't, I don't see as many going the other direction. But you have a, a Baptist pastor who comes to pay to Baptist convictions and then continues to minister in their church for, I've, I've seen cases where they continue to minister for years, um, because they don't, they don't have the ability to now just go get a job in a Presbyterian context because there's all sorts of, um, training and certification and ordination process that needs to happen. Um, so they just continue ministering where they are, even though they no longer believe the church's state of, you know, state of faith statement. So that's a lot to say. Like, let your yes be yes and your no be no, and when we really all boil it down. So I think that's enough of that. It, it just sort of got in my craw this week and I couldn't really stop thinking about it. 'cause it's been very frustrating. And now there are stories coming out of. Doctoral students that, um, that Barrett was teaching who have now also become Anglican. Um, so, you know, there starts to be questions of like, was he actively pros? I mean, this is like Jacob Arminius did this stuff and, and like the reform tradition would look down on it, where he was in secret in like sort of small group private settings. He was teaching convictions very different than the uni. I'm talking about Arminius now. Not necessarily Barrett. He was teaching convictions very different than the, the stated theology of the university he taught for, and then in public he was sort of towing the line. You have to ask the question and it is just a question. There's been no confirmation that I'm aware of, but you have to ask the question if that was what was going on with Barrett, was he teaching Baptist theology publicly and then meeting with, with PhD students privately and, and sort of convincing them of Anglican theology. I don't know. I'm not speculating on that, but I think it, the situation definitely right, brings that question to mind. It forces us to ask it. Um, and had he. Been transparent about his theological shifts sooner than that may not be a, a question we have to ask. Um, the situation may not be all that different, but we wouldn't have to ask the question. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's totally fair. I mean, disclosure is important in lots of places in life and we shouldn't think that theological dis disclosure, especially like you're saying among our teachers, among our pastors, it is a critical thing. It's helpful for people to know when perspectives have changed, especially when they're looking to their leaders who are exhibiting trust and care over their discipleship or their education to express that difference. If there's been a mark, change it. It's worth it. Disclose, I'm guessing you don't have to over disclose, but that we're talking about a critical, we're talking about like subversive anglicanism, allegedly. Yeah. Then. It would be more than helpful to know that that is now shaping not just perspective, but of course like major doctrine, major understanding. Yeah. And then of course by necessary conviction and extension, everything that's being promulgated or proclamation in the public sphere from that person is likely now been permeated by that. And we'd expect so. Right. If convictions change, and especially like you're talking about, we're just talking about moving from, especially among like Bible believing traditions, just raise the hand and say loved ones, uh, this is my firm conviction now. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I think if someone walks up to you and says, do you think that we should baptize babies? And you're like, yeah, I think so. Then you probably shouldn't be teaching at a Baptist seminary anymore. Like, seems like a reasonable standard. And that seems to be what happened, at least for some period of time. Um, you know, and, and it, that's not to say like, I think, I think there are instances where the church, a given church or um, or a university or seminary or, or whatever the situation might be, can be gracious and recognize like, yeah, people's perspectives change and maybe we can find a way for you to continue to finish out the semester or, you know, we can bridge you for a little while until you can find a new, a new job. Um, you know, we'll, we'll only have you teach certain courses or we'll have a guest lecturer come in when you have to cover this subject that is at variance and like, we'll make sure we're all clear about it, but it doesn't seem like any of that happened. And that's, um, that's no bueno. So anyway, Jesse. What are you affirming and or denying Tonight? [00:13:43] Music Recommendations Jesse Schwamb: I'm just gonna go with something brief. I suppose this is an affirmation of me. I'm saying that like somewhat tongue in cheek, but maybe it's, wait, I'll rephrase. It's because this will be more humble. I'm affirming getting it right, even more than I thought. So I'm just gonna come back to the well and dip it into something that I mentioned on the last episode. So the keen listener, the up-to-date listener might remember. And if you're not up to date, uh, just let this be fresh for you. It'll, and I, it's gonna be correct because now I have posts, you know, I'm on the other side of it. I've clear hindsight. I am affirming with the album Keep It Quiet by Gray Haven, which I affirmed last week, but it came out on the same day that the episode released. And since you and I don't really like record in real time and release it like exactly as it's happening, I only did that with some, a little bit of reservation because I only heard they only released three songs in the album. And I thought I was overwhelmed that they were, they were so good that I was ready to jump in and loved ones. Oh, it, it turns out. I was so correct and it was, it's even better than I thought. So go check it out. It's Grey, GRE, YH, and they are, this is the warning, just because I have to give it out there and then I'll balance it with something else for something for everybody here today. So, gr Haven is music that's post hardcore and metal core. You're getting two cores for the price of one, if that is your jam. It has strong maleic sensibilities. It's very emotional, it's very experimental. But this new album, which is called, um, again, keep It Quiet, is like just a work of arts. It real like the guitar work is intricate haunting, lovely, and it's bold, like very intentional in its structure and very el loose in its construction. It's got hook driven melodies and it's got both heart and soft. It really is truly a work of art. So if you're trying to, to put it in your minds, like what other bands are like this? I would compare them to bands like, every Time I Die, Norma Jean, let Live Hail the Sun. If you just heard those as combinations of words that don't mean anything to you, that's also okay. No worries. But if you're looking for something different, if you're looking for something that's maybe gonna challenge your ear a little bit, but is like orchestral and has all of these metal core post hardcore, melodic, textured movements, there's no wasted notes in this album. It's really tremendous. If that's not your thing. I get, that's not everybody's thing. Here's something else I think would be equally challenging to the ear in a different way. And that is, I'm going back to one other album to balance things out here, and that's an album that was released in 2019 by Mark Barlow, who I think is like just. So underrated. For some reason, like people have slept on Mike Barlow. I have no idea why he put together an album with Isla Vista Worship called Soul Hymns, and it's like a distinct soul and r and b album of praise with like these really lovely like falsetto, harmonies. It's got these minimalistic instrumentation, warm keys, groove oriented percussion, like again, like these false soul driven melodies. It's contemplative. It's got a groove to it. This is also equally a beautiful album for a totally different reason. So I think I've given two very book-ended, very different affirmations, but I think there's something for everybody. So my challenge to your loved ones is you gotta pick one or the other. Actually, you could do both, but either go to Gray Havens, keep it quiet, or go to Mike Bellow's Soul hymns. I do not think you will be disappointed. There's something for everybody on this one. Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I, it was funny because as you were saying the names of those bands, I literally was thinking like Jesse could be speaking Swahili and I wouldn't know the difference. And then you, you, you know me well, yeah. Uh, I haven't listened to Gray Haven. Uh, I probably will give it a couple minutes 'cause that's how it usually goes with songs that meet that description. Uh, I can always tell that the music that Jesse recommends is good from a technical perspective, but I never really, I never really vibe with it. So that's okay. But I mean, lots of people who listen to our show do so check that out. If, if you ever. Want a good recommendation for music. Jesse is the pers so much so that he can recommend amazing music before it's even available and be a hundred percent correct, apparently. That's right. So Jesse Schwamb: affirm with me everybody, because turns out I was right. Uh, it was easy to be correct when of course I had all of that fair sightedness by being able to listen to those. Yeah, those couple of songs, it, this is a kind of album. Both of these, both of these albums. When I heard them, I reacted audibly out loud. There are parts of both of 'em where I actually said, oh wow. Or yeah, like there's just good stuff in there. And the older you get, if you're a music fan, even if you're not, if you don't listen to a lot of music, you know when that hook gets you. You know when that turn of melody or phrase really like hits you just, right. Everybody has that. Where the beat drops in a way. You're just like, yes, gimme, you make a face like you get into it. I definitely had that experience with both of these albums and because. I've listened to a lot of music because I love listening to music. It's increasingly rare where I get surprised where, you know, like sometimes stuff is just like popular music is popular for a reason and it's good because it's popular and it follows generally some kind of like well established roots. But with these albums, it's always so nice when somebody does something that is totally unexpected. And in these, I heard things that I did not expect at all. And it's so good to be surprised in a way that's like, why have I never heard that before? That is amazing. And both of these bands did it for me, so I know I'm like really hyping them up, but they're worth it. They're, they're totally worth it. Good music is always worth it. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I, uh, I think that is a good recommendation. I will check those out because, you know, you're a good brother. I usually do, and I trust your judgment even though it, you'll like the second one. Yes. Hopefully. Yeah. Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: You'll like the second one. Second one is like, just filled with praise and worship. And like, if, if you're trying to think, like say, here's how I'd couch the proper atmosphere for Mark Barlow's soul hymns you're having, you know, it's, it's a cold and chilly. A tal evening, the wind is blowing outside. You can hear the crisp leaves moving around on the pavement and the sun has gone down. The kids are in bed, the dinner dishes are piled up in the sink. But you think to yourselves, not tonight. I don't think so, and you just want that toneage to put on. You want that music as you dim the lights and you sit there to just hang out with each other and take a breath. You don't just want some kind of nice r and b moving music. You don't want just relaxing vibes. You want worshipful spirit filled vibes that propel your conversation and your intimacy, not just into the marital realm, but into worship and harmony with the triune God. If you're looking for that album, because that situation is before you, then sol hymns is the music you're looking for. Tony Arsenal: See, I'm gonna get the, I'm gonna get the recommendations backwards and I'm gonna sit down with my wife with a nice like evening cup of decaf tea and I'm gonna turn the music on. Yes, it's gonna be like, yes. That was me screaming into the microphone. That was not good for my voice. Well, the good news is it's gonna, it's gonna wake the kids up. That's, I'm gonna sleep on the couch. That's, it's gonna be bad. That's, Jesse Schwamb: honestly, that's also a good evening. It's just a different kind of evening. It's true. So it's just keep it separated again, uh, by way of your denial slash affirmation. Tony disclosure, I'm just giving you proper disclosure. Everybody know your music KYM, so that way when you have the setting that you want, you can match it with the music that you need. So it's true. Speaking of things that are always worth it. [00:21:30] Parable of the Weeds Jesse Schwamb: I think the Bible's gotta be one of those things. Tony Arsenal: It's true. Jesse Schwamb: And this is like the loosest of all segues because it's like the Sunday school segue into any topic that involves the scriptures. We're gonna be in Matthew 13, and how about we do this? So this is one of these parables and in my lovely ESV translation of the scriptures, the, we're just gonna go with the heading, which says the parable of the weeds. You may have something different and I wanna speak to that just briefly, but how do we do this, Tony? I'll hit us up with the parable and then it just so happens that this is one of the parables in the scripture that comes with an interpretation from our savior. It's true. How about you hit us up with the interpretation, which is in the same chapter if you're tracking with us, it's just a couple verses way. Does that sound good? Tony Arsenal: Let's do it. Jesse Schwamb: Okay. Here is the parable of the weeds. Jesus puts another parable before them saying The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sewed good seed in his field. But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sewed weeds among the weeds and went away. So when the plants came up and bork rain, then the weeds also appeared, and the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds? He said to them, an enemy has done this. So the servant said to him, then, do you want us to go and gather them? Then he said, no. Lest in gathering the weeds, you root up the wheat along with them, but let them grow together until the harvest and at harvest time, I will tell the reapers, gather the weeds first, and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn. Tony Arsenal: Alright, so then jumping down. To verse 36. We're still in Matthew 13, he says, then he left the crowds and went into the house and his disciples came to him saying, explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field. He answered, the one who sows the good seed is the son of man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angel. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age, the son of man will send his angels and they will gather out of his kingdom, all that, all causes of sin in all lawbreakers and throw them into the fiery furnace. It is that in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father. He who has ears let him hear. Jesse Schwamb: So let me start with just like a little bit of language here, which I've always loved in this passage because where else in like the contemporary context, do you get the word tear? Yeah. Aside if you're like using a scale, and that's a totally different definition. I like this. I like the word tear. It force, it forces to understand that what's common to our ear, why that's being used, it often is translated weed. Here's just like my, my little like linguistic addition to the front end of our discussion and is the reason I like it is because here does have a specific definition. If like you were to look this up in almost any dictionary, what you're gonna find is it's like a particular type of weed. It's actually like an injurious weed that is indistinguishable in its infant form from the outgrowing of green. So I like that because of course that is exactly why. Then there's all this explanation of why then to not touch anything in the beginning because one, it causes damage to it looks like everybody else. I just thought I'd put that out there as we begin our discussion. Tony Arsenal: Yeah, yeah. You know, I, um, I am a homeowner and I don't own the land that I'm on, but I'm responsible for the land that I'm on. And we have this really gnarly weed problem. There's this, uh, sort of floor growing, uh, carpeting weed called, uh, I think it's called like a carpeting knob, head weed or something like that. Some really descriptive thing. And I went out there the other day and there's really nothing you can do about this other than to rip it up. But I went out there the other day to start to pull some of it up and it totally wrecks the yard. Like it totally pulls up the grass, it destroys the sod. And when you're done, this is why it's kind of nice that I don't have, I'm not responsible for the land as I'm not gonna have to pay to resod the land. But when you're done pulling up this weed, you have to resod the whole place. You have to regrow all the grass because it, first, it takes over for the grass, and then when you rip it up, it rips the roots of the grass up as well. And so this parable, um, on one level is immediately obvious, like what the problem is, right? The situation is such. That the good, uh, the good sower, right? He's a good sower. He knows what he's doing. He understands that simply ripping up the weeds. Even if you could distinguish them right, there's this element that like at an early stage, they would be very difficult, if not impossible to distinguish from, uh, from wheat. Even if you could distinguish them, you still wouldn't be able to pull up the weeds and not do damage to the grain. And so we, we have this sort of like, um, conflict if you wanna follow like literary standards, right? We have this conflict and as we come to sort of the climax of this, of this plot is when all of a sudden we see that, that the problem needs a resolution and there is a resolution, but it's not necessarily what we would think it would be. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I think that's what I find shocking. It is like a massive statement of reality that is that like equal points or equal times totally sensible. And other times we would think, well why surely not in the church Lord, like of all the places, like aren't we talking about a kind of purity of your people, the very people that you're assembling together, the chief of which is Christ and the apostles being the building stones and Christ of course being the cornerstone. And I, I think that's what I find and I wonder the people hearing this, if they thought like, well, surely Lord, that not be the case like you are bringing in and ushering in this new kingdom. Isn't this new kingdom gonna be one of absolute purity? And, and what I think he's striking at, which I do find a little bit wild, is that Jesus essentially saying, at least to my ear, anything we try to do, even like the purest preaching of the gospel, is not gonna prevent this in every age of the church. The same state of the things that's existed in that is in the time of the early fathers. In the first century, and the church as it stands right now in the land and the time of the reformers, and of course with the best ministers at this hour right now and on your next Lord's day, and everyone after that, there is always and ever will be a visible church or a religious assembly in which the members are not all wheat. Yeah. And then I like what you're saying. It's this idea that. There's a great harm that's gonna come about if you try to lift them up because you cannot tell. So, and this is what's hard, I think this does influence like how we interact with people online. Certainly how we interact with people in our own congregations, but we are going to have no clear convicted proofs. We might only have like probable symptoms if we're really trying to judge and weigh out to discern the weeds from the weeds, which at most can only give us some kind of conjectural knowledge of another state. And that is gonna sometimes preemptively judge cause us to judge others in a way that basically there's a warning against here. It, it's, it's not the right time. And ba I think mainly from the outside where I find like this parable coming together, if there's like maybe a weird Venn diagram of the way Christians read this and the way unbelievers hear this, the overlap between them is for me, often this idea of like hypocrisy and you know. When people tell me that the church is full of hypocrites, either like Christian or non-Christian, but typically that's a, a, you know, statement that comes from the non-Christian tongue. When people say that the church is full of hypocrites, I do with a little bit of snark, say it's definitely not full of hypocrites. There are always room for more in the church and, and there's like a distinction of course between the fact that there is hypocrisy in the Christian or whether the Christian is in fact or that person is a hypocrite. So like when I look through the scriptures, we see like Pharaoh confessing, we see Herod practicing, we see Judas preaching Christ Alexander venturing his life for Paul. Yeah, we see David condemning in another, what he himself practiced and like hezeki glorifying and riches Peter. Doing all kinds of peter stuff that he does, and even all the disciples forsaken Christ, an hour of trouble and danger. So all that to say, it goes back to this like lack of clear, convicted proofs that I think Jesus is bringing forward here, but only probable symptoms. And I'm still processing, of course, like the practicality of what you're saying, Tony, that in some ways it seems like abundantly clear and sensible that you should, you're, you're gonna have a problem distinguishing. But our human nature wants to go toward distinguishing and then toward uprooting sometimes. And the warning here is do not uproot at the improper time. And in fact, it's not even yours to uproot because God will send in the laborers to do that at the time of, of harvest. And so there will be weeds found among the wheat. It's just like full stop statement. And at the same time it's warning, do not go after them now. Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I, I'm sure this, um, I, I'm sure this will spill over into a second conversation, but we, I think we have to talk a little bit about the interpretation here before we, before we even like talk more about the parable itself, because if you're not careful, um, and, and. I need to do a little bit more study on this, but it, it's interesting because Matthew almost seems to want you to sort of blend these parables together a little bit. Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Tony Arsenal: Right. These, these, there's three, um, there's three, maybe four if you count the parable of the treasure in the field. But there's three agricultural parables that have to do with sowing seed of one, of, one way or another. And in each one the seed is something different. And I, it almost seems to me. And then on top of that, the parables are like interwoven within each other. So like right smack in the middle of this, we have the parable. Uh, is given. Then the next parable of the mustard seed, which we're gonna talk about in a future episode, is given, and then the explanation of this parable of the tears is given. Um, and so we have to talk a little bit about it and sort of establish what the seed is, because we just spent three weeks talking about the seed in the par of the sower. Um, or the parable of the, of the soils. And in that parable, the seed was the word of God in this parable. And this is where I think sometimes, um, and again, this is like the doctrine of election in parable form, right? Yes. I think sometimes we read this and we, we misstep because the seed is not, uh, is not the word of God in this. The seed is the believers. Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Tony Arsenal: Right. So the good seed is sewn into, uh, into the field, which, you know, I think maybe there'll be some, we, we can save this for, for next week. But a little sneak peek is, it's not always clear exactly what the field is. Right. And I think we often, we often talk about the field as though it's the church that doesn't necessarily align a hundred percent with how Christ explains the parable. So we'll have to, we'll have to talk through that a little bit. I affirm that it is the church in, in a, a broad sense. Um, but, but the, the way that Christ explains it slightly different, but the, the seed is sewn into the world. The sons of the kingdom of heaven are sowed into the, into the world. And then the seed of the enemy, the bad seed, is the sons of the devil that's also sewn into the world. And so these two seeds grow up next to each other. If we think about the seed here as though it's the word of God, rather than the, the actual believers and unbelievers that elect in the ate, we're gonna make some missteps on how we understand this because we're not talking about, um, the, the seed being, you know, doctrine being sewn into the world. And some of it grows up good and some of it grows up bad or good doctrine and bad doctrine. We're talking about the believers themselves. Sorry, Jesse is mocking my rapid attempt to mute before I cough, which I, I did. That was pretty good. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that was, that was pretty good. Listen, this is real. Podcasting is how it goes. Yeah, I'm with you. Thank you for pulling out that distinction. 'cause it is critical. We, we have some overlap of course, with Jesus being really ascribed as the farmer, the son of man, right. He's sowing this good seed, but not the word. It's believers or the sons of the kingdom. And it is into his field, which is the world. Part of that world of course, is necessarily the church, right? But while everybody's sleeping, this enemy, the devil, he comes, he sows weeds or unbelievers, the sons of the evil one among this weed, they grow, go up together. And of course, like if I were servants in this household, I'd ask the same thing, which was like, should we get the gloves out? Yeah. Just pull those bad boys out. Like and, and so again, that's why I find it very so somewhat shocking that. It's not just, you could see like Jesus saying something like, don't worry about it now because listen, at the end of all time when the harvest comes, uh, I'm gonna take care of it. Like it's just not worth it to go out now. Right. That's not entirely The reason he gives, the reason is lest they uproot the wheat by mistake. So this is showing that the servants who are coming before Jesus in the parable, in this teaching here to really volitionally and with great fidelity and good obedience to him to want to please him to do his will. He there, he's basically saying, you are not qualified to undertake this kind of horticulture because you're just not either skilled enough or discerning enough to be able to do it right. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And you know, I think, um. Maybe just a word of meth methodology too. Um, this parable also flies in the face of all of the, like, parables are not allegories, kind of kind of people. Um, and this is, we talked about this in our introductory episode. You have to take each parable for what it's worth, this parable very much is explained like a traditional allegory, right? Right. [00:35:39] Understanding the Parable's Symbols Tony Arsenal: It's got, it's got several different elements and Christ goes through and the first thing he does is tell you what each element represents, right? The sower is the son of man, the field is the word. The good seed is the sons of the kingdom of the weed. It's like, he's like clicking down all of the symbols and then he explains how all of it works together and like a good, all like a good allegory. Once you understand what each element and each symbol is, the rest of it actually is very self-explanatory, right? When you understand who's what in the parable. The outcome and the sort of the punchline writes itself as it were. And I think this is one of those parables that we would do. [00:36:18] Challenging Our Sensibilities Tony Arsenal: I think we would do well to sort of let marinate a little bit because it does challenge a lot of our sensibilities of what, um, what is real in the world, what is real in terms of our interaction with the world, right? What's real in terms of the role of unbelievers in the life of a Christian, um, whether we can identify who is or isn't an unbeliever. Um, I think we, you know, I, I'm not one of those people that's like, we should assume everyone's a Christian. And I'm certainly not one of those people who's like, we should assume nobody is a Christian. But I think there are a lot of times where we have figures either in public or people in our lives. Like personal acquaintances that have some sort of outward appearance. And, and that's like the key here that that distinction between weeds is a, is not a great translation as you said. Right. Because right. That distinction between wheat and weeds, to go to my analogy, like it's very clear what is grass and what is this like carpeting, knob weed. Like there's no, there's no doubt in my mind, which is the weed and which is the grass. Um, that's not what we're talking about here. And so it does, it does say here, I mean, it implies here that it's not going to be easy to distinguish the difference between exactly. The, a son of the kingdom and a son of the evil one. And I think that's a, that's a. A theological pill that is very difficult to swallow. Yes. [00:37:43] Personal Reflections on Identifying Christians Tony Arsenal: Because a lot of us, um, and this goes back to like what I, what we were saying in the last, the last parable, A lot of us were reared in our Christian faith on sort of this idea that like, you can check your fruit or you can check other people's fruits and you can determine, you can easily identify who's a Christian and who's not. I remember when I was in high school, you know, I got, I was converted when, when I was 15 and, um, I got to high school and it felt very easy to me to be able to identify the people who were play acting Christianity and the people who were real Christians. That felt like the most natural thing in the world to me. Um, it, it's an interesting story, but one of the people that I was absolutely sure was not a Christian. That he was just doing kinda civic Christianity. He was in confirmation 'cause his parents wanted him to. Um, and I had good reason to believe that at the time he was very worldly. He, he, um, did not seem to be serious about his faith at all. There was good reason to make the assessment that I did. And then I ran into him on Facebook like 15 years later and he's a pastor at the Lutheran Church and he's, you know, he loves the Lord Jesus Christ. And he would not explain it as though he had a later conversion story. It's not as though he would say like, well yeah, in high school I pretended to be a Christian. And then, you know, I got through college and uh, I really became like I got converted. He would, would grow this, or he would explain this as slow, steady growth from an immature state that knew the facts of the gospel and in a certain sense trusted that Jesus was his savior and didn't fully understand the ramifications of that. I mean, who did at 15 years old? Mm-hmm. Um. And, and that it was a slow, steady growth to the place that he's in now. [00:39:21] The Difficulty of Distinguishing Believers Tony Arsenal: So I, I think we should take seriously, and maybe this is the takeaway for this week at least, and we can, we can talk about it more, is we should take seriously the fact that the Sons of the Kingdom and the Sons of the evil one in this parable are not only inseparable without doing damage, but in many ways they are not easily distinguishable. Jesse Schwamb: Right. On. Tony Arsenal: Um, and that, that's a baked into the parable. And I think we do spend a fair amount of time and I, I'll. I'll throw myself on on this. You know, this, we, I'm not just saying we, um, we as a genuine statement, like I have participated in this. I'm sure that I still do participate in this sometimes intentionally. Other times, uh, subconsciously we spend a fair amount of time probably in our Christian lives trying to figure out who is a Christian who's not. And it's not as though that is entirely illegitimate, right? The, the, as much as we kind of poke at the, the, um, workers in this who sort of are kind of chumps, right? They're sort of like the idiots in this. They, they don't seem to know how this happened. They propose a course of action that then the master's like, no, no, that's not, that's not gonna work. They can tell the difference, right? They can see that some are weeds and some are are weeds, and they're asking, well, what do we do about it? But at the same time he is saying like, you're not really competent to tell the difference, Jesse Schwamb: right? On Tony Arsenal: a good, uh, a good. Competent farmer could probably go out and take all the weeds out. Just like a really good, I dunno, landscape technician, I'm not sure what you would call it. I'm sure someone could come into my yard and if I paid them enough money they could probably fix this knobby grass, weed, whatever it is. Um, infestation. They could probably fix it without damaging the lawn. Like there are probably people that could do it. I am not that competent person and the workers in this are not that competent person. And I would say by and large in our Christian life, we are not that competent person to be able to identify who is and who isn't, um, a Christian who is or isn't a son of the kingdom versus a son of the devil. Jesse Schwamb: And there's sometimes like we just get history reprised, or it's like, again, the same thing microwaved over and served to you three or four times as leftovers. So it's also gonna remember like any as extension that like any attempt to like purify the church perfectly, and this has happened like donatism in the fourth century I think, or even like now, certain sectarian movements are completely misguided. Yeah. And Jesus already puts that out ahead of us here. It's almost like, do not worry what God is doing because God again is, is doing all the verbs. So here's a question I think we should discuss as we, we move toward like the top of the hour. And I think this is interesting. I don't know if you'll think it's interesting. I, I kind of have an answer, but I, I'll post it here first. [00:42:01] Visible vs. Invisible Church Jesse Schwamb: So the setup like you've just given us is two things. One, we got the visible church, we talk about the visible church. I think a lot across our conversations. Yeah. And we might summarize it, saying it's like the community of all who profess faith, maybe even the community of all who are baptized. Right. Possibly. Yeah. And it's going to include then necessarily as Jesus describes it here, true and false believers. So that's one group. Then we've got this invisible church, which as you said is the elect. Those who are known perfectly to God. So the good seed is those elect true believers. The weeds, then the weeds to me, or the tears, even better, they sound a lot like that. Second and third soils that we talked about previously to some, to some degree. I'm not, I'm not gonna lump them all in because we talked about receiving the word and it taking root, all that stuff, but to some degree, and also probably like a soil one. But here's, here's the way I would define them up and against or in contradistinction to the elector believers. They're the reprobate. They're false professors or they're children of the evil one. Now here's the question, Doni, Alex, I, I think this is very interesting. I'm trying to build this up for like more dramatic effect. 'cause now I'm worried it's not that good. The question is, I'm going to presume that this good seed, the elect, true to believers, the confidence of perseverance of the saints, the justification in sanctification of God's children is in fact though we at some points have our own doubts, it is made fully aware and known to the good seed. That is, we should have, as you and I have talked about before, the confidence that God has in fact saved his elect. So the question that on the other side is for the ta, do the tears always know that they are the tears? Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I mean, you know, I think, um, I've said this before and I, I mean it, and I think it takes probably more. More discussion than we have time for tonight. And and that's fine because we can do as many episodes on this as we want to. 'cause this is our show and you can't stop us actually. Jesse Schwamb: Correct. [00:43:56] Assurance of Faith and False Assurance Tony Arsenal: Um, I've said before that assurance is the proper and rightful possession and inheritance of every Christian. Jesse Schwamb: Amen. Tony Arsenal: Right. So I, I am not one to say that the technical terminology is that assurance is not of the essence of faith. Um, I think we have to be really careful when we say that it's not, but we have to be equally careful when we say that it is. Because if we say that assurance is of the essence of faith, then what that means is someone who doesn't have assurance, doesn't have faith. Um, the reason I say that we can say that is because there's a sense that that's true, right? If you don't believe you're saved, then you don't believe you're saved and you don't trust that you're saved. But that doesn't mean that you always have full awareness of that confidence. And, you know, I think, um, I think. I think you're, you're right that, um, it may not always be, let me put it this way. I, I think that we have to consider the entire life of a Christian when we're, when we're making that analysis. And in a certain sense, like, I'm not even sure we should be making that analysis. That's kind of the point of the, the, um, the parable here, or at least one of the points. But, um, when that analysis is made, we'll, we'll channel a little bit of RC sprawl. It's not as funny when he's actually, uh, gone. I don't really mean channel RC sprawl. We will, uh, speak in the tradition of RC sprawl, um, in the final analysis, whatever that means. Whenever that is. You have to consider the whole life of a Christian, the whole life of a believer. And so there may be times in the life of a believer where they don't possess that full assurance of faith or that that full assurance is weak or that it seems to be absent. But when we look at the entire life of a believer, um, is it a life that overall is marked by a confident trust, that they are in fact children of God? Um, that a confident, uh, a confident embracing of what the spirit testifies to their spirit, to, to borrow language from Romans, I think in, in the life of a true elect Christian, um, that with the perseverance of the saints, uh, with the persistence of the saints and the preservation of the saints, um, I think that yes, those who are finally saved, those who are saved unto salvation, if you wanna phrase it that way. They finish the race, they claim the prize. Um, that assurance will be their possession in their life as a Christian. Jesse Schwamb: Right on. Tony Arsenal: All of that to say, I think there are, are, there's a good case to be made for the fact that there is also people who have false assurance, right? And this is where it takes a lot more, you know, finagling and jockeying and theological explanation of how can we know we have true assurance versus false assurance. You know, it's kinda like that question, like, does an insane person know they're insane? Well, does a false, does someone with false assurance know that their assurance is false? I don't think, I don't think so. Otherwise, it wouldn't be false assurance. Um, if they knew it wasn't real assurance, then they wouldn't have any kind of assurance. So I, I think I agree with you at least where, where I think you're going is that we do have to, we do have to make some judgements. We have to look at our own life, right? Um, there is an element of fruitfulness in this parable, right? We'll talk about that. I, I think we'll get into that next week. But it's not as though this is entirely disconnected from the parable of the soils. Both of them have a very similar kind of. End point. [00:47:20] Final Judgment and Eschatology Tony Arsenal: At the end of all things, at the end of the harvest, when the end of the age comes, and the reapers, the angels are sent, what they're gathering up are fruitful Christians, right in the parable, he sends out the, it's funny be, I love my dispensational brothers and sisters, but in this parable, like the rapture is the rapture of the unbelievers, right? The angels go out and reap the unbelievers first. The, the weeds are bundled up and thrown into the fire, and then the, the fruitful wheat is gathered into the barns. Um, there is this delineation between the fruitless weeds and the fruitful wheat or the, the grain that has borne, you know, borne fruit. That is part of what the, the outward. Elements of this parable are, so we should talk about that more, of what is this trying to get at in terms of not just the difference between weeds and wheat and how that maps up to those who are in Christ versus those who are not in Christ, but also like what is this telling us about the, the end of the age eschatology. All of that's baked in here and we haven't even scratched the surface of that Jesse Schwamb: yet. Yeah, we, we, I, and we just can't, even on this episode, probably, you're right, we're gonna have to go to two so that, I guess it's like a teaser for the next one. I'm told they're with you. It's interesting. I've been thinking about that, that question a lot. And I do like what you're saying. You know, at the end here, it's almost as if Christ is saying at the time of harvest, things become more plain, more evident In the beginning. The chutes are gonna look really, really similar, and you're gonna go in and you're gonna think you're guessing properly or using your best judgment, and you're gonna get it wrong in the end when he sends out those who are harvesting. I liken this passage here in the explanation as you read to us starting in verse 36, how there's this comparison of heat and light. And so there is the heat and light of the fiery furnace into which, as you said, all of those who are the children of the enemy will be gathered up and burned. And then there's that contrast with in verse 43, then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father. So there is like a reward that comes from the bearing of the fruit and that made evidence by a different type of heat and light. So I do struggle with this question because. It's easy to answer in some ways if we're defining the weeds in pirate or the tears in pirates as false professors typically. Let's say false professors of a nefarious kind, then it seems pretty plain that somebody, right, that the enemy has implanted certain people to stir up trouble with the intention to stir up trouble that is in fact their jam. Or they know that even if they're putting on heirs, that they're in fact play acting that the hypocrisy is purposeful and that it is part of like the missional efforts that they're doing to disrupt what God is doing in the world. So I might think of somebody like when we go, when we're looking in, um, Exodus, and we find that at least to some degree, all of Pharaoh's magicians can replicate everything that Moses is doing. Moses doing that by the power of God. But the magicians are so good and whatever means they're using, but they know, I presume they know they're not, they're not using Yahweh, they're not drawing their power or their influence from Yahweh. Tony Arsenal: Right? Jesse Schwamb: But it's so convincing to the people that Pharaoh is like, eh. Obviously I've seen that before because we just, we just did that here. Come back with your next trick until God flexes his mighty muscles in a really profound way, which cannot be replicated. And at some point there's a harvest that happens there. There's a separation between the two, those who are truly professing, the power that comes from God, the one true God, and those that are just replicating the cheap copy, the one that's just pure trickery and smoke and mirrors. So. That's an easy category. I'm with you. And I'm not saying that this is an invitation to bring the kind of judgment here that we've just spoken against. I'm not condoning this. What I do find interesting though is if the enemy is crafty, is it possible that they're always going to be forms of terror in the world that do feel that they have very strong conviction and belief about biblical things? Maybe there's, there's strong hobby horses or there are misguided directions here that pull us apart, that become distractions. Or maybe it's just even attitudes, uh, things that can be divisive, disruptive, derogatory that again, pull us away. For making the plain things, the main things and the main things, the plain things, which in some ways draws us back to like the whole purpose of you and I talking every week, which is we wanna get back to what the scripture teaches. We wanna follow the our Lord Jesus Christ very, very closely. I'm gonna clinging to the hymn of his rob as we walk through life so that we do not fall to those kind of false convictions. So I'm not, please hear me, loved ones. I'm not trying to call into question your faith as Tony just said. I am saying that there, this is kind of scary, just like we talked about. There are elements of the parables of the, of the soil that were equally scary. And so it's just in some ways to say, we gotta keep our heads not theological, swivel. We, we gotta be about the Lord's business, and we gotta be about understanding through prayer and study and communion with him, what it is that he wants to teach us in the purest way, knowing that the church itself and the world, of course, is never going to be entirely pure. At the same time, it is our responsibility to, as you already said, test for ourselves to understand what is that true gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Because some tears are going to be maybe easy to identify and with without, you know, throwing too much shade or. I was gonna say spilling the TI don't think that works here, but I'm not young anymore, so I'm trying to use or or put on blast. Yeah. I'm looking at you Mormons or Jehovah's witnesses. Like it's, it's easier there to be like, yeah, right, this is wrong. It is a false profession, but we've just gotta be careful even in our own hobby, horses not deviates into ground. I think that doesn't preclude us from being children of the light and children of the kingdom, but can still be disruptive or uh, you know, just distracting. But either way, yeah. I think what's scary to me about this is exactly what you said, Tony, is, is could it be that there are people that are very sincere about the Christian faith, but are sincerely wrong? Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: And what does that mean for God's elected purpose? What does that mean for our understanding of how to interact in our churches in the world? Does that make sense? Tony Arsenal: It does. And I'm not sure whether you were trying to set up the, what might be the first genuine reformed brotherhood cliffhanger, but you did. Because we're on minute 54 of a 60 minute podcast, and, uh, there's no way we're gonna get into that and not go for another 60 minutes. So, Jesse, I, I'm, I'm glad that we are taking our time. Um, I know that sometimes it's easy when you put out a schedule or you put out a sort of projected content calendar to feel like you have to stick to it. But I wanna give these parables, the time they deserve and the effort and the, uh, the, uh, study and the discussion that they deserve. And I think the questions you're posing here at the end of this episode are really, really important. And they are questions that this parable forces us to ask. Right, right. It's not as though we're just using this as a launching pad. Um. If the workers can't tell the difference between the, the seed and the, or the, the weeds and the weeds, it's reasonable to think that the weeds themselves may not be able to tell the difference. Right? The sons of the evil one, um, are probably not in this parable, are probably not the people like in the back, like doing fake devil horns, right? And like, you know, like there's, there's probably more going on that we need to unpack and, and we'll do that next week. Jesse Schwamb: I love it. So we've got some good stuff coming then, because we've gotta, this is like, do you ever remember when you were in, uh, you know, doing your undergraduate postgraduate work, you'd get like a topic or an assignment or a paper and you'd be super stoked about it and you start reaching it, be like, okay, researching it. And you'd be like, all right, I've got some good topics here. And then you get into it, you're like, oh, but I'm gonna have to talk about this. And Oh, like before I could talk, I'm gonna have to explain this. Sometimes when we get into these, as you and I have been talking, that's what it feels li

Leek het eerder erop dat we als Nederland de religie hadden afgeschaft, nu zoeken jongeren steeds vaker hun toevlucht tot traditionele religies en zien we wereldwijd een opmars van religieus nationalisme. In deze extra aflevering van ZVVD: Goddeloos, gesprekken over zingeving door Stine Jensen, in het dagelijks leven humanist en ongelovige, met vier gelovigen. Vandaag gaat Stine in debat met alle vier de gesprekspartners van deze week samen; dit gesprek vindt plaats in debatpodium Arminius in Rotterdam tijdens de Nacht van de Zingeving afgelopen vrijdag 10 oktober.

Leek het eerder erop dat we als Nederland de religie hadden afgeschaft, nu zoeken jongeren steeds vaker hun toevlucht tot traditionele religies en zien we wereldwijd een opmars van religieus nationalisme. In deze extra aflevering van Wat Blijft: Goddeloos, gesprekken over zingeving door Stine Jensen, in het dagelijks leven humanist en ongelovige, met vier gelovigen. Vandaag gaat Stine in debat met alle vier de gesprekspartners van deze week samen; dit gesprek vindt plaats in debatpodium Arminius in Rotterdam tijdens de Nacht van de Zingeving afgelopen vrijdag 10 oktober.

Im Herbst des Jahres 9 n. Chr. geraten drei römische Legionen unter Publius Quinctilius Varus in einen Hinterhalt germanischer Stämme – und werden vernichtet. Arminius, einst römischer Verbündeter, wird zum Verräter und Helden zugleich. Doch war die „Schlacht im Teutoburger Wald“ wirklich ein Wendepunkt der Geschichte? Wie gelang es den Germanen, die stärkste Militärmacht ihrer Zeit zu besiegen? Und warum ist dieses Ereignis bis heute von Mythen überlagert?Du hast Feedback oder einen Themenvorschlag für Joachim und Nils? Dann melde dich gerne bei Instagram: @wasbishergeschah.podcastQuellen:Reinhard Wolters, Die Schlacht im Teutoburger Wald, C.H. BeckGünther Moosbauer, Die Varusschlacht, C.H. BeckLutz Walther, Varusschlacht. Die Schriftquellen, Reclam++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte ++Werde Teil der WBG-Community und unterstütze unser Herzensprojekt:Supporter werden und WBG werbefrei hören: https://steady.page/de/wbg/aboutEinmalig unterstützen via Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=LQ36VDMHDLPZ2&&locale.x=de_DE Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For centuries, Rome grew unchecked, until one man was able to reverse their fortunes, and free his country. On this episode, we take a look at the story of Arminius, and what it teaches us about how to overcome an unstoppable force. 00:00 Battle of the Teutoburg Forest 03:00 Introduction to Arminius 05:40 Understanding the Germanic Tribes 13:00 Arminius' Early Life and Roman Service 21:00 The Rebellion Begins 25:00 Varus's Leadership in Germany 27:23 The Battle of Teutoburg Forest Revisited 31:30 Aftermath and Roman Reaction 34:20 Arminius' Legacy and Influence 46:20 Lessons from Arminius' Life ---- Sponsors:⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠TakeoverPod.Supercast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - All premium content for just $7/month ⁠⁠⁠⁠- ⁠⁠GainsInBulk.com/ben⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠ - Use code Ben for 20% off instantized creatine and more⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠Speechify.com/ben⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - Use code Ben for 15% off Speechify premium ⁠⁠⁠⁠- ⁠⁠Founders Podcast⁠⁠ ---- Stay In Touch - Sign up for our newsletter at ⁠⁠takeoverpod.com⁠⁠ - Twitter/X - ⁠⁠@BenWilsonTweets⁠⁠ - Instagram - ⁠⁠@HTTOTW

Cet été, retrouvez le meilleur d'Au cœur de l'Histoire avec Virginie Girod ! En l'an 9 de notre ère, l'Empire romain essuie la pire défaite militaire de son histoire. En Germanie, à l'Est du Rhin, les troupes du gouverneur Varus avancent dans les bois de Teutobourg quand soudain, des hordes de Germains surgissent de toute part. Après trois jours de bataille, les Romains sont défaits, trahis par Arminius, qu'ils croyaient être l'un des leurs. Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Send us a comment or question!Calvary Chapel Franklin: http://calvarychapelfranklin.com/  Email: info@calvarychapelfranklin.com  The Parsons Pad Website: https://parsonspad.com/ Telegram: https://t.me/parsonspadpodcastTwitter/X: https://twitter.com/ccfranklintn Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CalvaryChapelFranklin/  Subscribe to the audio podcast: https://parsonspad.buzzsprout.com/  Calvary Chapel Franklin meets at: Sunday mornings: 1724 General George Patton Drive, Brentwood TN 37027 Wednesday evenings: 274 Mallory Station Rd, Franklin TN 37967 (Aspen Grove Christian Church)Mail: PO Box 1993 Spring Hill TN 37174 If you need a Bible, please download the free Gideon's app for iPhone or Android: https://gideons.org/  Calvary Chapel Franklin is a 501c3 tax exempt religious organization. If you would like to donate to support this ministry, please click here: https://calvarychapelfranklin.churchcenter.com/giving 

In this episode of GraceNotes from no. 87 "Arminianism and the Gospel of Grace," we dive into the theology of Arminianism and its views on the gospel of grace. Named after Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius, Arminianism challenges the strong determinism of Calvinism, particularly in its views on salvation, free will, and God's grace. We'll explore the historical roots of Arminianism, from Arminius' objections to John Calvin's doctrines to the formalization of Arminian theology in the early 17th century. Through this study, we'll unpack key points of disagreement between Arminianism and Calvinism, such as the nature of election, the concept of prevenient grace, and the question of whether salvation can be lost. While Arminianism emphasizes human free will and the ability to choose salvation, it also presents challenges to the gospel of grace, particularly when it comes to assurance of salvation and the idea of works in maintaining salvation. How do Arminians reconcile their belief that salvation can be lost with the Bible's teaching on God's unconditional grace? We'll also look at how Arminianism compares to biblical teachings on eternal security, examining the struggles many believers face with assurance of salvation when their security is tied to human effort rather than God's grace. This episode seeks to bring clarity to these complex theological systems and highlight the importance of understanding the full gospel of grace. Whether you're familiar with the terms TULIP, prevenient grace, or the history of Arminianism, this episode will equip you to better understand both Arminian and Calvinist views and how they relate to the truth of the gospel. Join us as we unpack the core of the gospel message—salvation by grace alone, through faith alone—and why it's essential for believers to rest in the assurance of eternal security.

Hallo ihr Lieben,Willkommen zur vierten Episode unserer Staffel über Helden, ihre Geschichten, ihre Mythen und ihren Einfluss bis heute.In dieser Folge werfen wir einen Blick auf die Folgen der Varusschlacht. Wir sprechen über Arminius, seinen weiteren Lebensweg und vergleichen ihn mit Siegfried, dem berühmten Helden der Nibelungensage. Außerdem betrachten wir, wie beide Figuren in der Literatur dargestellt wurden und welchen Einfluss ihre Geschichten auf spätere Generationen hatten. Zum Abschluss ziehe ich ein Fazit über Arminius' historische Bedeutung und seine Rolle als Mythos und Symbol.Schreibt mir gern in die Kommentare, wie euch diese Episode gefallen hat. Ich freue mich auf den Austausch mit euch!Viel Spaß beim ZuhörenEuer Ingmar

Die neue Folge des Pagan Podcast ist da. In dieser Staffel dreht sich alles um Helden, ihre Geschichten, ihre Mythen und ihren Einfluss bis in unsere Zeit.In dieser Episode geht es um die Varusschlacht im Jahr 9 nach Christus. Wir sprechen über die wichtigsten römischen Quellen, die das Geschehen im Teutoburger Wald überliefern, über die Kultur und Kriegsführung der Cherusker sowie ihren Stammesglauben. Danach werfen wir einen Blick auf Arminius – seinen Werdegang, seinen Widerstand gegen Rom, den historischen Sieg und das politische Scheitern. Eine zweite Folge folgt in 2 Wochen! Schreibt mir doch in die Kommentare, wie ihr die Folge fandet. Ich freue mich auf einen Austausch mit euch!

Alors que la 52e édition du festival international de la bande-dessinée se tient en ce moment à Angoulême, Virginie Girod vous propose de découvrir les coulisses de la création d'une bande-dessinée historique, avec le dessinateur et scénariste Enrico Marini, qui s'illustre dans ce genre depuis 2007 et la parution du premier tome de sa série antique "Les aigles de Rome". Sous le règne de l'empereur Auguste, on y suit Arminius et Marcus, deux frères d'armes devenus ennemis au gré des conquêtes romaines et des rébellions barbares. Cet entretien est réalisé en partenariat avec les éditions Dargaud.

Virginie Girod raconte la bataille de Teutobourg dans un épisode inédit d'Au coeur de l'Histoire. En l'an 9 de notre ère, l'Empire romain essuie la pire défaite militaire de son histoire. En Germanie, à l'Est du Rhin, les troupes du gouverneur Varus avancent dans les bois de Teutobourg quand soudain, des hordes de Germains surgissent de toute part. Après trois jours de bataille, les Romains sont défaits, trahis par Arminius, qu'ils croyaient être l'un des leurs. Cet épisode a été réalisé en partenariat avec les éditions Dargaud et la bande-dessinée "Les Aigles de Rome", d'Enrico Marini.

Show that the emergence of Calvinistic Theology was an affirmation of Biblical Doctrine, born out of a reaction to teachers such as Pelagius & Arminius ~ articulated by Augustine, Calvin and othersExplain its historical influence on our churches, and show that it shapes more than the 'ordo salutis'. Contrast the Doctrines of Grace with the false Calvinism around today, distinguishing between the mere label of being 'Reformed' and 'True Calvinism'.

Dans les Aigles de Rome, dont 7e tome est paru récemment, Enrico Marini plonge les lecteurs au cœur d'un conflit où vengeance, loyauté et trahison s'entrelacent. Alors que Marcus et Arminius, deux anciens frères d'armes, s'affrontent dans une lutte acharnée, cette fresque historique soulève des questions intemporelles qui résonnent encore aujourd'hui. Découvrez le processus créatif du plus flamboyant des auteurs suisses, Enrico Marini, au travers de cet entretien exclusif. Une interview de Christian Missia Dio — Une production ActuaBD.com - Montage : Christian Missia Dio — Photo : Christian Missia Dio - Musique : We March Together — Courtesy of Patrick Patrikios — Youtube Audio Library

In 9 AD, the rebel chieftain Arminius and his confederation of Germanic tribes ambushed three Roman legions in the Teutoburg Forest. For days the Romans were relentlessly stalked through the woods and pounced on by their pursuers. All told, up to 20,000 Romans were killed in the chaos, and only a handful were able to escape. The battle proved to be one of Rome's most devastating defeats, and left a scar in the Roman psyche for generations to come.In this Explainer episode, Dan explores the historical context for the battle and its profound consequences for Roman strategy and expansion. He's helped by Dr. Simon Elliott, who provides deeper insights into how the Roman military worked, and where its vulnerabilities lay.Warning: this episode contains accounts of violence that some listeners may find disturbing.Written and produced by Dan Snow, and edited by Max Carrey.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.

In this episode of The Vortex Apologetic, Beef and the Brain discuss the concern behind the missiles shot into Russia; a doctor speaks the truth regarding flu-shots; cancer in covid-19 vaccinated individuals, and some other news. And lastly, an introduction into the nature of the debate between John Calvin and Jacobus Arminius.  Tune in, listen and be a Berean!     Episode recorded on November 21, 2024

The US Election  · LIVE · Donald Trump sweeps · Aftermath and AnalysisWelcome, ladies and gentlemen, to another very special episode of Desire + Capital. We are doing it live @Arminius!This is our live coverage of the US Election at Arminius. Of course, we felt it was necessary to give some post-election analyses in order to put the outcome of the elections in some perspective.Also, thanks to the organisers @StudiumGenerale and @Arminius! Who put together a great evening, albeit with a less than great election result. So, on your Marx. Get set. Go!

The US Election  · How does it work?  · Kamala Harris  · Donald Trump  · Gerrymandering Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to this very special episode of Desire + Capital. It's difficult to get ready for what has been called the greatest show on earth by some and an empty gesture of feudal spectacle by others. But, we will be here with you through this Countdown to Civil War. Desire + Capital will be live on 5 November at the Arminius, so please join us for this historic event!For tickets: https://arminius.nl/programma/us-election-watch-party/So, on your Marx. Get set. Go!

LEGACY BROADCAST * The Future is Open: Dr. Richard Rice, Loma Linda theology professor and a leading advocate of open theism, is interviewed by Denver Bible Church pastor Bob Enyart. (Enyart is the co-founder of opentheism.org.) Dr. Rice's book, The Openness of God, was published in 1980, 14 years before he co-authored the famed 1994 book by the same name that he co-authored with Pinnock, Hasker, Basinger, and Sanders. Rice and Enyart have a relaxed and very interesting discussion of open theism and recent developments, and then go back in history to consider the way that Arminius himself wrestled with the matter. * Book Blurb: Open theism has reached its adolescence. How did it get here? And where does it go from here? Since IVP's publication of The Openness of God in 1994, evangelical theology has grappled with the alternative vision of the doctrine of God that open theism offers. Responding to critics who claim that it proposes a truncated version of God that fails to account for Scripture and denies many of the traditional attributes of God, open theism's proponents contend that its view of God is not only biblically warranted but also more accurate―with a portrayal of God that emphasizes divine love for humanity and responsiveness to human free will. No matter what one's assessment, open theism inarguably has made a significant impact on recent theological discourse. Check out the YouTube Video Here! * Richard Rice: Now, twenty-five years later, Richard Rice recounts in this volume the history of open theism from its antecedents and early developments to its more recent and varied expressions. He then considers different directions that open theism might continue to develop in relation to several primary doctrines of the Christian faith. BEL's Dr. Rice interviews...  - kgov.com/richard-rice (6/9/20 this program) - kgov.com/richard-rice-2 (10/20/20) - kgov.com/richard-rice-3 (10/21/20) * Rome & Greece: Late in the discussion, Bob repeats his line from kgov.com/sayings. "The Reformation broke with Rome but not with Greece." * Open Theism Social Media: Please help our brand new (Dec. 2020) social media efforts: - Instagram OpenTheismorg (Please follow & 'like' our daily verses :) - YouTube Open Theism channel (Please subscribe & hit the bell!) Today's Resource: Predestination & Free Will Seminar So much is at stake when people consider predestination and free will. Strong emotions often surface with a discussion of this topic. That passion points to our critical need to understand the truth regarding whether or not God has predetermined who will go to heaven and who will go to hell. Also, the question of whether or not God has planned out each person's life affects us. Does God have a plan for your life? Does a blueprint exist for your future? Did God predetermine whether or not you would get married, and to whom? Did God plan whether you would be wealthy or poor, happy or sad? If God does plan your life, does He do so in minute detail or in general themes? If God has a plan for your life, are you able to alter that plan? This topic directly influences people concerning how they live their lives. As Christians, we must seek God to accurately portray the LORD to others. For any misrepresentation of God will dishonor Him and perhaps bring harm to those misled. You can now order the seminar video in a 3-DVD set or MP4 video download.

In AD 9 Rome lost three legions in an attack made by Germanic tribes. It became an infamous event in Rome's history dealing a huge blow both to its manpower and prestige.  So how had this come to be? In the first of two episodes on this event I'm joined by Dr Jo Ball who is an expert on the Teutoburg Disaster.  Dr Ball discusses the battlefield (including her work there) and then we turn to the main characters involved. What was Rome trying to achieve here and who exactly was Varus, the Roman governor? Finally it's the turn of Arminius - do we know why he betrayed Rome? Dr Ball provides insight at every turn, it's a must listen. Part Two, where Dr Ball unwraps the events of the disaster, will be out soon. Don't forget to rate and review, it really helps indie podcasters like me. Music by Brakhage (Le Vrai Instrumental).

Was ist wirklich passiert im verregneten Teutoburger Wald? Die Legende der Schlacht von Varus gegen "Hermann" wurde oft erzählt - die Wahrheitssuche ist akribische Forschung... Von Ralph Erdenberger.

Calvary Chapel Franklin: http://calvarychapelfranklin.com/  Email: info@calvarychapelfranklin.com  The Parsons Pad Website: https://parsonspad.com/ Telegram: https://t.me/parsonspadpodcastRumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1006557?date=this-year Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccfranklintn Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CalvaryChapelFranklin/  Subscribe to the audio podcast: https://parsonspad.buzzsprout.com/  Calvary Chapel Franklin meets at: Sunday mornings: 1724 General George Patton Drive, Brentwood TN 37027 Wednesday evenings: 274 Mallory Station Rd, Franklin TN 37967 (Aspen Grove Christian Church)Mail: PO Box 1993 Spring Hill TN 37174 If you need a Bible, please download the free Gideon's app for iPhone or Android: https://gideons.org/  Calvary Chapel Franklin is a 501c3 tax exempt religious organization. If you would like to donate to support this ministry, please click here: https://calvarychapelfranklin.churchcenter.com/giving 

Scripture: Romans 9:17-18, Ephesians 1:3-12, John 6:44, 2 Tim. 1:9, John 17:9, John 3:16, John 5:39-40, Romans 1:18-32, 1 Tim. 2:1-4, 2 Peter 3:9, 1 John 2:2**The other perspective that I'd mentioned near the end of the podcast is known as "Molinism" named after 16th-century Spanish Jesuit theologian Luis de MolinaCalvary Chapel Franklin: http://calvarychapelfranklin.com/  Email: info@calvarychapelfranklin.com  The Parsons Pad Website: https://parsonspad.com/ Telegram: https://t.me/parsonspadpodcastRumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1006557?date=this-year Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccfranklintn Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CalvaryChapelFranklin/  Subscribe to the audio podcast: https://parsonspad.buzzsprout.com/  Calvary Chapel Franklin meets at: Sunday mornings: 1724 General George Patton Drive, Brentwood TN 37027 Wednesday evenings: 274 Mallory Station Rd, Franklin TN 37967 (Aspen Grove Christian Church)Mail: PO Box 1993 Spring Hill TN 37174 If you need a Bible, please download the free Gideon's app for iPhone or Android: https://gideons.org/  Calvary Chapel Franklin is a 501c3 tax exempt religious organization. If you would like to donate to support this ministry, please click here: https://calvarychapelfranklin.churchcenter.com/giving 

#LONDINIUM90AD: Gaius & Germanicus observe that Adolf Hitler rallied Lippe villagers in his desperate January 1933 Lippe State campaign at the same spot (Leopoldshone) where Arminius and the united Teutons defeated three Roman Legions in 9 AD -- the worst defeat in Augustan Imperial history.. https://www.sky.com/watch/title/series/548580e1-95a2-3c60-a422-f513a9d81fd5 1770 Pantheon

Germanen Arminius överfall på romarna vid Kalkriese berg år 9 efter vår tideräkning har gått till historien som ett av de blodigaste slagen under hela den antika perioden. Känt som slaget vid ”Teutoburgerskogen”, ”Hermanslakten”, eller Clades Variana (Varuskatastrofen) var det kanske inte störst i fråga om antalet förlorade romerska soldater. Men på grund av den korta tidsrymden och överfallets natur blev det närmast att betrakta som en massaker.I dagens avsnitt av Militärhistoriepodden pratar idéhistorikern Peter Bennesved och professorn i historia Martin Hårdstedt om slaget vid Teutoburgerskogen.Efter att ha svarat på ett rop på hjälp från sina germanska allierade inne i Germanien öster om Rhen, var ståthållaren Publius Quinctilius Varus på väg tillbaka med sina tre legioner mot den romerska militärbasen vid Xanten. På vägen var Varus tvungen att passera Kalkriese berg, beläget strax norr om den stad som idag heter Osnabrück, i nordvästra Tyskland.Vid Kalkriese berg hade dock hans nära allierade Arminius arrangerat en fälla. Vägar hade grävts bort för att kanalisera de romerska soldaterna in i ett smalt pass omgärdat av träsk, och längs med bergskanten hade de germanska trupperna byggt upp en jordvall, vilken de kunde gömma sig bakom. Hur många germanerna var och hur deras ledare Arminius hade lyckats samla ihop och arrangera detta överfall är ännu okänt, men förberedelserna var långtgående.När den kilometerlånga kolonnen med legionärer var på väg att passera berget, stoppades de upp längst fram. Varus beslutade då att fortsätta framåt i tron att legionärerna skulle kunna hantera attacken. Snart inleddes dock ett dramatiskt överraskningsanfall från jordvallen som pressade ihop legionärerna och sedan tvingade ut dem i träsket till höger om dem. Bakifrån fyllde ytterligare germanska krigare på och snart var hela den romerska armén omringad.Inom loppet av några timmar hade hela den romerska styrkan på mellan 15 000 – 20 000 man tillintetgjorts. En formidabel slakt. Inom kort insåg även befälhavaren Varus att allt var förlorat, och enligt sed kastade han sig på sitt eget svärd, det enda hedervärda sättet att ta sitt eget liv för en romare.Nyheterna om slaget chockade kejsare Augustus, men trots straffexpeditioner de följande åren hämtade kejsaren aldrig sig riktigt från förlusten, och så småningom blev Rom tvungen att lägga om sin strategi i norr.Konsekvenserna av slaget blev således långtgående. Att kalla det för en vändpunkt i Europas historia är i det närmaste en underdrift. Arminius överfall ledde till att de germanska folken kunde utvecklas utan romerskt inflytande under de kommande århundradena, och fortfarande idag utgör Rhenfloden en gräns mellan latinska och germanska språk och kulturer.Bild: Hermansstatyn. Canva. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, the fellas talk about the 5 articles of The Remonstrance.

Didn't Arminius believe that you could lose your salvation? Isn't the inerrancy of Scripture a recent theological development? Wasn't the United States established as a Christian nation? Dr. Adair and Dr. Svigel return to the Bible and Theology Matters podcast a third time to discuss the Urban Legends of Church History.

Chemischer Beweis mit Standbohrer, Röntgenstrahlen und Säure: Die Varusschlacht hat offenbar tatsächlich in der Region Kalkriese stattgefunden. Drei Legionen des römischen Feldherrn Publius Quinctilius Varus hat Arminius aka Hermann der Cherusker im Jahr 9. n.Chr. mit seinem Heer niedergemetzelt. Doch wo fand diese sagenumwobene Schlacht statt? Das ist unter Historikern seit Langem umstritten. Nun verdichten sich die Hinweise auf den Südwesten von Niedersachsen. Denn der sogenannte metallurgische Fingerabdruck zeigt: Es spricht sehr viel für die Region Kalkriese im Osnabrücker Land. Wir haben Annika Lüttmann, Gewinnerin der fünften Staffel unseres Science Slam, besucht und uns von ihr genau erklären lassen, wie der Nachweis der Materialforschung funktioniert. Die Chemikerin hat unserer Reporterin Lena Bodewein vorgeführt, wie antike Kleiderspangen aufgebohrt und Metall-Legierungen auf ihre Spurenelemente hin untersucht werden. Im Gespräch mit Host Korinna Hennig erklärt Lena, welche Rolle militärisches Recycling spielt, was eine Röntgenfluoreszenzpistole ist und warum es gar nicht zischt, wenn man Kupferstaub in Salzsäure auflöst. Am Ende steht ein chemisch eindeutiges Ergebnis. Heureka! DIE HINTERGRUNDINFORMATIONEN: Pressemitteilung Museum und Park Kalkriese: https://www.kalkriese-varusschlacht.de/die-varusschlacht/metallurgischer-fingerabdruck-1.html Pablo Fernández Reyes, Universität Liverpool, Dissertation über metallurgische Charakteristika römischer Legionsschmieden (2014): Metallurgical characterisation of 1st and 2nd century AD Roman copper-alloy military equipment from north-western Europe (Doctoral dissertation, University of Liverpool): https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/2003529/

Episode Synopsis: Jonathan Harker arrives to stay with Mina and the rest of the men as guests in Seward's asylum. He and Mina set to work ordering and organizing all of their separate accounts into a single chronological narrative. While working, Mina discovers that Renfield's behavior coincides with the movements of the Count. Seward goes to visit Renfield, and finds him lucid, and discussing arrangements to be discharged from the asylum. Seward hopes to visit him later in hopes of uncovering more information on the Count. Jonathan travels around town, tracking the Count's boxes of earth and buying drinks for everybody every step of the way. A delivery man working for Carter, Paterson and Co. describes that they transferred the fifty boxes into the chapel of Carfax Manor. Mina is delighted to see that Jonathan's resolve in tracking the count has renewed his vigor as Van Helsing said it would. While Jonathan and Seward are away, Mina meets Arthur and Quincey, and in turn, comforts each of them in their trauma over Lucy's death. When Seward arrives at the asylum, and at Mina's request, takes her to meet Renfield. He is astonished to find Renfield conversing with her on a high intellectual level, quoting philosophy, and explaining his Zoophagous behavior as an attempt at prolonging his own life by assimilating others. When Seward and Mina must leave, Renfield shocks Seward again by wishing Mina well and saying that he hopes to never see her again. Seward picks up Van Helsing from the train station, and Van Helsing is glad to know that everybody else is already assembled. He tells Seward that they should not involve Mina in any further planning, as it might be bad for her in the long run. In a meeting after dinner, Van Helsing lays out the path before them, that the Count is strong with many powers, and influence over animals and the dead, and that failure in their mission would doom each of them to the Count's nefarious army. Each present at the table pledge themselves to the grim task in spite of the risks. Van Helsing goes on to discuss the details about the Count that they had observed through experience, and to say that his friend, Arminius, a scholar from Buda-Pesth University, was able to provide more details about the Count through research. In life, the Count was an unusually cunning war lord who defeated the Turks long ago. His family is said to have had dealings with the devil, instilling the Count with his evil, supernatural powers. He may only rest in the earth that is made holy by the graves of his biological children, which is why he must transport their dirt graves with him, and now which they must find. At this point, Quincey, who had stepped outside to investigate a noise, shoots his pistol at a bat which had come to rest outside the window where the group was meeting. Not wanting to lose a moment, the men agree to investigate whatever boxes remain at Carfax, and, to Mina's chagrin, she must stay behind, and no longer be involved in their dealings with Dracula. Follow us on Twitter.com/CryptiCanticles, Facebook.com/DraculaRadioPlay, and at crypticcanticles.com

Johnathan and David discuss some of their favorite online resources.Johnathan's list:ccel.org — a wealth of free Christian books; allows you to make an account so that you can save notes and highlightsnewadvent.org — especially newadvent.org/fathers, which has the full text of many patristic worksstepbible.org — Step Bible by Tyndale House, my favorite online Biblewesley.nnu.edu — Wesley Center Online with the full text of Wesley's sermons, Notes on the Bible, etc.bestcommentaries.com — commentary recommendations on each book of the Biblethevcs.org — Christian art in conversation with Scripturebibleproject.com — a wealth of free Bible study resources (e.g., animated video overviews of each book of the Bible)bcponline.org — the Book of Common Prayer onlinelectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu — the Revised Common Lectionary with readings and other liturgical resourcesbiblehub.com — some free commentaries (e.g., Calvin's Commentary) in an easy-to-read formatDavid's list:1. The Wesley Center Online (free)A database of Wesleyan and holiness materials created by Northwest Nazarene University.I like it because it has some hard-to-get resources.2. Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL.org)SearchableIncludes Schaff's 38-volume Church Father's seriesCalvin's CommentariesWorks of Arminius (3 Vol. Nichols ed.)No page numbers3. NewAdvent.org (free)Similar to CCELMore readable in my opinion4. The Revised Common Lectionary (lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu)5. Papalencyclicals.net (free)Every important document ever put out by the Roman Catholic ChurchThe search feature is difficult to use because titles are often only in Latin.6. Perlego.com ($18/month)This would be in my top two or three if it still had the daily subscription option.Tons of contemporary books.7. Wesley Scholar (wesleyscholar.com) (free)An independent collection of Wesleyan-Methodist and early Christian works. Contains articles as well as original works.8. Open Access Digital Theological Library (libguides.thedtl.org) Contains some free materialContains PhD dissertations9. Books.Google.com Used to be able to download as PDFs.Gives all the information about a book including the nearest library or where to get it online.10. Gutenberg.org (free)Over 70,000 of free ebooksChristian and secular booksSeveral different formats including actual facsimiles of pagesEverything is public domainSearchableHonorable Mentions:JSTOR.org (fee)Usually accessible through a student library accountNot really affordable for individuals.Academia.edu (fee and free)Up-to-date scholarshipPay by subscription or by itemSupport the show

Arminius, also known as Hermann the German, was a Germanic warrior and chieftain who played a crucial role in the early first century CE in the region that is now modern-day Germany. He is best known for his leadership of the Germanic tribes against the Roman legions during the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, a pivotal event in the history of the Roman Empire. Arminius was born around 18 or 17 BCE into the Cherusci tribe, one of the powerful Germanic tribes of the time. He received a Roman education, which allowed him to understand the tactics and strategies of the Roman military. This education proved invaluable as he later used this knowledge to organize a successful resistance against the Roman forces. In 9 CE, Arminius, who was a trusted officer in the Roman auxiliary, turned against his former allies. He united various Germanic tribes, including the Cherusci, Marsi, Chatti, and Bructeri, to form a formidable force. His plan was to stop the Roman expansion into Germania, the region east of the Rhine River. The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest in 9 CE was the defining moment of Arminius's life. As a commander of the Germanic tribes, he led his forces in an ambush against three Roman legions led by Publius Quinctilius Varus. The battle took place in the dense Teutoburg Forest, and Arminius exploited the terrain and his knowledge of Roman tactics to defeat the Roman legions, resulting in a significant Roman loss. The battle was a devastating blow to the Romans, halting their advance into Germania. Arminius's victory at the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest marked a turning point in the relationship between the Roman Empire and the Germanic tribes. It shattered the illusion of Roman invincibility and made the Romans reconsider their expansionist plans in the region. Arminius became a symbol of Germanic resistance against Roman domination. However, the aftermath of the battle was complex for Arminius. He faced challenges in maintaining the unity of the Germanic tribes, and he struggled to secure a lasting alliance among the various groups. Furthermore, there were internal rivalries and conflicts among the Germanic tribes. Arminius's life took a tragic turn when he was betrayed and assassinated by rival Germanic leaders around 21 CE. His death highlighted the difficulties of leadership in a diverse and often divided tribal context. Despite his untimely death, Arminius left an enduring legacy. His successful resistance against the Romans inspired later generations of Germans, particularly during the nationalist movements of the 19th century, to look back to him as a symbol of national heroism. His story has been romanticized and retold in various forms of art, literature, and historical accounts. In conclusion, Arminius was a skilled leader who played a crucial role in the resistance against Roman expansion in Germania. His victory at the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest had far-reaching consequences, reshaping the course of history in the region and leaving a lasting impact on the collective memory of the Germanic peoples. Show notes at https://thedigressionpodcast.com/109 Sound Off! With a comment or a question at https://thedigressionpodcast.com/soundoff Like the show? Leave a 5-star rating and review: https://thedigressionpodcast.com/review Help us keep the engine running at https://thedigressionpodcast.com/donate Or just share our podcast with a friend! It's the best way to grow the show!! “MaxKoMusic – Dark Ages” is under a Creative Commons (cc-by) license. Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: http://bit.ly/maxkomusic-dark-ages NOTES: Arminius: The Limits of Empire by Robert Fabri  

durée : 01:04:59 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Philippe Garbit - Par Jean Montalbetti - Avec Hélène Carrère d'Encausse - Réalisation Christine Bernard-Sugy

durée : 01:10:00 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Philippe Garbit - Par Jean Montalbetti - Avec Hélène Carrère d'Encausse - Réalisation Christine Bernard-Sugy

Jordan and Hunter talk with Tom McCall and Keith Stanglin about Arminius and soteriology. They cover topics like : What is Arminius's position with respect to the infamous 'facientibus quod in se est' statement? Is Arminius a 'syngergist'? (And, of course: What is 'synergism' anyway?) Given Arminius's statements, is he rightly considered a 'Semi-Pelagian'? Should we think of Arminius as Reformed? How similar is his soteriological system to what we think of as Reformed today? Resources:1) Jacob Arminius: Theologian of Grace, Tom McCall and Keith Stanglin2) After Arminius: A Historical Introduction to Arminian Theology, Tom McCall and Keith Stanglin3) Center for Christian Studies4) Trinity, Christology, and the Theological Interpretation of Scripture with Tom McCall5) Book Review: Arminius and the Reformed Tradition, Tom McCallSupport the show

Originally Released on October 31, 2016 Happy Reformation Day! In this episode we will be examining how the theologies of Jacob Arminius and John Wesley were aligned with the Five Solas of the Protestant Reformation: Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, and Soli Deo Gloria. To do this we will be examining both primary and secondary sources. You may be surprised to find out that both Arminius and Wesley were theological heirs of the Protestant Reformation and their theology and doctrine were faithful to all five of the solas. That is why all Wesleyan-Arminians should be excited about Reformation Day! Soli Deo Gloria.

This is the seventh full episode! We will be discussing the doctrine of Predestination as articulated by Jacob Arminius. First, we define Predestination. Then we look how Arminius defined Predestination. What becomes very clear is how Christocentric the Arminian doctrine of Predestination is! Then we look through the “Declaration of Sentiments” by Arminius and see what he had to say about the Divine Order of Decrees and compare the Arminian Order of Decrees to the Supralapsarian and Infralapsarian orders of decrees. We then look at what Thomas C. Oden had to say about the alignment between the Arminian understanding of Predestination and the Patristic understanding.

This episode of Remonstrance is entirely devoted to the question, “What is the will of God?” We first discuss the Calvinist understanding of the will of God to provide context for the Arminian understanding. We also look at Calvin's distinction between the decretive and prescriptive will of God. We then discuss the philosophical differences between Voluntarism and Intellectualism. It is more important than you might think. We then look at the distinction between the Antecedent and Consequent will of God that Arminius emphasized in his theological writings. We then look at the question of divine determinism and look at how Thomas C. Oden explains how God governs the world according to His will. We hope you are blessed by this episode!

In this episode we continue the new series: TULIP: A series comparing Calvinism and Classical Arminianism. This episode wraps up our examination of Historical Points of Interest with an overview of the Reformation era surrounding Jacob Arminius and the Synod of Dort.    Get the resources/further reading materials on the episode landing page: https://christisthecure.org/2023/03/02/tulip-4-reformation-era-pt-2-arminius-dort-and-summary-of-key-terms/    Christ is the Cure is subscriber supported: Join the support team at patreon.com/christisthecure or go to https://christisthecure.org/support-citc/

This episode is entirely devoted to the Doctrine of Justification with specific emphasis on what Wesley and Arminius had to say about Imputation. We realize there is a lot of debate and confusion today about the Doctrine of Justification. It is important for Wesleyans and Arminians to see what their theological founders had to say. To do this we will be reading and discussing a variety of secondary and primary sources on Justification and Imputation. It is clear that both Wesley and Arminius stood with the Protestant Reformers on this issue. We will also spend time focusing on three aspects of Justification that both Wesley and Arminius had in common: (1) they both expressed agreement with John Calvin (2) they both did not want to make a distinction between the “Active” and “Passive” righteousness of Christ in their Doctrine of Imputation and (3) they both taught that “Faith is Imputed for Righteousness” and for this they were criticized by their Reformed contemporaries.  Please visit the theologians page of our website to find links to all the books we references in this episode. We encourage you to buy them and read them all for yourself.

This is our third full episode of Remonstrance Podcast. In this episode we will discuss the Wesleyan-Arminian Doctrine of the Atonement. First, we will explain the various major views on the Atonement. They are the Governmental, the Satisfaction, and the Penal-Substitution views. After that we will look at Hugo Grotius and the history of the Governmental View of the Atonement. Then we will look at what Arminius and Wesley taught in regards to the Atonement (spoiler alert: they did not hold to the Governmental Theory). Then we will focus on the views of the Atonement held by the major early Methodist Theologians: Watson, Pope, and Summers. Then we will discuss John Miley and how the Governmental Theory of the Atonement was introduced to Methodism. We will finish with some clarification from Thomas Oden. In this episode we reference works by Roger Olson, Kenneth J. Collins, and Thomas Oden. We highly recommend the works of all three of these theologians.

The year was 9 CE. Autumn winds, rain, and cool air blew through the trees of western Germania's forests. The waters of the Rhine River were beginning their annual swell in the wake of summer's heat. Though the autumns of Germania were relatively moderate, the season was one of transition and marked by a climate subject to swift change, even week to week at times. So, it was in September in the north of the Germanic central uplands when a certain Roman general marched his men into a pass between Kalkriese Hill and dense, boggy swampland. Unbeknownst to the Romans, they were marching into a bloody, hellish gauntlet that, for them, was to characterize their last days on Earth. The days that followed were a harrowing bloodbath that destroyed three veteran Roman legions and rocked the Roman Empire, and its leader, to the core. You can find the Hardtack socials via linktree. If you have any feedback on Hardtack episodes or suggestions for future episodes, please send an email to hardtackpod@gmail.com Don't forget to rate and subscribe! Make your Own Hardtack! Hardtack Recipe (Survival Bread) - Bread Dad Sources: The battle that stopped Rome: Emperor Augustus, Arminius, and the slaughter of the legions in the Teutoburg Forest https://brewminate.com/annihilation-of-a-roman-army-the-battle-of-teutoburg-forest/ Long Term Decline of the Roman Military World at War: Understanding Conflict and Society - Long Term Decline of Roman Military (apus.edu) A General History of Europe: The Decline of the Ancient World by A.H.M. Jones History of the Goths by Herwig Wolfram Dyck, Ludwig Heinrich. "Arminius." Ancient History Encyclopedia. July 12, 2019. Accessed July 14, 2019. https://www.ancient.eu/Arminius/ Fisher, Martini. "Publius Quinctilius Varus." Ancient History Encyclopedia. July 10, 2019. Accessed July 14, 2019. https://www.ancient.eu/Publius_Quinctilius_Varus/ "Florus on the Germanic Wars." Livius. Accessed July 14, 2019. https://www.livius.org/sources/content/florus/florus-on-the-germanic-wars/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/hardtackpod/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/hardtackpod/support

This is our second full episode of Remonstrance podcast! On this episode we will be taking an in depth look at the theology of Jacob Arminius and John Wesley in regards to Divine Providence. We will start off by defining Providence and Meticulous Providence. Then we will be looking at what Arminius had to say, specifically in regards to preservation, divine governance, divine concurrence, and permission. We also look at the “greater good” theodicy in the thought of Jacob Arminius and how God directs evil and sinful actions toward a greater good. We then look at what John Wesley had to say and how he affirmed both meticulous providence and “greater good” theodicy as well. 

Friday, 20 January 2023   “Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you: Acts 13:40   Paul has spoken of Israel's history, the coming of Christ, the treatment Jesus received from the hands of Israel, and the good news that this was all a part of God's plan for the redemption of the world. Because it is this way, it is through Him that forgiveness of sins is received and that through faith in Him, justification that could not come through the Law of Moses is received.   Having said that, there is an obvious point that has not been explicitly stated even if it is implied. If Jesus has initiated a New Covenant, and if that is now in effect for the forgiveness of sins, then the Mosaic Covenant is annulled in Him. The offering of forgiveness of sins through the sacrificial system, including the Day of Atonement, is no longer effectual. Because of that obvious point, Paul next says, “Beware therefore.”   This is not a threat, but a solemn warning. Paul has shown that what he has stated was prophesied in advance and recorded in Scripture. He will next demonstrate that even the consequences for rejection of God's offer of Christ Jesus had been prophesied. As this is so, then those who reject that offer are continuing to fulfill prophecies that were written concerning this new and exclusive path to salvation. That is made perfectly clear from his continued words, “lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you.”   Paul began his talk to the people with the selection of Israel and their being exalted while dwelling “in the land of Egypt, and with an uplifted arm He brought them out.” Immediately after that, he then said, “Now for a time of about forty years He put up with their ways in the wilderness.”   That was a time of the rejection of the Lord's deliverance. It resulted in the death of every man, twenty and above, who perished for their lack of faith. Paul is now tying the account of Jesus directly in with that as he closes out his speech. The words are as bookends on his speech. The Lord exalted Israel in their own type of Egypt, being under the bondage of the law. He brought them out with an uplifted arm via the cross of Calvary. And yet, the nation has already rejected this offer for the most part.   But this was known by God, and it was spoken of in advance through the prophets. Paul's words are telling the people that just as Moses had to fashion a fiery serpent in the wilderness and hold it up for any who looked to it to live, even while national Israel was being punished and perishing, so each Jew would have to do the same with the cross of Christ. They could individually look to the cross and be saved.   To support this, he will next cite the prophet Habakkuk to close out his discourse to those at the synagogue.   Life application: Paul has spoken his gospel message to those in the synagogue. This included Gentiles as will be explicitly stated in verse 42. He has given them the gospel; the same gospel was extended to all who heard. There were not two separate speeches to the two categories conveying two separate gospel messages (hyperdispensationalism).   The consequences for national Israel's rejection of Christ Jesus are implied in his words, and they will receive their just punishment for this rejection. However, Paul's appeal has been to individuals of the Jewish nation as well as to those Gentiles who were in attendance. Now each will have a choice to make. Will they accept the gospel he presented and be saved, or will they reject it and perish?   This same offering has continued to be extended to all people, Jews and Gentiles, for the past two thousand years. Each person who has heard it will either accept it and be saved or reject it and perish. God is not forcing this upon people, choosing them apart from their free will (Calvinism). This will be evident in the citation from Habakkuk.   Likewise, Paul has shown in his words that the law is ineffectual to save while Jesus' offering is fully effectual to do so. His words imply that the Law of Moses is now no longer in effect for forgiveness of sins. To remain under this law (Jews), or to place oneself under it (Gentiles) as taught by the Judaizers', Adventists, Hebrew Roots Movement, etc., is thus a rejection of Jesus and a point of condemnation.   Further, Paul has noted that “everyone who believes is justified from all things” (Acts 13:39). This is a clear refutation of the doctrine of Arminius and those who follow him concerning loss of salvation. To be justified from all things is to have all things removed from penal consequences. Those who are so cleansed are also no longer under law, but grace. As this is so, then there can be no further imputation of sin. Salvation is eternal.   By simply paying attention to the words of Paul, the correction of defective doctrine or even heresy can come about. Don't be a heretic! Come to Jesus, drop the foolish things that keep you separate from the truth of the gospel, and live out your life in the contented bliss of knowing that you are not just saved, but that you are also living out your salvation in the proper manner.   Again, come to Jesus! Believe the word! And walk in soundness of doctrine, thinking through the various principles that are presented in Scripture.   Lord God, how simple the plan of salvation is. You have sent Jesus and made the offer of salvation through Him. And yet, we seem to desperately try to muddy up those pure waters with all kinds of crazy ideas. Help us not to do this, but to follow Jesus in the purity of the gospel and in the assurance of our salvation for all our days. Amen.  

“In order to depict a battle, there is required one of those powerful painters who have chaos in their brushes” — Victor Hugo “Inconceivable!” — From The Princess Bride A little over 2,000 years ago, Rome was a well-oiled war machine crushing everything in its path. At that time, the Roman legions were the most deadly military force in the Western world, and possibly in the whole world. Every year, they conquered new peoples and pushed the boundaries of their empire. Rape and pillage was the name of the game, and they were masters at it. But in the year 9 CE, something happened in the forests of Germany that was going to have a profound impact on the destiny of the world. Some historians go so far as to suggest that both the German and English languages may not exist as we know them, had things gone differently. News arriving from Germany, along with a severed head delivered by courier, threw Emperor Augustus in a deep depression. In this second and final part of the series (for the first part you can check Episode 47)about the clash between Rome's power with Germanic tribesmen, we'll consider topics such as how suicide post-defeat in battle was a family tradition for one of the key characters in our story, when Varus ordered 2,000 people crucified, the training of the Roman army, Arminius' skill at playing the long con, the battle that changed history, having to cut your friends' throat out of kindness, the German passion for human sacrifice, Roman vengeance, how these events may be tied to the creation of the English language, and much more. If you feel generous and enjoy History on Fire, please consider joining my Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/historyonfire to access plenty of bonus content. If you'd like to go to Japan for a historical tour with yours truly as a guide, please check out https://geeknationtours.com/tours/signature-battlefield-series-classic-samurai-from-the-gempei-war-to-the-mongol-invasions-2023/Big thank you to Athletic Greens for sponsoring this episode. Athletic Greens is going to give you a FREE 1 year supply of immune-supporting Vitamin D AND 5 FREE travel packs with your first purchase. All you have to do is visit https://athleticgreens.com/HOF

Arminius and the Reformed Tradition Was Jacob Arminius a Reformed theologian who held to the basic tenets of Reformed soteriology? Today's guest skillfully dissects his writings on predestination, union with Christ, justification, and more to effectively prove that Arminius' views on salvation differed significantly from confessional norms. J.V. Fesko serves as professor of Systematic and Historical Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary and is an ordained OPC minister. Fesko is the author or editor of more than 20 helpful books on Reformed theology, justification, and other biblical topics. In conversation with Jonathan and James, the professor carefully describes Arminian positions that arguably break from Reformed traditions. To possibly win a copy of Arminius and the Reformed Tradition: Grace and the Doctrine of Salvation, sign up here. Our copies are a gift from Reformation Heritage Books.    

Perhaps the most fundamental complaint of the Remonstrants against Reformed theology, the concern that most animated Arminius' desire to revise Reformed theology, was the charge that the Reformed view makes God the author of evil. In his desire to fix this problem . . . Continue reading →