Podcasts about calvinists

On today's Bible Answer Man broadcast (06/23/26), Hank opens with a Facebook question from someone who asked, “Is it unbiblical to call yourself a Calvinist or an Arminian; a Lutheran or an Augustinian?”Hank also answers the following questions:How could God fulfil a land promise in 1948 to a people we know genetically did not exist? Dan - CT (2:49)Can a Christian go to hell for doubting God one day and believing the next day? Derek - Indianapolis, IN (8:55)Why was Eve not scared that a serpent could speak? Could animals speak in the Garden of Eden? Lance - OK (15:11)Are near-death experiences legitimate? Sheila - Brooklyn, NY (20:52)My friend says that he's been talking to the spirit of his deceased wife. How can I explain that this is not his wife? Annie - Wichita, KS (22:14)

https://smithfieldbaptist.org.au/sermons/chris-athavle-mark-218-28-the-sabbath-pt1/feed/ 0

In episode 497 of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb bring the Parable of the Talents to a close with one of the most theologically rich discussions in recent memory. Beginning in Matthew 25:24, they zero in on the one-talent servant — not merely as a cautionary tale about productivity, but as a profound case study in distorted theology. The servant's fatal error wasn't laziness alone; it was a fundamentally false picture of his master. That mischaracterization produced a craven, fearful inaction that the hosts argue maps directly onto the eschatological stakes of the parable. Drawing on Calvin, William Ames, and Reformed confessional commitments, Tony and Jesse make the case that right theology is never merely academic — it shapes the whole of life, and ultimately determines one's eschatological destiny. Key Takeaways The one-talent servant's core failure is theological, not behavioral — he constructs a false image of his master as harsh and exploitative, and that distorted theology governs everything that follows. False theology produces fatal inaction — the servant's fear is not godly fear but a craven dread rooted entirely in his mischaracterization of the master's character. The knowledge of God and the knowledge of self are inseparable — following Calvin's Institutes, the hosts argue that a right understanding of God as gracious and generous will produce active, trusting faithfulness, while a distorted view produces fearful, minimal compliance. The parable is fundamentally eschatological, not merely practical — interpreting the talents primarily as spiritual gifts or ministry opportunities misses the point; the parable is about who belongs to the master's kingdom and who does not. Character precedes action — the faithful servants do not become faithful by producing returns; they produce returns because they are faithful. The wicked servant buries his talent because he is wicked, not the other way around. William Ames understood the servant's sin as a violation of the ninth commandment — by burying his talent, the servant effectively bears false witness against God's own estimation of the gift, rejecting both the gift and the Giver. The "outer darkness" language is not out of place — it is the natural eschatological conclusion for someone who never genuinely knew or trusted the master, making the parable a picture of what it means to be outside the grace and presence of God entirely. Key Concepts False Theology as the Root of Inaction The most striking feature of the one-talent servant's account is not what he did — or failed to do — but what he believed. He tells his master, "I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed." Tony and Jesse point out that nothing in the parable supports this characterization. A master who entrusts his servants with what amounts to decades of wages — hundreds of years' worth of labor between three servants — is not a hard, exploitative figure. He is astonishingly generous and trusting. The servant has constructed a theological fiction, and that fiction becomes the prison of his own inaction. This is not a peripheral observation; it is the interpretive key to the entire parable. What we believe about God determines everything about how we live before Him. The Knowledge of God Shapes the Whole of Life Calvin famously opens the Institutes with the observation that the knowledge of God and the knowledge of self are so bound together that it is nearly impossible to determine which is logically prior. Jesse draws on this insight to show that the one-talent servant's self-understanding — timid, fearful, paralyzed — flows directly from his distorted image of God. A person who genuinely knows God as gracious, generous, and long-suffering will be motivated to active, trusting faithfulness. A person who privately believes God to be harsh and demanding will retreat into fearful, minimalist compliance. This is not merely a first-century observation. It is a diagnostic tool for self-examination: the shape of our obedience reveals the shape of our theology. Reformed orthodoxy has always insisted that right doctrine is not academic — it is the engine of the Christian life. Character Precedes Action — The Anti-Works-Righteousness Reading One of the most important guardrails Tony and Jesse set up in this episode is against a subtle works-righteousness reading of the parable. It is tempting to hear the parable and conclude: do productive things for the kingdom, and you will be welcomed as a good and faithful servant. But the hosts argue that this inverts the logic of the text entirely. The faithful servants are not commended because they generated a return; they generated a return because they are faithful servants. The wicked servant buries his talent because he is wicked — his character drives his conduct, not the reverse. Justification and sanctification alike are received by faith in Christ alone, and no reading of this parable should suggest that our eschatological standing is secured by our productivity. The sheep act like sheep because they are sheep. That punchline, Tony notes, will carry them straight into the sheep and the goats passage next week. Memorable Quotes "Who is it that's not going to be saved in the last day? It's the people who don't recognize the master. The people who think that the master is a hard man who reaps where he has not sown and gathers where he has not scattered. Well, if we think that's who God is, we have a lot of trouble coming our way." — Tony Arsenal "A person who genuinely knows the living God as gracious, generous, long-suffering, with that kind of hesed kind of love — that person will be motivated to active, trusting faithfulness. A person who privately believes God to be harsh and demanding is always going to retreat in this fearful, minimal kind of compliance." — Jesse Schwamb "The sheep act like sheep because they're sheep. They don't become sheep because they do sheep things. They do sheep things because they're sheep." — Tony Arsenal Full Transcript Welcome to episode four hundred and ninety seven of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse  And I'm Tony, and this is the podcast with ears to hear Hey, brother  [00:00:42] Jesse Schwamb: Hey, brother. We're back at it again. We're hanging out in Matthew's gospel, the 25th chapter, and it's time to, I think, close out the Parable of the Talents, where we've got two servants that double their master's money, and one who buries his in the ground like a Calvinist who's confused predestination with doing nothing. And of course, all of this irony is the faithful servants, they can't even take credit. The master supplied the capital, the ability, and apparently even the bull market. It's grace all the way down. But meanwhile, the one talent guy returns exactly what he was given and he gets absolutely wrecked, and we're gonna dig into that. Gonna dig into- ... that later.  [00:01:26] Affirm or Deny Segment [00:01:26] Jesse Schwamb: But before we do, it's what everybody's waiting for. It's that time in the podcast where we affirm with something that we really like or we recommend or we think is undervalued, or we deny against something that's exactly the opposite. Not worth it, no good, get it out of here. So Tony, are you affirming with or denying against?  [00:01:43] Tony Arsenal: I'm denying against something related to the World Cup. Um-  [00:01:47] Jesse Schwamb: Okay ...  [00:01:48] Tony Arsenal: I am not a purist, so please don't hear me as, like, elitist soccer dude who is resistant to any sort of changes, but, um, I didn't actually even know this was happening. Are you following the World Cup at all, Jesse? [00:02:01] Jesse Schwamb: I'm trying to. I'm not against it, I'm just finding myself- Yeah ... stuck in  [00:02:05] Tony Arsenal: trying to like- There, there's a lot going on.  [00:02:06] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah ... yeah, coordinate everything.  [00:02:07] Tony Arsenal: Um, one of the things that they... And they're at weird times this year too- Yes ... at least so far they are.  [00:02:11] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.  [00:02:11] Hydration Breaks Rant [00:02:11] Tony Arsenal: Um, one of the things this year that I noticed that I didn't know was happening, and I hate it, hate it, hate it, hate it, is, uh, I, I guess I understand why they're doing it, but they've instituted what they're calling mandatory hydration breaks-  [00:02:25] Jesse Schwamb: Oh,  [00:02:26] Tony Arsenal: I've read about this uh, into the games. Yeah. And essentially what this has done is it's turned a game that used to be, uh, and has always been two 45-minute halves-  [00:02:38] Jesse Schwamb: Mm-hmm ...  [00:02:38] Tony Arsenal: um, uh, with overage time, right? So, like, the, the ref will sometimes just, like, add a couple minutes. Usually it's, you know, three to five, maybe 10 minutes at the most to the end of the, the half. They've turned that from, uh, two 45-minute halves into now four, what is that? Like, 23-minute quarters, 22 and a half- Right ... minute quarters. Um, and they're not always quarters. They're not always evenly split. They sometimes do the hydration break early or later. Um, this is awful. It's just awful, right? One of the, one of the, um, maybe this is me being a little bit of a soccer purist. One of the things about soccer that makes it a challenging sport is the endurance of it.  [00:03:21] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:03:22] Tony Arsenal: Right? And contrary to what I think most people think when they watch soccer, um, it's one of the few games, few professional games that doesn't have a ton of breaks- Right? There's not a lot of times where, where match play actually stops for any real amount of time. Um, and that's what stoppage time is. It's not intended to be something like football, where there often is time on the clock where the clock is still moving, but the game is not, like, actively progressing forward, right? Right. You have to do something special to stop the clock. In soccer, uh, at least historically, 45 minutes of play is 45 minutes of play. It's, it's 45 minutes of actual actionable play. And now, um, you know, they stop the game. The clock doesn't continue, but now the game stre- like, the, the game itself stretches longer 'cause they've introduced these additional breaks. So I'm denying, uh... This just sounds like s- I'm such a ghoul here. I'm denying mandatory hydration breaks, not because I want soccer players to get sunstroke. Uh, they get plenty of water. There's plenty of times they get to stop and get water. It's- And this is... We didn't have mandatory hydration breaks when the World Cup was in Qatar. Right. Right? And everybody, for the most part, was fine. Like, the players were all fine. There were no casualties on the field. I don't even recall, like, major medical problems on the field. We're in LA now. Yeah, it's warm, summer, but come on, guys. Like, let's, let's, let's be real. This is not, uh, this is not rec league. This is not, you know, U15 league play with, with kids. These are adult men who condition for a living. Like, this is their job, is to be conditioned and for their bodies to be in peak performance. So it's just... It just interrupts the game. I don't know. I'm, I'm being a little crotchety here, but I feel like I have a right to be 'cause this is my show, and I can do what I want to. That's absolutely true. So I'm denying hydration breaks, mandatory hydrat- hydration breaks, which change the game. And a commentator actually commented about that on, on the match the other day. Um, it changes the dynamic of the game. It changes the strategy of the game. Um, it changes the whole feel of the game, right from the strategy of how long you have to be able to go, right? This will change how- how footballers have to condition themselves, 'cause they're no longer having to condition themselves for two 45-minute halves. They're having to condition themselves for four 22-and-a-half minute quarters, um, which is not the same game as, as that. So anyway, we'll- it's yet to see, be seen if that has any real impact on the outcome of any games or anything like that. But it was annoying to me, so I'm denying mandatory hydration breaks. [00:05:59] Jesse Schwamb: That's great. We haven't had a good denial in a little while on this podcast. I think that's fantastic. I mean, not the break, but the denial itself. Plus, and I don't wanna be... You'll have to tell me if I'm speaking conspiratorial here, because most of my apparent World Cup and general sports news still comes from The Wall Street Journal, so that might be a weird place to get it. But- ... the, I became aware of this through an article that was lamenting the exact same thing. Yeah. It was just basically all the arguments that you said. Like, it's weird, and the game wasn't designed this way, and it's definitely like an interruption. It's definitely like an insertion.  [00:06:32] Ads and Soccer Purism [00:06:32] Jesse Schwamb: And then, of course, was all the stuff about, isn't this really about just allowing commercial break time, and it's more about that, and we're just conveniently saying that we need the hydration breaks. And what else would they, we have them do if we needed to force them to take a break but say, "You know what? Why don't you guys take a knee and get some water- Yeah ... while we show you some ads?" So I imagine that doesn't sit well with people either.  [00:06:52] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. I mean, I'm sure that that's the case. Again, I, I haven't even been able to watch a full, full World Cup match, so I don't, I don't know... I don't even know how long the hydration breaks are, to be honest with you. But yes, it's an interruption in play where they can cut to commercial. And whether that was why they put this in place or not, or whether they're just utilizing it, it's obnoxious. Like, part of the fun of watching soccer is that there is no commercial break for the first 45 minutes. Right. Um, that's just part of- Which is unusual in sports ... part of the joy of the game, is that it's a continual game with no real breaks. Um, even when, like, a player is injured because, you know, there's an injury on the field or something like that, um, even when that happens, they don't cut to commercial because there was no planned commercial. They don't have anything there. Right. So, um, it's changed, like, the way... Y- you know, even, even things like this is gonna change how uniforms are thought out, because sponsorship money through uniforms used to be the m- one of the main commercial-driving, like, sponsorships for, um, for the game. So I'm just annoyed by it. [00:07:53] More Rule Changes [00:07:53] Tony Arsenal: There's an- a couple other things that I'm annoyed by this year. They have this... It's kinda like that automatic up call checker thing we talked about. Right. They have this, like, um- They call it mistaken identity, uh, recheck. Basically where if a player is fouled or appears to be fouled, they can, someone can flag it and it will recheck it and, like, digitally the system tells them whether there was a foul or not. And like I said before when we were talking about this a little bit before, um, there is a real element in the game, or there has been a real element to the game historically, where the ump is almost like, or the ref is almost like a third player, and you have to be wise and play the ref. Um, you have to, you know, there's, there's an element of a little bit of, uh, espionage and subtle- Right you know, subterfuge here going on in the game that I think people outside the game who are just watching, they look and they think like, "Oh, yeah, that guy flopped." But there's a whole, like, art and there's a whole form to that, and there's real cost if you do it poorly. Um, and so, like, we've already had one instance where a yellow card was called on a player. Uh, the other player simulated the foul. Um, and so they reversed it and gave the other guy a yellow card, but they did that after the game. Um, which, which is a whole other thing. Like, you play a whole game, um I could talk about this all night. Like when you get, when you get a red card- ... you're, you're out for an entire game, not just- Right the rest of this game. You're out for an entire game. Your position is out for an entire game, so that might mean you start the next match down a player. Well, what does that mean if you are given a red card sort of posthumously after the match, right? Right. Like, you- it's changed the whole calculation because for the whole game, that player, uh, was playing as though he didn't have a yellow card. And that, maybe that's good, maybe that's bad, but he was playing the game as though he didn't have a yellow card, and then all of a sudden now he does. Um, he doesn't go... I don't think he goes into the next match starting with a yellow card. Um, a- and so I'm kind of like, "Well, what's the, what's the point?" But, um, you know, some of that plays into, like, if there's ties and ties, match, match point ties, then they start looking at who has penalties and stuff. But either way, it's annoying that they, they're introducing this. Like, we didn't need to have... Yes, there's probably a place for reviewing a, a bad ref's calls. Right. They've also added, like, automatic on offsides. There was a whole strategy and a whole part of the game of forcing a person offsides, of drawing a person offsides, being offsides without looking like you're offsides. Some people may look at that and go, "Well, that's cheating," but no, it's actually just part of the game. Right. Like, playing the ref and understanding that is part of the game. And now it's still part of the game, but it's part of the game in a different way, and that's... Maybe I am just being a purist, but I just, I don't like it. I don't like it. Give me back my beautiful game the way it's always been and get off my lawn, get off the turf, get off my pitch, whatever. Um, I'm denying the fact that the World Cup is not as it's always been. But also, like, we don't need this stuff. Like, the World Cup has been fine for how many years?  [00:11:03] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:11:03] Tony Arsenal: We don't need water breaks like this- W- i- you know, if it was like last World Cup, five players died from dehydration in the middle of the... Like, okay, like yeah, let's do some water breaks. But like, nobody died. Nobody even had major medical emergencies. I think a couple people had to come out of the game a little early 'cause they weren't well-hydrated. But like- Right ... run to the side, get a water bottle. Like, you can do that in the middle of a game. There's nothing- Yeah ... against the rules to stand by the sideline, drink when someone's doing a substitution or even in the middle of the game. I've seen that happen, where someone will sprint over to the sideline, they'll take a drink of water, and then they'll throw the cup back over. So anywho, we should move on. This could be my entire, my entire rant of, for a whole episode- Good ... against the weird changes in, in World Cup soccer, so.  [00:11:48] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, I love it.  [00:11:49] Peacock Spanish Hack [00:11:49] Jesse Schwamb: My favorite hack, uh, for World Cup soccer so far this year, and this was given to me by a colleague, uh, and a brother, I think this is fantastic, is right now because my wife is convalescing, we have all the subscriptions temporarily to allow, like, the full healing process to take place. Watch whatever you want, wherever you want. Except for the World Cup, because the, uh... I- it was just, like, where you could actually get it in English was, like, crazy expensive, at least for me. So here's the thing, though. Somebody reminded me uh, that we have Peacock and that because of Telemundo, could just watch and stream the entire World Cup in Spanish. So guess what, loved ones? We're learning a lot more Spanish- I love it ... and we're watching the World Cup with the announcers on. I'm not turning off that, 'cause that's the best part. And, you know, I'm getting, like, 25% of what's being said, but it is awesome. And there's- Yeah ... a lot more energy and excitement. So if for some reason you have Peacock and you're saying, "Oh, I'm missing the World Cup," technically you don't have to. It's all there for you. That's amazing. Just you gotta embrace Spanish.  [00:12:46] Tony Arsenal: That's amazing. And yes, actually, it probably is more entertaining.  [00:12:49] Jesse Schwamb: It is.  [00:12:50] Tony Arsenal: Um, and you don't, you don't need to... You really don't need to understand what the commentator is- No I mean, like 90% of the time the commentator's like, "Oh, he's having a good year," and, uh- ... yeah, like, "Oh, yeah, yeah, he's looking real great. Do you see how his, uh, laces are laced up?" Like, they're just trying to fill time.  [00:13:05] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:13:05] Tony Arsenal: So it doesn't really matter what they're saying. And when it does matter what they're saying, you'll get it just from the-  [00:13:11] Jesse Schwamb: Yes [00:13:11] Tony Arsenal: just from what the announcer's voices are doing. So I'll have to check that out. Yeah, the, the matches are at weird times, at least so far. I think, I think that once we get out of group play, m- a lot of the matches shift to the East Coast, so there'll be, uh, a little bit more normal times.  [00:13:25] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:13:25] Tony Arsenal: But, like, the first, the first, uh, US match was at 9:00 Eastern Time, and then, like, the last one's at 10:00 Eastern Time. Yeah.  [00:13:32] Jesse Schwamb: So  [00:13:33] Tony Arsenal: late. Yeah, super late, and it's a, it's a three-hour match by the time you, you get done with halftime and everything. So yeah, it'll, it'll... It's, it's frustrating. Although historically, um, every time the men, the men's team has won their first match, they've gotten out of group play, and every time they've lost their fir- first match, they have not gotten out of group play. And we, we really, really won our first match. Yes. Yeah. So I think, I think we'll get out of group play. I think probably, depending on how the, the cards roll, um, we'll probably, we'll probably get through our first elimination round, maybe our second, but we're not gonna go much further than that. Um, even, even that would be a, a pretty good victory, so- Anyway, football is life, right? Danny Ross. Um, do, did you watch Ted last night? Yes,  [00:14:24] Jesse Schwamb: I have seen it. Yes.  [00:14:25] Tony Arsenal: That was good. Football is life. Um, that's me this time of year. Like, I wore a soccer jersey to work on Friday, and nobody could tell me I couldn't do that, and I didn't care. So- I  [00:14:33] Jesse Schwamb: love it ...  [00:14:34] Tony Arsenal: uh, nobody even tried. Everybody, everybody's fine. Everybody loves soccer- How dare they ... and loves the World Cup, so. Yeah. That's the truth. Anywho, save me from this. I, I literally could talk about soccer all night. This is the one sport that I get like this. And the... Not even the one sport. The one sporting event that I get like this about is the World Cup. I love it. So you've gotta, you gotta stop me or I'm not gonna, not gonna stop. Let  [00:14:54] Jesse Schwamb: it out.  [00:14:54] Hydration Tabs Recommendation [00:14:54] Jesse Schwamb: Well, I would say, like, we could play that game with our affirmations and denials where it's, like, six degrees of separation, but we only need one. And this is gonna sound like it was planned, but it wasn't. Your denial, of course, as you've just well articulated, was about hydration breaks. Turns out my affirmation is actually about hydration. So-  [00:15:11] Tony Arsenal: Jesse's affirming hydration breaks. We're about  [00:15:13] Jesse Schwamb: to fight. Yeah. No, I'm, I'm definitely not a- affirming hydration breaks, but this might be the kind of hydration they're having. I don't know, but it's the one I'm gonna recommend. So where I live, it is the summertime, and where I live, we get both the heat and the humidity, and that's the oppressive part, isn't it? It's where it feels like the inside of a dog's mouth. And so I actually just came back from a run, and my go-to hydration break for myself is, uh, Nuun, N-U-U-N. And here's the reason why, is I've had Gatorade, I've had all the... I've had Liquid IV, I've had all that stuff. Most of the time it's r- too sweet. Nuun is just these effervescent dissolvable tablets that you drop into water, and it creates this low sugar electrolyte drink. It has all, like, the normal stuff. It has sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, chloride, all that good stuff, but there's just one gram of sugar. And it's this convenient little tab. Like, you can just get this whole little roll of tabs. You can carry them with you if you're going hiking or you're camping or you're out and gonna do a run. You just drop them into a bottle of water or whatever size water you want. I usually go 32 ounces is the way I like it. They have all, all kinds of flavors. It's just the right thing. Like, it's... It is like the refreshing thing of water, but when you're like, "You know what? I wanna taste something that's not water." So Nuun is, like, the right thing. I may have referred to it before, so I'm sorry if I did. But I'm referring with you can order it on, like, Amazon or any kind of, I don't know, general kind of camping or sports-oriented store is probably gonna be there. But it's... For me, it's the right thing because I don't know about you, but I find most sports drinks, like, in general too sweet. Like, you, you start... You have one, and then if I get through it, I'm kind of like, "Ugh, now I feel like my mouth is, like, really just coated in sugar, and that's not what I wanted." Yeah. So this feels like you're, you're getting a little less sweetness, but you don't feel guilty afterwards like you've just consumed a bunch of sugar. I will admit, I drink one I guess it's like 12 ounce Gatorade every week, just one. And this is because there's a delightful and loving, like, 72-year-old woman in our congregation who brings, I believe it's her own, she invests this every week. She brings for the team that is doing the worship through music Gatorade, uh, because she thinks we need to be replenished. So really, we have a hydration break- ... right before the service. But she, it's so beautiful and so delightful, I will never refuse it, and I am also on often parched at the time. So-  [00:17:31] Tony Arsenal: Yeah ...  [00:17:31] Jesse Schwamb: it does work out, so.  [00:17:31] Tony Arsenal: Jesse's worship team goes real hard. They need to hydrate in the middle. They do a mandatory hydration break in the middle of the- It's, yeah middle of the service.  [00:17:39] Jesse Schwamb: It's mandatory. Yes. We are strict.  [00:17:41] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And it's an, it's a good time for announcements and commercial breaks. Um, yeah. I, I think, uh, and you're... I don't know if you're gonna believe me when I say this. With all of the Nuun that passes its way around the family home when we're all here- Yeah at summertime, I've never had-  [00:17:57] Jesse Schwamb: Oh, really? ...  [00:17:57] Tony Arsenal: Nuun. Yeah. We never tried it. I think our go-to for, for sort of powdered energy drink or powdered, uh, sports drink is little Propel packets.  [00:18:05] Jesse Schwamb: Um- Oh,  [00:18:05] Tony Arsenal: that's not bad either. Propel's not bad. I like Propel. It's very sweet, but it, it doesn't- Yeah ... um, Propel- doesn't add sugar. I think that they've, they've got their formula where it's a sugar-free formula. Um, but it is very sweet. So sometimes I'll only do, like, a half a packet of Propel- Yeah ... which I know kind of, they, they argue that or they, like, advertise as, like, "It's the perfect balance of electro-" I don't know if it's the perfect balance of electrolytes, but- Um, but some is better than none probably. Yeah. And, uh, Propel is not better than Nuun apparently, so.  [00:18:36] Jesse Schwamb: I, I, I think Nuun is, like, top shelf electrolyte. And you can get it, like I said, in lots of flavors. One of the fun things is you can get it caffeinated or uncaffeinated. I mean, most, most of it is uncaffeinated. But if you're like you wanted to have some, they have a what they call Kona Cola, and it is cola-flavored and has caffeine. It's amazing, because it's, like, just slightly effervescent, a little bit bubbly. Not too much. It's still, like, refreshing, but if you like the cola flavor, which as you know is its own distinct combination of elements and spices, then it's right on. So- Yeah ... it's really nice. So there you go. Yeah. Nuun- I- And if you're gonna take a hydration break because you're being forced to while you're playing soccer, I highly suggest you choose Nuun. That's the way to go.  [00:19:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know what they're drinking. I think most of the time they're just drinking water.  [00:19:26] Jesse Schwamb: Probably.  [00:19:26] Tony Arsenal: So I, I don't... I mean, I, I think you're supposed to drink something with some electrolytes, so maybe they have some electrolyte-  [00:19:32] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah ...  [00:19:32] Tony Arsenal: water in it. I don't know.  [00:19:33] Jesse Schwamb: I don't know. Probably.  [00:19:34] Join the Telegram Group [00:19:34] Jesse Schwamb: Here's the thing. If you wanna tell us what you like to drink or when you are, let's say, serving the Lord's people by participating in worship through music and you're forced to take a hydration break, as I am at times, then you need to go to t.mereformedbrotherhood. Put that into your browser right now. Take a hydration break and put t.mereformedbrotherhood into your browser and that will send you to a link for Telegram, which is just a little chat app in which we have a small corner of the world. It's brothers and sisters listening to the podcast, interacting, and it's about time, actually, we probably had some kinda taste test stuff-  [00:20:11] Tony Arsenal: Yeah with,  [00:20:12] Jesse Schwamb: like, these kinda hydration drinks. There's so many of them now. Some of them are, like, purposely salty. Some of them are really sweet. Some have all these crazy and wild flavors. Some of them have all kinds of caffeine. So let us know what you like, but best way to do that- Please ... is join the Telegram group. [00:20:26] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And please do not, uh, do not make your church stop their service for a hydration break. Please don't do that. The only hydration break I wanna hear you talking about in your church service is a baptism. So please-  [00:20:38] Jesse Schwamb: I knew that's  [00:20:38] Tony Arsenal: where you were going ... do not interrupt the Lord's day for a hydration break. Just if you need water, just, like, step out of the room, take a drink of water, come back. Or if you're in a church that lets you have water in the sanctuary, like most do, just take a drink. That's true. You don't have to- Yeah ... stand up. You don't need to have- That's good ... anyone interpret. Just take a quick drink and then be quiet. Just  [00:20:54] Jesse Schwamb: go to the sidelines, maybe sub out- Mm-hmm ... with somebody else who can play bass, and take a quick drink.  [00:21:00] Tony Arsenal: Exactly. Come back. Yeah. Or just dump the, dump the Propel powder straight in your mouth.  [00:21:05] Jesse Schwamb: I thought you were gonna say like have somebody come up, preferably like an elder, and just hose you down with a thing of Gatorade while you're, while you're  playing  [00:21:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, exactly. Just go up to the baptismal font, take a scoop of water, dump the Propel directly in the baptis- no, I'm just kidding. I shouldn't joke about that stuff. Yeah.  [00:21:19] Back to Matthew 25 [00:21:19] Tony Arsenal: Anyway, Jesse, I'm excited because although we are probably gonna round out this parable, we're not done with these parables because- Oh, yeah, that's  [00:21:28] Jesse Schwamb: right [00:21:28] Tony Arsenal: although we're gonna finish this parable this week, we'll probably finish it and get started talking about, uh, the next, the little chunk of text, which is not a parable, but we can't really, uh, divorce it from these parables 'cause they're all telling, they're all making the same or a very similar point about what the kingdom of heaven will be like in relation to the end times- Mm-hmm in relation to the eschatological, um, outcome of all things. Uh, and, and Christ in his teaching, um, he kind of rounds out this teaching and finalizes what these parables mean by talking to us about the sheep and the goats. Um, which again, is not really formed like a parable, but, uh, but it has very similar structures. It has some similar elements to it. Um, but it, it's so integral to what these, all what this sort of like, uh, anthology of eschatological parables mean in all the discourse. We really have to cover that to, to cover the others fully. But tonight we're gonna finish our discussion about the parable of the talents, which I'm excited about because I think we're gonna, we're gonna round out on some stuff that, um, I, I hope you've heard, uh, is probably not as, um, prominent as it should be. Uh, and this, we talked about last time that this parable has been, uh, not necessarily applied properly in many popular- Right ... teachings. Uh, and so I'm, I'm sure you've heard not so great interpretations. Hopefully we're gonna give you an interpretation that's a little bit more accurate and faithful to what the Bible teaches. [00:23:00] Reading the Parable Text [00:23:00] Jesse Schwamb: And so we're gonna pick it up in verse 24 of Matthew 25, because you'll probably recall, and if you haven't it's because you need to go back and listen, that we talked about the first two of these servants and the return that they were able to garner on the investment which the Lord gave them when He went away. And then there's the third dude. So we're gonna pick it up there and go all the way to the end of this, which allow us to close it out. So beginning verse 24, "And the one also had received the one talent came up and said, 'Master, I knew you'd be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. See, have what is yours.' But the master answered and said to him, 'You wicked, lazy slave. You knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed; therefore you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have at least received my money back with interest. Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has 10 talents. For to everyone who has more, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who does not have, even what he does not have,' excuse me, 'what he does have shall be taken away. And throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'"  [00:24:18] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:24:19] Textual Notes and Transition [00:24:19] Tony Arsenal: There, there's some, um, some textual things about this that I think, uh, we sh- should at least acknowledge. I don't know that we're gonna dig too deep into them. Um, it is very possible to, um, to read verse 30 Almost as an interpretive statement in itself rather than part of the, um, part of the parable itself. And, and so let me, let me see if I can, can parse that out. So if we read it as though it's part of the parable, then it is the s- the, the master in the parable who is saying, "And cast the worthless servant into the darkness; in the place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." I think that's the most natural reading, so I'll, I'll put my cards on the table that I think that we should read this as part of the parable itself. It's also possible linguistically and grammatically to sort of read this as an explanation, where Christ is now taking this principle of what has happened with the worthless servant, right? That even what he has will be taken away. And then, and then to sort of read this as a commentary that sort of, uh, like we saw before, um, kind of bridges this section with the next. So instead of reading, "And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness," uh, as though it were part of the parable, that it was this master within the parable saying this, we can read this as Christ saying that this is what will happen to those who are worthless servants. And then that follows up with, in verse 31, kind of h- connecting to when the Son of Man comes in His glory and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. Before Him will be gathered all nations. Right. Th- this next sort of, like, more explicit, non-parabolical, um, uh, eschatological teaching. I think that former one is more natural, but just because it's, it's present in a lot of the commentaries that this is there, I wanted to at least call that out. I don't know that it makes a ton of difference in terms of how we understand the parable, but I do think, you know, part of what it means for us to wrestle through this is not just to take a particular position on the text, but to discuss, like, some of these ambiguities that are present. Um, and, and sometimes, um Sometimes I think we need to be cautious and really think through, because, uh, let me, let me rephrase it this way. None of the teaching in the Bible is sort of uninterpreted, untranslated, raw teaching of Christ. All of this is coming to us from the apostles retelling it, and yes, inspired by the Holy Spirit, so all of it's God's Word. But it's not as though, um, it's not as though Christ was first speaking in Greek. That's the big thing. But there are some places in the New Testament, in the Gospels, where it's not always clear whether a passage is Christ speaking or the, uh, the Gospel writer interpreting what Christ is speaking. This is one of those places where there's a little bit of a question mark about that. Um, again, I think the most natural reading is to read this as part of the statement of the master within the parable, but I did wanna just comment on that before we moved on much further.  [00:27:31] Buried Talent Scandal [00:27:31] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's helpful because I think we've gotta understand that end in light of how it's evolving. And we, we're starting with that stark contrast between the first two, which receive this great reward, which receive accolades and praise, and then you have this one talent servant's response is all about hiddenness. He just digs a hole, puts it in the ground, and hides it away. Which by the way, of course, we talked about this in the other parables, like in the ancient world, burying valuables was recognized as a form of safekeeping. I mean, I think even Josephus mentions that. We talk about the pearl of great price. There was something to be known for, well, I have this valuable thing. The best place for me to, the best place for me to put it so that it isn't compromised is in the ground, in a secret place. And there's like a surface level, I guess, reasonableness to that act. But what's interesting and where it comes in with that heat that you're kinda talking about, that ends up being in the end this grand statement of the eschatological, eschatological reality, is that the parable here with this one talent servant treats all that action as like complete catastrophic failure. And I, I think as much as I can understand it, it's because the master did not give him this talent to protect it from loss. He gave it to him for, to use it for gain And so the servant has mistaken the nature of that commission entirely. He substituted like the security-seeking for risk-taking faithfulness. And so I think that informs some of then what happens in these latter verses here, like when we get all the way down to 30. Because I think when we read that, we see the, like the redistribution as scandalous. But the scandal really is in this lack of actions. Like gifts exercised grow, but gifts buried, they just atrophy. So the one t- talent servant's talent is taken because he's, he's already been treated as n- as it was, was nothing. He's functionally like forfeited it by burying it. And so the transfer of the 10-talent servant is the formal confirmation of what his own choices had, had already produced. I think there is something there about like the eschatological reality, reality that will unfold in the judgment, which of course leads to, into the end of this chapter  [00:29:36] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, I think you're right on that.  [00:29:39] Misreading The Master [00:29:39] Tony Arsenal: Um, what we see the problem with the one talent servant is not, um, not that he's not productive.  [00:29:49] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:29:49] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think that's, that's actually the symptom of the illness, not the illness itself. What we see with the, the one talent servant is that he misunderstands his task, as you're pointing out, but more foundationally, he misunderstands his master, right? And that, that's really the, the main point of the parable when we kinda get... You know, Christ, um, when He's telling a parable, He explains the parable. Sometimes He doesn't explain the parable at all. He just sorta drops the parable and then moves on. Other times He will give the interpretation itself, like directly. We saw that in the parable of the, uh, of the soils or the parable of the sower. Um, and, and other times the kind of like the main explanation of the parable is, is actually embedded in the parable. And I think for this parable, the main explanation is when the, the one talent servant, uh, comes forward and he, when he's explaining why he did what he did-  [00:30:47] Jesse Schwamb: Right [00:30:48] Tony Arsenal: he says, "Well, I knew you were a," uh, let me just find it for sure here. He says, um, "I knew that you were a..." I just lost it. My brain is totally lost here. You ever have that happen where you're trying to find a word- Yes ... on a text and you just can't? He says, "Master," in verse 24, he says, "Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. So I was afraid. I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours." There's a number of statements in here that just don't make any sense. Like, they're just... Like you said, a lot of these parables have kind of like a chump figure, where, like, he's sort of like the designated idiot of the parable. [00:31:31] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:31:32] Tony Arsenal: In this instance, there's so much wrong that it's almost hard to find something right. And, you know, he starts out, he says, "I knew you were a hard man." There's nothing in the parable, there's nothing that suggests that this is a hard man. There's nothing to suggest that. He, as we said last week, he trusts these servants with an almost unimaginable amount of wealth, right? He just leaves hundreds of years worth of wealth in the, in the, like... And it's not even like he's going off to war and he may never be coming back. He's just going on a journey.  [00:32:05] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:32:05] Tony Arsenal: He's just traveling for a little while, and he's like, "I'm gonna leave 100 years worth of labor with this guy and 40 years worth of labor with this guy and 20 years worth of labor with this guy." He, what, what, in what world is that a hard man who just blesses and trusts his servants with that amount of unimaginable wealth? But then he says, "I knew that you, uh, reaped where you did not sow and gathered where you scattered no seed." First of all, um, what kind of person accumulates this kind of wealth without reaping, uh, without the, like, a- apart from the principle of reaping and sowing and gathering and, and scattering? Like, he obviously is a very successful businessman. Um, the, the fact that this, uh, servant is couching this in agricultural terms, I think it's reasonable to think that this is a very successful landowner who has made good use of his land, has turned a profit Obviously he's reaping where he sows and he's gathering where he scattered or he wouldn't have this kind of money to throw around to leave with his servants in the first place. But the servant doesn't recognize that the fact that he was given one talent is in fact the master reaping or sowing and scattering the seed of these talents. So he's saying like, "Well, you reap where you have not sown," but the fact is like he was sown a full talent worth of resources and he, the, the master expected to reap what he had sown when he gets back. So this servant He's worthless and he's lazy, but he's also just kind of dumb in that he just doesn't- Right ... recognize the reality of what's going on. He has an incorrect understanding of who the master is. He thinks he's a hard man, when actually he's an incredibly trusting and generous master, right? The, the ESV masks this as servants. We're not talking about hired hands here. We're talking about slaves. Right. We're talking about h- probably about household slaves. This is doulos. These are the slaves that work in the fields, um, as opposed to, like, diakonos, which are the slaves that work in the house, right? These are, these are field servants. These are laborers that are indentured or are, are in servitude, and he gives them enough wages, enough labor, enough money, they could just take off and leave with it. They could buy their own freedom with this. Right. He trusts them with that. That's not a description of a hard man, a hard, lazy man who sows w- reaps where he doesn't sow and gathers where he doesn't scatter. So the primary issue here with this servant is not that he's lazy, although he is lazy. It's not that he's wicked. He is wicked. It's that he doesn't recognize who the master is. He doesn't understand who the master is and what is expected of him as a servant of that master, which I think, I think, as I've thought about this over the last week or so, I think that actually says everything about the eschatological import of this, right? Yes. Who is it that's not going to be saved in the last day?  [00:34:56] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:34:57] Tony Arsenal: It's the people who don't recognize the master. Right on. The people who think that the master is a hard man who reaps where he has not sown and gathers where he has not scattered. Well, if we think that's who God is, we have a lot of trouble coming our way. [00:35:10] Fearful False Theology [00:35:10] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that is the heart, right, of this dude's sin. It's a false theology of God that produces then this fearful inaction. Because, like you said, it's not just that he's been lazy. He has constructed this weird, distorted picture of his master, and then he allows that distortion to govern his behavior. So this, quote-unquote, "fear" is not like the fear of the Lord that is the beginning of wisdom, but it's this kind of craven dread that's rooted in a mischaracterization of the master's entire character. And one of the things that I think, among many, that's really great about the Reformed theological tradition is that it's always assisted, and I th- hopefully we along with it in our conversations, that, like, the right theology is not merely academic. It does shape the whole life, which is why, like, Calvin famously opens his institutes with this observation that the knowledge of God and the knowledge of self are bound together. So- Yeah ... a person who genuinely knows the living God as gracious, generous, long-suffering, with that kind of hesed kind of love, who is good- W- that person will be motivated to active, trusting faithfulness. A person who privately believes God to be harsh and demanding is always, I think, going to retreat in this fearful, minimal kind of minimum champion-type compliance. It's the same thing, I think I always think about this for some reason, and mention it a lot probably, but it's the same thing with Joseph's brothers finding all their money back in the sacks-  [00:36:31] Tony Arsenal: Yeah ...  [00:36:32] Jesse Schwamb: with their food. It's, like, in that instant moment, all they have is fear and dread. And it- for this guy, that's exactly what he has. But it doesn't start, like you're saying, merely because he realizes that he should have done more, or he's comparing his return with that of everybody else, or even that he's going back and taking a look at his own actions and finding them to be full of want or lack. In fact, he does a really good job, at least in his own mind, theologically justifying his behavior. So here, what he, the real crime, the real shame, the real sin is that somehow he views the master as harsh and demanding and exploitative. That's wild. But of course, that was the root of everything else, which I think does give us pause to reflect on our own lives, like I said, as we come to understanding how this parable reads us. [00:37:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:37:21] Red Letters And Commentary [00:37:21] Tony Arsenal: And, um- Part of the reason why I think it's important to understand what I was talking about earlier with, you know, the, the Gospels are an interesting sort of like composite document in that, yes, they contain the true sayings of Jesus, the true, true, um, words of Christ. But this is also, a- and I promise that this will loop back around, this is, um, this is important for us. The red letters are no more God's word than the black letters, right? Mm-hmm. And what I mean by that is, like, the, the so-called words of Christ in scripture are not more inspired or more profitable than the words that are the commentary of the apostles. And I only say so-called, and I'll explain why I say that. As I said, like, Matthew is translating, uh, he- first of all, he's recalling what Christ has said. He's, he's probably not, um, sitting there with a, with a quill and a, you know, a piece of paper or a piece of parchment- Right ... transcribing what's, what Christ is saying as he goes. Right? He's, he was there. Matthew was there. He's recalling what Christ has said under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. He's making editorial decisions about what Christ taught in terms of like, what of Christ's teaching do I capture? What do I summarize? And I think there's ... It's important because every word is inspired, but also it's understandable. And what I mean here, and what, the reason I'm kind of belaboring that is I think there's an interesting thing that happens in verse 29. It says, "For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance. And from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken." So this, this concept actually that, um, that verse 30 might be, uh, might actually be Matthew's commentary or even Christ's explanation of the parable, I think that actually, that actually expands to verse 29 in some of the commentators. So if we read it this way, and I think this, this may be valuable for us to at least ponder. If we read it this way, verse 27 is still the master in the parable space. It says, "Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him and give it to him who has 10 talents." There's a way of understanding this text, uh, and it's grammatically acceptable. I think theologically it doesn't change a lot, but it's worth us at least considering this. There's a way of reading this text where that's the end of the parable, and then Christ is explaining the parable, or Ma- or even maybe Matthew is commenting on the parable. It says, "For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance. But to the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." Now, I think that, um, as I said, the most natural way to read this is that the parable proper ends with verse 30, that all of this is part of the parable, all of this is the master in the parable speaking. But I do think verses 29 and 30 take on a more explanatory, um, uh, explanatory role, and this is the main reason why. The, the one parable, one talent servant in the parable, he's not properly described as the one who has not, right? He had one talent. He was given one talent. Right. It's not as though he had zero talents. The one who has not, even what he has will be taken away, and the one who has, more will be given.  [00:41:01] Has And Has Not [00:41:01] Tony Arsenal: This is actually, I think, where we can go really sideways on this parable. I hear this parable often interpreted as sort of this understanding that, like, God has blessed His people with certain gifts, and we have to use our gifts in the kingdom to be productive, and people who use their gifts in productive fashion will be given more responsibility and more opportunities. People who don't use their gifts, whatever opportunities they have will be taken away from them. Now, I, I would argue that's probably true on a practical level, um, and that's just actually just true in general, right? Right. A person who has responsibility, th- think of, like, your working environment. M- you know, all, most of our listeners are not working in regular pastoral ministry. This is one of those areas where I think, actually, the corporate world is more representative of how things are. Um, in the corporate world, if you are given responsibility and you excel and use that responsibility well and you are a productive servant of your company that you work for, you're going to be given more responsibility, whether that's in the form of a promotion, which is the ideal circumstances, or whether that's just your responsibilities as assigned, a job description expanding without pay. Either way, if you do a good job, if you, if you take the sphere of influence, the sphere of responsibility that you're given and you do a good job and you shepherd that well and you steward that well, that sphere of influence, that sphere of responsibility will expand. Um- If you squander it and you sit in your office watching TikTok videos or listening to music and you don't use that, uh, responsibility well, that sphere of influence will shrink, and ultimately it will shrink until you no longer have a job, right? It works a little differently, I think, in, like, traditional pastoral roles, and I think there are some in our audience that, them, are in those roles that this may not fit. That's a good general principle. I don't think that's what this is teaching. Like, I don't think this, this parable is about, like, productive ministry opportunities. Right. And if it was, we wouldn't be talking about people who have none, have not, right? We would be talking about people who have less. We'd be talking about people who are given less responsibility. The person who has no responsibility is who's in view here. And that's why- Mm ... I think it actually, this is shifting, this ex- explanation, whether it's, uh, sort of like an explanation, an explanatory punchline to the parable that's part of the parable itself, or whether it's Jesus or Matthew commenting on the meaning of the parable. The difference between those two things is important for us to think about. It's not so important in terms of what the actual meaning is. Because the difference here is that what we've now done is we've shifted from the context of a financial grounded analogy in the parable to now a broader discussion about the fact that there are those who have, and there are those who have not. And the people who have will be given more, and the people who have not will be taken away from. And if we were talking strictly financially, then now we're, like, in, like, Occupy Wall Street, 1% kind of era. We're talking about salvation. We're talking about, um, we're talking about the fact that God gives salvation to some, and He does not give salvation to others. He gives grace to some, and He does not give grace to others. And to those who have grace, more grace will be given. To those who have not grace, more will be taken away. And the outcome of that- Is that the worthless servant who is the one who has not, the worthless servant will be cast into the outer darkness, right? This is a, an explanation of what it means to be a worthless servant who ultimately ends their time. Ends is not the right word. Who ultimately has the outcome of s- of outer darkness for all eternity. If this parable is just about how we use our giftings and our skills and our money for the kingdom, and we're expected to be productive and to, like, increase the kingdom through our tithing and through our, like our service, then this comment about, like, the outer darkness is really out of place. Unless, unless we earn our salvation by that. Which of course we know we don't.  [00:45:22] Jesse Schwamb: Right. Right.  [00:45:24] Wicked And Slothful Heart [00:45:24] Jesse Schwamb: Here's how I think everything you said is true, and the scripture actually bears this out because it was exactly where you're going with that, which is we're talking more about the identity. Like, what, what makes this servant or slave worthless? That's the critical question. And then if we understand that, it'll help inform how we then interpret this idea of sheeps and goats, which we'll get to in a whole other episode. But if you look at verses 26 and 27, where the master then responds to this slave calls him wicked and slothful, slothful, right? So that his, his basically lack of usefulness comes embedded or underneath those two terms. So one, obviously the wickedness here is moral. It's a failure to fulfill a covenantal obligation to the master, which we've been talking about. So again, it's not just about laziness. Like there's, there's so much more there. It's as if that's the entry point for the master to bring condemnation on him in two forms. One is that wickedness. The second is this idea of like slothfulness, which is dispen- I was gonna say dispensational, but what I meant to say is dispositional. So it's like, uh, like a subtle inertia of the will, and together they're describing a person, and I think this is a critical point. This is a person whose heart has never been genuinely aligned with the master's purposes. Now, when we understand it that way, I think, then everything that follows makes a lot more sense because it's not just about bad timing in the market. It's not just about being fearful that you're gonna lose money and you're risk-averse, so therefore you hid, hid everything. It's really this idea that this, this s- slave, this one talent slave, he was not on board, not vibing with, not aligned with, however you wanna say it, with the master's purposes from the very beginning. And there is maybe we might say like a minimum of faithfulness, even interest on the deposit that God requires. But the question of course is never am I doing what the five talent servant does, but it's always am I using what I have been given? And in this way, like are we finding ourselves aligned, that our hearts are leaning into, that we find ourselves tilting towards what God has for us, both understanding who He is and who we are in light of who He is. What I find interesting is I found some really unique commentary from the great puritan William Ames in his book Conscience, with the Power and Cases Thereof. That's a title that only a puritan could- ... forward, um, where he actually treats this failure. So getting again to the sense of like why is it so grievous? Like in other words, why does the action of this servant, which we've already kind of touched on, lead into basically a character attack on the servant, and why is the connection between those two things legitimate? What he basically says is that he treats the failure to use one's gifts as God has given as a violation of the ninth commandment, which is bearing false witness against God's own estimation of those gifts. So this slothful servant, by burying his talent, effectively says, "This is not worth using." That is like the thing that God has given me, who God is Himself, I reject fully and outright. So why would that person then not be cast into outer darkness in kind of keeping with both like the, the breadth and scope of this parable, but also essentially what it's teaching about who this last, you know, servant is? [00:48:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, and you know, as you say that, I think too, um- There's an element of this that is Because it ties to this servant's misunderstanding of the master, and then, a- and I think you're, you're bringing Calvin in here and, and sort of the idea that our knowledge of God and our kn- knowledge of self are so, like, intertwined that it- Right ... it's almost difficult to understand which comes first. Yes. Yes. Calvin concludes that the knowledge of God is logically prior, but he, he also acknowledges that, like, it's really tough to sort of like figure out which one is more logically prior. This servant starts from the understanding that the master is a wicked master, that he is an immoral, lazy master. I- and it's, it's ironic. It does- the text doesn't say this, but I think it's a reasonable extrapolation. Um, the, the wicked, slothful servant projects his own wickedness and his own slothfulness onto the master, right? He, he projects that the master is a wicked man, is a hard man, and also that he's lazy. He, he does- he reaps where he doesn't sow, he gathers where he doesn't scatter. And the action of the, of the, the character of the servant is not derived from his inaction. Right. It's his inaction that- Yes ... causes the, or it's his, his character- Character ... that drives his lack of action, right?  [00:50:12] Sheep Goats Identity [00:50:12] Tony Arsenal: The good and faithful servants, they're not, and this is where we're gonna come when we come next week. Like, this is where we're gonna go when we get to next week's. Just as maybe, like, I, I want you to listen next week, but you probably don't need to, 'cause I'm gonna give you the whole punchline here.  [00:50:27] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.  [00:50:27] Tony Arsenal: The sheep act like sheep because they're sheep.  [00:50:29] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:50:30] Tony Arsenal: They don't become sheep because they do sheep things. They do sheep things because they're sheep, and the goats do goat things because they're goats.  [00:50:37] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:50:37] Tony Arsenal: The wicked, lazy servant does wicked, lazy servant things because he's a wicked lady- lazy servant, right? He buries the talent in the ground because he's a wicked, lazy servant. The good, faithful servants j- just do what good, faithful servants do. They, they make a return on the master's talents because that's what they do, right? And I think where we have to be really careful and where, uh, the other pitfall that this parable can bring us to, and I kinda referenced it a little bit earlier, is there can be sort of this subtle works righteousness that creeps in, that we can believe if we're really good and productive for the kingdom, then that's what will earn us the good and faithful servant commendation when we, we cross into glory. The reality is there are those who cross into glory and hear good and faithful servant, right? There are those who will hear, "Well done, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of your master." And there are those who will not. They will have what little they have taken away from them, and they will be cast into the outer darkness where there's weeping and gnashing of teeth, right? That's not a statement on what we've earned. It's a statement on who we are.  [00:51:48] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:51:49] Tony Arsenal: So you can either be the faithful servant who trusts the character of the Lord, who doesn't think Him to be a hard man, who reaps where He doesn't sow and gathers where He doesn't scatter. You can trust the master, and in the act of trusting the master and knowing His character, you just do what good, faithful servants do. You work hard, you follow the servant, the master's lead, and you produce a return on what is there. Right? In, a- and we didn't talk about this too much. In effect, these servants are reflecting the nature of the master.  [00:52:23] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:52:23] Tony Arsenal: Because you don't get to the point where you can leave 100 years worth of wealth to one servant, and 40 years worth of wealth to another servant, and 20 years worth of wealth to another servant if you have not yourself been a productive, faithful person who knows how to reap and sow appropriately, right? [00:52:42] Gospel Joy Or Darkness [00:52:42] Tony Arsenal: That is the key to this parable,

Samuel Rutherford helped write the Westminster Confession. He also developed a four-part test for evaluating prophetic words. That's not a charismatic running loose, but a Westminster divine doing careful pastoral theology on the gifts.ABOUT THIS EPISODE:There's an assumption that the debate over spiritual gifts is a recent one: a 20th-century Pentecostal invention set against centuries of Reformation clarity. But the historical record tells a different story. John Knox was called "the prophet and apostle of our nation." John Welsh reportedly prayed a dead man back to life. George Wishart publicly predicted Cardinal Beaton's death from the pulpit. These weren't fringe figures. They were architects of the Scottish Reformation.In this episode, Joshua Lewis responds to a four-part viewer question that cuts to the heart of what cessationists often ask about continuationism: 1. Did any Protestant Reformers — Luther, Calvin, Knox, Wesley — actually affirm the continuation of miraculous spiritual gifts?2. Are there accredited seminaries that teach continuationism, and if so, why don't more charismatic leaders pursue formal degrees?3. Did the lack of denominational accountability in charismatic churches contribute to the scandals the show has covered?4. Are continuationists mostly Arminian, or do Calvinists hold this position too?Joshua works through each question with the historical and theological care. Join us for an informative episode.0:00 – Introduction0:34 – Questions2:23 – Reformation-Era Continuationism5:26 – Continuationist Seminaries7:01 – Charismatic Anti-Intellectualism11:27 – Denominational Accountability & Scandal14:52 – Calvinism vs. ArminianismRESOURCES MENTIONED: - Scots Worthies by John Howie (unedited, Project Gutenberg): https://www.gutenberg.org/files/28272/28272-h/28272-h.htm- Spirit Hermeneutics by Craig Keener: https://www.amazon.com/Spirit-Hermeneutics-Reading-Scripture-Pentecost/dp/0802874398- Barna Research — "Is There a Reformed Movement in American Churches?": https://www.barna.com/research/is-there-a-reformed-movement-in-american-churches/Subscribe to The Remnant Radio newsletter and receive our FREE introduction to spiritual gifts eBook. Plus, get access to: discounts, news about upcoming shows, courses and conferences - and more. Subscribe now at TheRemnantRadio.com.Support the showABOUT THE REMNANT RADIO: The Remnant Radio exists to equip believers who are hungry for the radical middle of both Word and Spirit. Subscribe for twice-weekly content on theology, church history and the gifts of the Spirit.

Greg answers questions from callers about who sits on the left side of God, why we would matter to God and he would require anything of us, whether it's wrong to be grateful when other people are suffering, principles for living in a world with AI, and how a Calvinist knows he's saved.   Topics: Who sits on the left side of God? (04:00) My atheist friend admits there must have been an Architect of the universe, but he can't believe that we would matter to him or that he would require anything from us, and he asks why anyone should go to Hell just because they don't want to submit to his will. (12:00) Is it wrong to be vocal about the things we're grateful for when other people are suffering? (32:00) Can you offer some principles to equip believers to be prepared to live in a world with AI—to avoid pitfalls and be successful in their Christian walk? (38:00) If people are all born totally depraved and unable to understand spiritual truths, then how does a Calvinist know he's saved? (51:00) Mentioned on the Show:  Submit a question on the Open Mic Line Dogmatic Theology by William G.T. Shedd, edited by Alan Gomes Related Links: Is God Really Blessing American Christians with Answers to Little Prayers While Others Suffer? by Amy Hall Five Points: Towards a Deeper Experience of God's Grace by John Piper Sinners in the Hands of a Good God: Reconciling Divine Judgment and Mercy by David Clotfelter

Among the controversies in modern-day Christendom is the doctrine of election. Some hold to the belief that God sovereignly chose people for salvation, while others claim that coming to faith in Christ is simply a 100% free-will choice of the individual apart from any necessary influence from God. But what does the Bible actually say? Hard core Calvinists and Arminians alike all agree that a person must believe on the Lord Jesus in order to be saved. But what about God's part in our salvation? Could it be true that He was working in eternity past to somehow guarantee our future righteousness and intimacy with Him? Or is He, even today, simply at the mercy of sinners, hoping and waiting on them to believe? Dr. Jeff explores this hot topic from Scripture in this week's program.

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with our dear friend of the podcast, Pastor Claude Ramsey. Claude is the Pastor of Reformata Baptist Church, Host of Here I Stand Theology Podcast, and Author of his latest book: A Pastoral Commentary on Revelations. They discussed how to read through the Book of Revelation, the four different views of Eschatology, as well as some of the misconceptions and traditions overlayed in Revelation. Enjoy! Here Pastor Claude Ramsey speak at the Abiding in Christ Conference HEREDominion Wealth Strategists are the only Kingdom minded company that you need to use. Set up a free consultation here today! You need to protect your sword! Beautiful, classic, and one of a kind! Design your bible rebind from Deus Vult today! 10% for all Dead Men listeners with the code "DEADMANWALKING" Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

The relationship between the Church and the world has been a subject of debate since the Church's earliest days. In ⁠A Church for a Secular World: The Development of Klaas Schilder's Ecclesiology⁠ (Brill, 2025), Marinus De Jong explores how Stanley Hauerwas, with his emphasis on the Church as polis, made a significant contemporary contribution—one that has also faced strong criticism. This study examines the distinctive insights of second-generation neo-Calvinist theologian Klaas Schilder (1890-1952) on this issue. Neo-Calvinism is renowned for its development of Reformed theology, particularly in this area, and Schilder builds on this tradition with a critical eye. Engaging with the increasing secularity of the twentieth century, he carefully interacts with Karl Barth's writings while refining his own perspective. In doing so, Schilder's position comes close to the Anabaptist stance of Hauerwas, yet remains firmly rooted in the Reformed understanding of creation. Marinus de Jong, Ph.D., is assistant professor of the theology of neo-Calvinism at Theologische Universiteit Utrecht, the Netherlands. He co-editedThe Klaas Schilder Reader: The Essential Theological Writings (Lexham, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The relationship between the Church and the world has been a subject of debate since the Church's earliest days. In A Church for a Secular World: The Development of Klaas Schilder's Ecclesiology (Brill, 2025), Marinus De Jong explores how Stanley Hauerwas, with his emphasis on the Church as polis, made a significant contemporary contribution—one that has also faced strong criticism. This study examines the distinctive insights of second-generation neo-Calvinist theologian Klaas Schilder (1890-1952) on this issue. Neo-Calvinism is renowned for its development of Reformed theology, particularly in this area, and Schilder builds on this tradition with a critical eye. Engaging with the increasing secularity of the twentieth century, he carefully interacts with Karl Barth's writings while refining his own perspective. In doing so, Schilder's position comes close to the Anabaptist stance of Hauerwas, yet remains firmly rooted in the Reformed understanding of creation. Marinus de Jong, Ph.D., is assistant professor of the theology of neo-Calvinism at Theologische Universiteit Utrecht, the Netherlands. He co-editedThe Klaas Schilder Reader: The Essential Theological Writings (Lexham, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

The relationship between the Church and the world has been a subject of debate since the Church's earliest days. In ⁠A Church for a Secular World: The Development of Klaas Schilder's Ecclesiology⁠ (Brill, 2025), Marinus De Jong explores how Stanley Hauerwas, with his emphasis on the Church as polis, made a significant contemporary contribution—one that has also faced strong criticism. This study examines the distinctive insights of second-generation neo-Calvinist theologian Klaas Schilder (1890-1952) on this issue. Neo-Calvinism is renowned for its development of Reformed theology, particularly in this area, and Schilder builds on this tradition with a critical eye. Engaging with the increasing secularity of the twentieth century, he carefully interacts with Karl Barth's writings while refining his own perspective. In doing so, Schilder's position comes close to the Anabaptist stance of Hauerwas, yet remains firmly rooted in the Reformed understanding of creation. Marinus de Jong, Ph.D., is assistant professor of the theology of neo-Calvinism at Theologische Universiteit Utrecht, the Netherlands. He co-editedThe Klaas Schilder Reader: The Essential Theological Writings (Lexham, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

The relationship between the Church and the world has been a subject of debate since the Church's earliest days. In ⁠A Church for a Secular World: The Development of Klaas Schilder's Ecclesiology⁠ (Brill, 2025), Marinus De Jong explores how Stanley Hauerwas, with his emphasis on the Church as polis, made a significant contemporary contribution—one that has also faced strong criticism. This study examines the distinctive insights of second-generation neo-Calvinist theologian Klaas Schilder (1890-1952) on this issue. Neo-Calvinism is renowned for its development of Reformed theology, particularly in this area, and Schilder builds on this tradition with a critical eye. Engaging with the increasing secularity of the twentieth century, he carefully interacts with Karl Barth's writings while refining his own perspective. In doing so, Schilder's position comes close to the Anabaptist stance of Hauerwas, yet remains firmly rooted in the Reformed understanding of creation. Marinus de Jong, Ph.D., is assistant professor of the theology of neo-Calvinism at Theologische Universiteit Utrecht, the Netherlands. He co-editedThe Klaas Schilder Reader: The Essential Theological Writings (Lexham, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/christian-studies

https://smithfieldbaptist.org.au/sermons/nathan-athavle-hebrews-138-the-same-yesterday-as-today-as-forever/feed/ 0

https://smithfieldbaptist.org.au/sermons/rob-ayoub-revelation-28-11-to-the-church-in-smyrna/feed/ 0

Love to hear from you; “Send us a Text Message”A former Anglican Priest says, “I lost the argument,” and somehow that turns into a battle for truth, conscience, and coming home. Kevin Middlesworth joins us to share the winding road from a devoted evangelical childhood, through Calvinist and Reformed theology, into Anglican priesthood, and finally into full communion with the Catholic Church.We talk about the moment when so many Christians hit a wall: the authority question. Who gets to say what Scripture means, what the Eucharist really is, and what the moral life demands? Kevin describes the hidden exhaustion of being your own final judge, the “crushing weight” of trying to carry every doctrine alone. From there, we follow the breadcrumbs that led him to the Church Fathers, the Catechism, and St. John Henry Newman's insight on conscience as God's persistent voice.This is not just an intellectual conversion story. Kevin opens up about marriage, friendship, and the real cost of changing course, plus why he refused to pressure his wife while she wrestled with the same Catholic claims. Eucharistic adoration, Confession, the Rosary, the Liturgy of the Hours, and the surprising discovery that what once looked like “extra's” is actually God's abundance.If you're curious about Catholicism, returning to the faith, or trying to find solid ground in a noisy culture, come listen. Subscribe, share this with a friend who's asking hard questions, and leave a review with your biggest takeaway.Join the movement: Claymore Milites ChristiSupport the show

Welcome to the Grace in Focus podcast. Today, Bob Wilkin and Sam Marr are in a continued discussion about Calvinism. How do Calvinists misunderstand John 3:16? Why is this (mis)understanding […]

Welcome to the Grace in Focus podcast. Bob Wilkin and Sam Marr are continuing a discussion about Calvinism from the book, Whosoever Will. What are the major Calvinist denominations in […]

What if the way you learned about Jesus made him feel like a painting on a wall — something beautiful to admire from a distance, but not alive, not present, not *now*? That's what growing up Reformed-Presbyterian looked like for me. I knew my TULIP. I could explain cessationism. But I couldn't explain why communion felt like it meant something more — or why I kept waiting for a God who seemed to have stopped speaking. Everything changed in a cathedral in Orvieto, Italy. In this teaching from John 6:51-58, I trace my journey from a hard-core Calvinist upbringing through the feast of Corpus Christi, the medieval art of Luca Signorelli, and a stunning realization: the Eucharist is not a religious tradition. It's an encounter with the living Jesus — the one seated on the throne, who is coming again. **In this teaching you'll discover:** - What "de-museumification" means and why so many Christians have a museumified Jesus - The history of the Corpus Christi miracle and why an entire Italian town was built around it - How Signorelli's frescoes in the Orvieto Duomo connect the broken body of Jesus, the martyrs, and the resurrection - Why the Cathar heresy (denial of both the Eucharist and the Resurrection) still echoes in modern Christianity - How the doctrine of cessationism developed as a *reaction* to Catholic theology — and what was lost - What John 6 means when Jesus says "my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" - Why the Eucharist, the Holy Spirit, and the return of Jesus are inseparably linked We can't go back to the past. Christendom is dead. But Christ is not.

https://smithfieldbaptist.org.au/sermons/chris-athavle-romans-714-25-i-myself-serve-the-law-of-god/feed/ 0

On today's Bible Answer Man broadcast (06/05/26), Hank shares on the way we often snorkel in the shallow depths of prayer and only get sunburnt backs, but rarely we go deep into the depths of prayer.Hank also answers the following questions:What is your take on the Calvinist interpretation of predestination? Jordan - Edwardsville, IL (6:59)Are we required to pay tithes under the New Covenant? Samuel - Bronx, NY (9:54)Do Jewish people believe in the Trinity? Salvador - Charlotte, NC (15:57)What is the iron furnace in 1 Kings 8:51? Margo - Claremore, OK (23:46)

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with Noah Wing & Ryan Baechle in studio. They are the Founder and Chairman of the Iona Study Center. They discussed their history, vision, and founding ideas for the center, as well as some upcoming lectures, and what it means to be theologically and intellectually studied, especially as a young man. Enjoy! Subscribe and attend upcoming events at the Iona Study Center HERESubscribe to the Noah's Substack HEREDonate to the Iona Study Center HERE  Dominion Wealth Strategists are the only Kingdom minded company that you need to use. Set up a free consultation here today! You need to protect your sword! Beautiful, classic, and one of a kind! Design your bible rebind from Deus Vult today! 10% for all Dead Men listeners with the code "DEADMANWALKING" Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

Pastor Arnold challenges the Calvinist doctrine of Limited Atonement. Drawing from Scripture, he argues that Christ died for all people, not only the "elect," and that Christ's atonement is unlimited in its provision, yet conditioned upon faith for its application. The presentation examines key biblical passages often used in debates over the extent of the atonement and contrasts Calvinist interpretations (TULIP) with a Free Grace perspective (LOTUS). Arnold contends that the doctrine of "Total Atonement" better reflects God's love, justice, and universal offer of salvation.

Join us as our pastors explain the biblical bases for Calvinist and Armenian thought in the age-old conversation about predestination and free will.Show Notes:https://crossexamined.org/free-will-or-calvinism-which-should-you-choose-with-dr-leighton-flowers/https://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html

The post “Why are Calvinists so mean?” appeared first on Key Life.

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with George Williams. George is a former Pastor and now the Director of Multiplication for Open Bible. He was also Greg's former pastor for years. Greg & George discussed his testimony, as well as his journey from a centrist charismatic to now a Christian Nationalist and the pivotal moment that opened his eyes. They discussed the 19th Amendment, theonomy, and the death penalty, and also touched on the insanity of pure libertarianism. Enjoy! Dominion Wealth Strategists are the only Kingdom minded company that you need to use. Set up a free consultation here today! You need to protect your sword! Beautiful, classic, and one of a kind! Design your bible rebind from Deus Vult today! 10% for all Dead Men listeners with the code "DEADMANWALKING" Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

In this profound exploration of Matthew 22:1-14, we examine Jesus's parable of the wedding feast—one of the most theologically dense teachings in Scripture. This parable reveals the magnificent scope of God's gospel invitation extended to all humanity, the tragic reality of human rejection, and the sovereign grace that ensures God's purposes will not be thwarted. Through the imagery of a royal wedding banquet, Jesus addresses the religious leaders who challenged His authority while simultaneously unveiling timeless truths about salvation, election, and the nature of the Church. This episode unpacks the parable's layers of meaning, from the universal call of the gospel to the particular grace of election, equipping believers to understand both the urgency and the sovereignty of God's redemptive work. Key Takeaways The Universal Gospel Call Is Genuine and Urgent: God's invitation to salvation goes out indiscriminately to all people, regardless of ethnicity, social status, or moral condition. This external call is sincere, well-meant, and accompanied by genuine offers of grace. Human Rejection Is Willful and Culpable: The parable demonstrates that humanity's refusal of God's invitation is not due to insufficient information but to volitional rebellion. This rejection often progresses from indifference to active hostility against God and His messengers. God's Sovereign Purposes Cannot Be Frustrated: Despite widespread rejection, the wedding hall will be filled. God's redemptive plan includes the expansion of His covenant community beyond ethnic Israel to include Gentiles from every nation. The Wedding Garment Represents Imputed Righteousness: The garment required for the feast symbolizes the righteousness of Christ, received by faith alone, not earned through human effort. This illustrates the doctrine of justification by grace through faith. The Visible Church Contains Both Genuine and False Believers: The parable warns that not all who hear the gospel and enter the visible church possess true saving faith, distinguishing between the external call and the internal, effectual work of the Spirit. Eternal Punishment Is Real and Conscious: The parable's conclusion soberly affirms the doctrine of eternal, conscious punishment for those who reject Christ, depicted as "outer darkness" with "weeping and gnashing of teeth." "Many Are Called, But Few Are Chosen": This foundational statement maintains the biblical tension between the universal external call of the gospel and the particular, effectual call of God that sovereignly draws the elect to salvation. Key Concepts The Nature of the Gospel Call: External and Effectual Reformed theology has carefully distinguished between two aspects of God's call. The external or general call is the sincere proclamation of the gospel to all without distinction, inviting everyone to faith and repentance. This call is genuine on God's part—He truly offers salvation to all who hear. However, due to total depravity, the natural person will not respond to this call on their own. The internal or effectual call is the sovereign, irresistible work of the Holy Spirit by which the elect are regenerated, have their wills renewed, and are infallibly brought to saving faith. This distinction preserves both human responsibility (we are culpable for rejecting a genuine offer) and divine sovereignty (God alone saves by His grace). The parable beautifully illustrates both realities: servants genuinely invite all they find on the highways, yet the King ultimately determines who is properly clothed for the feast. The Wedding Garment and Justification by Faith Alone The wedding garment represents one of the parable's most critical theological elements. In ancient Near Eastern culture, hosts often provided garments for wedding guests, making the lack of proper attire inexcusable. Theologically, this garment symbolizes the righteousness of Christ imputed to believers—a righteousness not produced by human effort but received through faith alone. This directly confronts any notion of works-righteousness or the idea that we can stand before God based on our own moral achievements, religious observances, or church membership. The man without the garment represents those who presume to approach God on the basis of their own righteousness rather than Christ's alien righteousness. His speechlessness before judgment illustrates that on the last day, no one will successfully argue their case on grounds of personal merit. This underscores the Reformation principle of sola gratia and sola fide—salvation is by grace alone through faith alone, clothing us in a righteousness that is entirely Christ's. The Tension Between Universal Call and Particular Election The parable's conclusion—"many are called, but few are chosen"—encapsulates one of theology's profound mysteries. This statement places two realities side by side without resolving the tension philosophically. The invitation truly goes to all (universal call), yet only some respond savingly (particular election). Reformed theology maintains this biblical tension rather than collapsing it in either direction. We don't limit the external call only to the elect (hyper-Calvinism), nor do we make the internal call dependent solely on human decision (Arminianism). Instead, we affirm that the gospel invitation is genuinely universal while the effectual drawing is sovereignly particular. This means Christians can proclaim unreservedly, "Christ has died for you" to any person, knowing the offer is sincere, while simultaneously trusting that God will infallibly save all His elect through that proclamation. Memorable Quotes "The most scandalous and tragic thing that could happen at a wedding or a wedding banquet is that nobody shows up. The guests don't come. Or in fact, not only do they not come, they don't want to come—they burn the invitations." "You don't bring anything to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary." "Many a man in this world will silence his own conscience with many a fair excuse. But in that day, there will be no excuse, no plea, no delay." - William Perkins Full Episode Transcript [00:00:58] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 493 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse, and this is the podcast where we will talk about every single parable. Hey, brothers and sisters. So when was the last time that you were at a wedding? I think weddings are one of the most glorious of all kinds of human events and celebrations, and I think the solemness of the vows and the promises that are exchanged between a man and a woman in marriage in that ceremony, or maybe only equaled by the joy of those same vows and promises. And of course, the whole point of coming together to celebrate a, a wedding. Is to make that joy consummate and complete by having others participate in it. The seeing the union of a man and a woman become one, the excitement of that love expressed in promise and commitment. It's an incredible thing. And I was thinking about this recently because our wedding invitation is actually framed in, in our living room because one of the guests that we invited gave that to us as a really thoughtful gift. And so our wedding ceremony and the party that followed, and it was a. Amazing and awesome party, especially thanks to my in-laws and my parents who generously made sure that that was possible was an exceptional event that we still talk about all the time. Actually, you know, in my wedding when we had this grand kind of wedding banquet afterwards, we had a friend of ours who actually performed the song that we danced to on grand piano and sang for us, which is amazing. We had a DJ in one room and we had a live jazz band in another, and I specifically recall. That when we left late in the evening, my new wife and I, that there were still people on the dance floor having a good time. And I thought, this is the way it's supposed to be. I mean, this is a wedding. This is a wedding banquet. [00:02:58] Why No One Comes [00:02:58] Jesse Schwamb: And so it also made me think recently, especially as we find ourselves in Matthew chapter 22, continuing to look at all these incredible parables that Jesus gives to us, that perhaps the most scandalous and tragic thing that could happen at a wedding or a wedding banquet is that nobody shows up. The guests don't come. Or in fact, like not only do they not come, they don't want to come, they burn the invitations. They wanna have nothing to do with the celebration or the ceremony itself. And so Jesus has been doing all of this teaching that we've been tracking, and he's been responding to these leaders in the Jewish community, the people we call the Pharisees and the scribes who have challenged his authority. And he's been progressing in the way that he's almost ratcheting up the language that he's using, the indictments that he's bringing to them. And now he's about to bring in weddings and specifically the wedding banquet. And that is where we're gonna find ourselves in a Matthew Chapter 22. Now, by the way, I should also mention that because my wife is super popular lady and super lovable. We had a pretty large wedding. I think we had over 200 guests, and so. Because my father-in-law is retired military, we were actually able to have our whole wedding banquet, our whole celebration and party on a local army base. But because of that, it meant that before you could actually get onto the base, all of our guests. Had to be searched. So it's nothing like, you know, basically just shaken down your wedding guests before they show up. So that also was super fun.  [00:04:32] Reading Matthew 22 [00:04:32] Jesse Schwamb: But let's go to the scriptures, everybody. So here's Matthew chapter 22. Uh, listen to this as we take a look at what Jesus has to say and why he brings in weddings. Actually, it might be helpful to say or to give you something, rather to listen to or listen for before you even hear me read the scriptures because. This parable of this wedding banquet, it is definitely one of the most theologically dense parables in the entire synaptic tradition. It is set like we've been saying within the final week of Jesus' ministry in Jerusalem, and it's embedded in the sequence of confrontational exchanges that he's having with the Jewish leadership because they have challenged his authority. And so as you listen to this being read, I want you to clue in, key in as they say to a couple of things. See if you can find the, like the Christological proclamation in this. There's a, a covenantal poll. I think there's some sociological instruction and there's an eschatological warning. All of this happens as is Jesus's jam in the short span of several verses where he illuminates all of these principles of the sovereign grace of God and the summons of the gospel. Total depravity and culpability of this, these rebellious people who refuse the call, the historical judgment of God upon the covenant breaking Israel. And then of course, the subsequent expansion of that covenant into the community include to include the Gentiles. All of this is happening. In this parable, and so I want you just to listen for that as we together read. Or in my case, I guess I just read, especially if you're driving, do not read the parable that begins in the first part of Matthew chapter 22. Here's the word of God. And Jesus answered and spoke to them again in parables saying The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son, and he sent out his slaves to call those who had been called to the wedding feast and they were unwilling to come again. He sent out other slaves saying, tell those who have been called. Behold. I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fon livestock are all butchered and everything is ready. Come to the wedding feast. But they paid no attention and went their way, one to his farm, another to his business, and the rest seized the slaves and mistreated them and killed them. But the king was enraged and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and set their city on fire. Then he said to his slaves, the wedding is ready, but those who were called were not worthy. Go, therefore, to the main highways and as many as you find there, call to the wedding feast. And those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found both evil and good, and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests. But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who is not dressed in wedding clothes, and he said to him, friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes? And the man was speechless. Then the king said to the servants, bind him hand and foot and throw him into the outer darkness. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth for many are called, but few are chosen.  [00:07:50] Parable Context [00:07:50] Jesse Schwamb: Wow. So what an incredible. Story, what an incredible foundation or rubric or context in which so many rich theological concepts and pastoral concepts, doctrinal concepts are given to us from Jesus. And you'll notice that of course, chronologically here, this parable is following the parable of the two sons and the parable of the wicked tenants. Those are the vine growers that we were talking about over the last several episodes. And this one rounds everything out. It forms like a triptych of rejection parables directed against these chief priests and the Pharisees who keep coming after Jesus and his authority. And Matthew signals this kind of escalating tension. The Jewish leaders are now explicitly seeking to arrest Jesus. And Jesus responds not by treating their, not by retreating, of course, but by intensifying his indictment in this parabolic form. And here's where we arrive in Matthew 22. It's interesting to me, of course, that this is the approach that Jesus takes. He has already conveyed these two great stories, and at the end of the last one, Tony and I spoke about how this was where at least Matthew explains to us very directly that the, the Pharisees and the scribes, they understood, they discerned that Jesus was speaking about them, and yet Jesus says, I'm not done yet. I've got one more. And this is the culmination of all the things that he's been saying. And it starts again in verse one with Jesus saying, and again, he spoke to them in a parable. You know, it signals that the parable itself is still a reply. Not to a verbal question at this immediate moment, but to this ongoing posture of rejection exhibited by the religious leaders. You notice that what Matthew says here is very, I think, theologically significant in light of where Jesus explains that the parables both reveal and they conceal their instruments of divine judgment upon heart and hearts, even as they illuminate those with ears to hear. This is why I think it's just so important that as Christians. Even as we study God's word, as we participate in it, so to speak, as we let it read us, that we come with this posture of prayer, that we desperately need God's Holy, holy, holy Spirit to illuminate for us what the scriptures say, to lead us into the paths of righteousness and judgment, which are present in the scriptures, so that we may understand them with these spirit-filled eyes, with a spirit enabled brain with ears that have been unstopped by the spirit. So these parables are the mode by which Christ simultaneously honors and judges his audience. He shows indirectly what it would've been of no use to state plainly. And so the parable form itself is really part of the message here. I think that's something hopefully you picked up as we've been processing them all together, that Jesus opponents cannot arrest what they cannot fully comprehend, yet their incomprehension is itself their condemnation, right? This is, this is the mystery. Of the gospel of what God does, where there is this outward and full unbiased external call, and yet there is something that is efficacious by the power of the Holy Spirit for those whom God has chosen and called to himself so reformed to eus. Are attentive to the authorial intent in historical situatedness of each thing that Jesus says. That's one of the things I think is great about the way in which we kind of have organized our theological perspective and these parables function as a prophetic oracle of judgment. And certainly that's like in an Old Testament accent. I mean, that's the Old Testament jam. It's an Old Testament lawsuit kind of John. It's like law and order. If law and order were Moses, were doing it right. So notice that again, as Tony and I've said so many times before, what I kind of always find so phenomenal about these parables is that often we think of parables as having the main object of being a noun of some kind. It's a person, it's a place. It's a thing that is sometimes the case, but more often than not, it's one of those nouns associated with a verb.  [00:11:59] Kingdom And The King [00:11:59] Jesse Schwamb: And so we get that in verse two. The kingdom of heaven may be compared to what? To a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. And so it implies that the kingdom is being revealed and likened in a definitive act. We got verbs, loved ones. This is the classic. The ultimate, God does all the verbs because you're gonna hear her over and over again. God is going out. God is giving. God is seeking. God is going after, and these verbs are really the center of the parable itself. It's not just that it's the wedding banquet as maybe the title in your scripture gives you, but it's more about this giving of this event and it's preparing of this grand feast. And so the recurrence of this allegory seemed, I think, pretty straightforward to us. The the king is God, the Father, the Son is Christ, and the wedding banquet, which by the way in the Greek here is plural, is really emphasizing that it's a totality of an occasion. This is the Messianic feast. This is the eschatological consummation of the Covenant of Grace. And that image imagery draws like so deep from this Old Testament well and background of God as the husband and the bridegroom of Israel. Again, how lovely and amazing for Jesus and his thorough knowledge of the scriptures to draw in something that the audience would've been like, yes, I know what you're talking about. I'm totally down with that. And so the son's wedding is therefore not some kind of like incidental entertainment. It is the central event of all history, the installation of the Messianic king and the gathering of his bride. And of course, the people hearing this would've immediately gravitated toward that. I think they would've leaned in maybe even like smiled or smirked at one another, knowing that this was now all that veiled. What Christ was drawing on here was the classic presentation. Of the family of God represented in the children of Israel itself, being drawn back into consummate harmony with God the Father, where there was peace and unitedness, and a celebration of this fact that all things were now made and brought together, that God was restoring and bringing all those back to himself in his true and true kingdom that could not be thwarted. So the fact that the king gives the banquet, prepares it, sends servants, selects the guests, underscores this incredible modernistic character of salvation. I think it's impossible to miss here that God is literally doing all the verbs. The initiative at every point is divine. There's no hint here of synergism. The guests do not arrange their own invitations, literally. And so that's why in verse three, we see God, he sending out his servants. And of course that's a familiar theme. It should be to us. If you've been tracking with us the last several parables we've been speaking of because the servants represent the prophets of the Old Testament and subsequently the apostles and the ministers of the word. The invitation had already gone out to quote those who were invited. So it's this perfect passive parable in the Greek, it's, it's indicating a prior and standing invitation. This is the external or general call of the gospel going out through the preaching of the word. And notice that there is always a response. Even here, Jesus moves directly and quickly to here's what the response was. In other words, as the scripture has told us that God's word never goes out in returns void, there's always, as it were, a response here, that's illustrated for us very directly because the response is not so good.  [00:15:32] Invitation Refused [00:15:32] Jesse Schwamb: I mean, this is what would, this is horrible like wedding etiquette. They were not willing to come. And this verb I think is critical because it's volitional refusal. It's not mere ignorance. And reformed theology is insistent here against any kind of constellation that makes man's rejection of the gospel. A matter of insufficient information or circumstances we know better, right? We as people should know that we as Christians who have been changed, know that the natural man here is not natural, merely because he lacks the certain kind of information as if he could be restored or regenerated or reformed if we just knew more things. The will is in bondage to sin. And so as the Westminster Confession, faith says, man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation. This is classic Jonathan Edwards, like, you don't bring anything to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary. For some reason in my head, I said that with kind of a, a weird, almost like southern attitude, which I did not mean to convey. But the point is that this refusal is total, it's willing, it's culpable, it's damnable, it's precisely that, which makes it all the more grievous. The invitation is genuine, the refusal is genuine, and the guilt here is entirely real. So the invited in verse three, represent all of Israel. I, I would say like particularly the leaders here, Tony and I have been talking about the responsibility of these, these leaders in particular to, of course, lead Shepherd, grow these people in faith and a love toward God in a way that is toward freedom and now toward more conviction around extraneous rules or heavy burdens that they set up for them that they cannot perform. And so we have these leaders who had received the covenantal promises and the prophetic witness. I mean, that's like classic Romans nine. The rejection of the servants echoes the pattern of prophetic persecution throughout all of Israel's history. So this is sad stuff. It's a sad beginning to have this grand wedding feast prepared by this king for his son set in motion with the invitations already gone out. And essentially all of those who have been invited have Ally refused.  [00:17:49] Feast Is Ready [00:17:49] Jesse Schwamb: But what's so incredible about God and his loving kindness is still represented here in verse four. The king does not relent after the first refusal, which is remarkable. I mean, this is, again, going back to our proper understanding that we love because God first loved us. That love always leads to giving. And so therefore, God so loved the world that he gave his only son. And when did he give his son? At the fullness of time when we were still at enmity, when we were enemies with him still, he sent his son for us and he sends, therefore a second embassy with an even more urgent and elaborate message that he gives them. He puts into their mouth. And the feast, again, is not merely planned. It's prepared. It's ready. The oxen and fat and calves are images of this lavish like sacrificial celebration. Everything's all slaughtered. Everything is ready to go. Now, I don't know the last time you've been to like an epic feast. I do mean like epic over the top feast. I want you to look up something for me. When you have a chance, look up, just go to your browser of choice and type in shady maples smorgasbord. Now, I don't know if you know what a smorgasbord is, but it's like a, I guess it's like a buffet, but like if you took a buffet and multiply it by a million and then only serve like rich, decadent food and more food than you could possibly really imagine and close to where I live, there's a very famous Amish style. Buffet called Shady Maple Smoker Sport. Just go look it up. 'cause it's gonna be possible for you to describe, but all I can say to you is this isn't just like your standard buffet, it's not just like a potluck where it's like, Hey, we got ham. And, um, we've got some salads and, uh, we've got that, uh, what's that? That weird stuff. You can I, the ambrosia, like we, we've got your hydrox cookies for dessert. This is the last time I was there and uh, actually I was there with my parents and my wife and they treated us. And because this was at a part of my life where my gallbladder was trying to attack me and kill me, I remember just being so ill while I was there feeling so ill, and yet just being so disappointed and bummed out that I couldn't eat all this glorious food because there was filet mignon and lobsters. And shrimp and fish and ham like glazed ham and like carving stations. And then for desserts there was like custards and pies and ice cream and cookies and whoopee pies. And it was this over the top celebration of food. And you couldn't help but just feel like, wow, this thing that we're doing right now is like incredible. I've also, I don't think ever seen my father sample so many different desserts because it was special. This was a, a lavish and incredible celebration for us, and it was prepared, it was ready to go. And we find the same thing here. And so the second sending corresponds to this ministry of the Apostles and the early churches proclamation to Israel. The urgency of the messages come now. It reflects this eschatological pressure of the gospel. A good kind of pressure as if like there's a tea kettle on the stove and it's heating up, and now it's starting to whistle and then to boil over. The kingdom has arrived. Loved ones, the feast is set, delay is inexcusable, and, and so the language of readiness, I think is this glorious language of the gospel. The atonement has accomplished. Christ has been crucified, risen, and exalted, and the feast of salvation is prepared. And what I love is that the reformed tradition consistently insists on the sufficiency of Christ's work for all and the genuine freeness of that gospel offer. I like this is what I usually go back to, is that the cannons of dort affirm this in this way. This is the quote. The promise of the gospel is that whosoever believes in Christ, crucified shall not perish, but of everlasting life. This promise together with the command to repent and believe, ought to be declared and proclaimed to all the nations. The invitation is genuine and urgent. The feast is truly ready. [00:22:01] Mission To All [00:22:01] Jesse Schwamb: The church that I attend is part of the Christian Missionary Alliance denomination, and one of the many things I love about my church is that outward and continual focus on this very thing. That the invitation is genuine. It is urgent, and the feast is truly ready, and it is for all peoples. This freeness to, as we talked about before, scatter the seed of the gospel message unreservedly and without bias to all, all in your sphere of influence. All nations, all people, all tongues, all tribe. And my church is very serious about this. In fact, one of the things our pastor loves to do is oftentimes when he's giving it this kind of proclamation, in fact, just this Lord's day, he was speaking from Matthew 28 and about the Great Commission and the essential nature of that great commission is every Christian's promise to participate in that. It is something you and I are commissioned for and we ought to regularly evaluate our, what our prayers look like. What our finances look like and what our time looks like with respect to whether we are taking seriously that commission, which God has given to us. And so in reminding us of that very fact, one of the things he'll often say from the pulpit is he'll ask out to the congregation, he'll say, what is our middle name? And everybody will respond, missionary. And, and while it's a little bit trite, it reminds us that as part of like the essential ethos in DNA of who we are as Christians, and in fact in this particular year. One of the themes that the whole Christian Missionary Alliance nomination has been focusing on is all of Jesus for All the World takes all of us. I love that all of Jesus for all the world takes all of us. And so we have embedded in this parable here, so much of this intentionality of the gospel, of going out for all people, making this, this message and this mission available. Going out and speaking and preaching and witnessing and testifying of how great God is and what he has done in setting and preparing this gospel message for all people. But in verse five, we find out that even still with all of this, they paid no attention. They went off one to his farm and another to his business. In other words, the word here suggests this kind of contemptuous indifference rather than this active hatred that that actually comes a little bit later. But worldly affairs, a farm, some converse. All this displaces the invitation. And these are not wicked activities, of course, in themselves. Their wickedness consists in their displacement of what is the ultimate. And that I think is actually like very penetrating diagnosis of the human condition. The great enemy of the gospel, at least it seems to me, is not always, as you talk to people, like some kind of dramatic philosophical rejection, some well articulated hatred toward God. It's instead like a quiet absorption in the ordinary pursuits of life. It's like what I think Augustine called being curved inward upon oneself. The world is a great enchant. It be witches our souls, it distracts us. There are so many things that can pull us away from not only meditating on this gospel message, but coming alongside and appreciating. In participating in that great commission. There's so many things to distract us. It's, it's not as if we need a list. I think if I asked each one of you or you asked me, what are some things that you find distracting that pull you away from time and prayer time, studying God's word, time spent with my wife, time spent serving in my local church. I'm not gonna be hard pressed to find those things to say to you. So this idea that we have, whether it's the farm or this business pursuit here, I suppose it could be representative to at least great earthly loves. You have the land, kind of a agrarian rooted life, and then there's trade mercantile and acquisitive life. I mean, maybe these just suggests that the rejection spans all of our social and economic classes, both within Israel at the time and for us today. And so we move both from like this kind of cold indifference, this we'll have other things to do. I'm, I'm just too busy. And, uh, how many times do we really convince ourselves that we can justify our busyness when we feel the pull of the spirit that there is a need? We feel the pull of the gospel message because there's the gospel pressure to ensure that we are speaking truth and love to those around us. That we ourselves are responding to this invitation with our wholeheartedness, our mind, soul, and spirit, everything that we are, and we convince ourselves. Well, I just, you know, I have a lot going on right now. God, there's just so much that I need to do.  [00:26:34] Indifference Turns Violent [00:26:34] Jesse Schwamb: Now we get to verse six and things shift a little bit. Verse six reads, while the rest sees the servants and treated them shamefully and killed them. Now, what's interesting to me is the indifference, kinda just that cold lackadaisical ness of verse five escalates somehow into violence. In verse six, some of them invited not only ignore the servants, but actively persecute them. And so here we have them, basically are being told they treated them outrageously, shamelessly, they killed them, and, and that's really the language of the entire prophetic tradition, the killing of the prophets. In fact, this Greek word here is ris. It's a word for arrogance. Honor, violating, assault, a sin against the honor of both the messenger and the one who sent him both. Like the one who is the emissary and the one who grants power or vouch saves authority to that emissary. And so to assault the king's servant is of course, to come against the king, and this is an act of high treason. It's against the sovereign God of the entire universe. I, I like here something that Calvin notes about this kind of inexcusable aggregation of aggravation of Israel's sin. He writes, they not only rejected the grace, which was offered to them, but added cruelty to their contempt. That's incredible. Right? That's exactly what we do. We reject God. It's, it's of course like not only just taking all the gifts he gives us and pretending as if they're under our own authority or. Have been the result of our own talents or abilities. But instead, when we do this, we add cruelty to all of our contempt. And the reformed doctrine, of course, of total depravity is not merely the claim that humans are bad. It's the claim that following humanity left to itself moves progressively from the indifference. That we saw in the previous verse, verse five, two, hostility toward the living God in his gospel messengers, which we see in verse six. In other words, unless God constrain us, loved ones, that is the natural end of man to move from this place where I do not care about God till I hate him, and then I hate all those who represent him, all those who speak on his behalf. [00:28:46] Judgment On The City [00:28:46] Jesse Schwamb: And so the king's response here, as you might imagine, is one of anger. He's angry. He sends his troops and he destroys the scriptures, say those are murderers, and he burns their city. I mean, the verse is almost certainly this kind of pro prophecy filled in its intent and its content. It's I think, probably a transparent reference to the destruction of Jerusalem by Roman armies in 80, 70. And Matthew, even if we say he's writing after that event, or in like a conservative dating with prophetic anticipation, presents Christ as foreseeing and pronouncing the divine judgment upon the city. And this King's anger, of course, is not just, it's not anger that's looking for reciprocity. It's not just anger that's saying, this has made me upset and I'm responding viscerally and emotionally. It's not petulant rage. It is holy and righteous wrath of the sovereign whose grace has been despised and whose servants have been murdered. The destruction is complete. The murderers are destroyed, the city is burned to the ground, and there are foreign tradition kind of following. A covenantal hermeneutic, I think reads 80, 70 as this terminus of the old Covenant administration in many ways, and the judgment upon Nashville Israel for his rejection, for her rejection, rather of the Messiah, you know? While all of that is true, I think what this presents for us is a reminder of how serious our God's Holiness is. And that again, every time we sin, every time that we come against God and someone would challenge his authority as it were, either directly or indirectly, we put ourselves in the place of those who reject the gospel message. And in so doing, we ought to fall on our knees and ask for the kind of repentance that is necessary because we ourselves are putting our place, we're extending among. The murderers, and in this case, the, the message that Jesus has for those is only anger and again, is a righteous kind of anger. So one might imagine as we read in like the previous parables, that Jesus could have just entirely ended there. It almost sounds like we've drawn to a close.  [00:31:04] Invitation Rejected [00:31:04] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, there's a king. He has a wedding banquet for his son. He sent out last invitations. Nobody came. He goes to confronts the guests and not only do they say we're not interested, some of them are like, yeah, we burned all the invitations. And then the people that you sent to remind us, we killed those people. And it'll be right for the king to say. That's it. Everybody's done here. I'm shutting the whole thing down. And honestly, that could have happened in the garden. That could happen at the cross. Instead, we find something totally different. The parable goes on.  [00:31:33] Feast Still Happens [00:31:33] Jesse Schwamb: In fact, verse eight reads, then he said to his servants, the wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Notice loved ones that the feast does not get canceled. I mean, Christmas doesn't get canceled. It's just redirected. The king's purposes will not, cannot be frustrated, and this is a critical sociological and eschatological claim to me, at least. What we're seeing here is the refusal of the invited guests does not leave the wedding hall empty. Praise the Lord. It occasions the wider extension of the invitation.  [00:32:07] Gospel Offer Explained [00:32:07] Jesse Schwamb: And this idea of not worthy does not introduce a prior standard of merit by which the guests were found deficient. But instead, as you know, their unworthiness consists in their refusal To refuse the gospel is to demonstrate one's unworthiness of it. And so worthiness in this context is not some kinda like moral achievement, but it's a covenantal responsiveness. It's the openness of the creature to receive what the king graciously provides. It's why when we stand before God in the kind of judgment that we rightfully deserve, and he says something to the extent of, why should I let you into my heaven? Why should I let you enjoy eternal life with me? We should rightly say, because you promised. And because by the power of your Holy Spirit, through the faith you have given and instilled in me by this imputed righteousness, I can trust you at your promise. And so I think this verse is like so critical for understanding the well meant offer of the gospel. Again, we should together affirm that the gospel is offered to all without distinction, and that those who do not come are inexcusable. God does not will. The damnation of those who reject the gospel as a bare first intention, their damnation follows from their own culpable refusal.  [00:33:31] Mission To All Roads [00:33:31] Jesse Schwamb: And so the king says, listen guys, go out everywhere. Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding piece. As many as you find. I don't know how you're envisioning. If you were listening to this story and you were like setting the actual scene, but I don't know, to me, I just find them, the, the servants or the slaves that they look at it one another and they're just like s go time and they just turn around and start going everywhere to all the places, uh, to anyone who will listen to all the like, stops that there were on the byways. All the highways, all the roads. They're just going through all the places. Wherever the road takes 'em, that's where they're going. And all along the way they're spreading this mission, this invitation, and the mission now. Is universal in scope. The main roads, literally the, the exits, the outlets of all these places. The thoroughfares, where the roads branch out of the city and the highways diverge in the countryside. This is representing, of course, like the ends of the earth, the places where any and all may be found. And the command here to as many as you find to go to those is of course, like a command of universal scope. It's for you and me, loved ones there. There's no prior qualification, rich or poor, Jewish, gentile, moral or immoral. This is the missio day, breaking through all ethnic and social boundaries, and in this loving way, in this pastoral way, it underpins the free and indiscriminate offer of the gospel. Again, like going back to the Westminster Confession and the shorter catechism, affirming this covenant of grace that is administered by the preaching of the word. And no matter where you work, like reform theology from like William Cur, David Bernard, like to the modern missionary movement, we're drawing from this mandate of precisely this kind of universal commission. You know, it's like Spurgeon, I think once said something effect of like, Christ has done more than give a general invitation. He has given an urgent, pressing, commanding invitation to all something like that. And I always remember that because when I think about what it means to step into this role of fulfilling the great commission of understanding what Jesus is saying here, it's not just as if we're saying, listen, the world is in a dire place. This is an emergency situation. And so for all of us in our sphere of influence. To bring forward this message of the indiscriminate offer of the gospel is to take God at his word and then to deliver that word to all of those, all the highways, all the byways, all the outplace, every tribe, Tong, nation. What a glorious thing that our God has given us and put us on mission in this way so that no matter who we meet, we know we might say Jesus loves you, that Jesus has died for you. This is, I think, one of the things that those who maybe are new to the reformed tradition and the theological perspective. Find a little bit interesting to parse out, or maybe sometimes if you've had conversations like I have people think that we're parsing the words too much, but there's something to be said for the death of Jesus being sufficient for all and efficacious for the elect, that we're not simply splitting words. There we're describing very discreetly, very cogently, very crisply. This indiscriminate gospel message while at the same time recognizing that it's God's sovereign choice and will to draw those whom he will to himself. And so in verse 10.  [00:36:54] Good And Bad Gathered [00:36:54] Jesse Schwamb: These servants go out to the roads and they gather all whom they found both good and bad. And so the wedding hall, guess what was filled with guests, because this is God's sovereign prerogative because he can do all these things because even those who have denied him does not remove him from power. That he does all the verbs and so the servants obey and the results are comprehensive. They gather in all of these, and Matthew's quick to say both the good and the bad, and I think like the good and the bad pairing is significant. I don't think this is necessarily meaning that there's the morally virtuous and the morally depraved, though that probably is included somewhere. But I think this, this more, this reflection that, once again, it's all kinds of people. For God's to love the world that whomsoever, all of those who believe in him should not perish, but have eternal life. The wedding hall is filled, it was filled, and it's filled by God's sovereign action through human instrumentality.  [00:37:53] Visible And Invisible Church [00:37:53] Jesse Schwamb: And there is, like I'd say, if you're tracking with this, you should notice that there is a, a kinda a tension here. It sits between verses 10 and 11, and it's going to resolve the banquet hall is full. But you'll notice that it's not all within, well, not everybody who's within it are truly saved. And we'll get to why that isn't just a second. But the filling of the hall through the universal gospel summons does produce a mixed company. We've already talked about the parable of the terrors in the wheat before, so this, this should be news if you've been listening to us for a little while, but it's precisely the condition of the visible church in this age. Again, I just think it's fantastic that when we go to the scriptures, one of the reasons we know it's true is because God tells us the truth about the way things are. And we know that this is the way that the church is today. We would call this the visible versus the invisible church. And of course there's a distinguishing between the visible church, which consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion from the invisible church, which is the totality of the elect, those who God has actually called to himself. So the hole is full. But not all in the hall are clothed. And this is fascinating how Jesus brings in this idea of dressing of not, I mean, not what you put on your salad, a smorgasbord, but like what you're actually wearing.  [00:39:07] Wedding Garment Meaning [00:39:07] Jesse Schwamb: So in verse 11, but the king came in to look at the guests and he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. So notice that the parable scene here kind of shifts dramatically all of a sudden because the king arrives suddenly. He's present. He was speaking, he was giving instructions, he was preparing, he was a character, kind of chilling in the background. But now there's this eschatological moment the king's coming to inspect. The guests corresponds to this final judgment, and what he finds is there's a man without a wedding garment. He's at the center, I think of this parables, theological climax. So what, what is this wedding garment? I would put it to you like, as you're thinking through this and maybe interpreting listening for yourself, what do you think the wedding garment is? And I would say like what most reformed interpreters have been unified on is that this really represents that imputed righteousness, the the righteousness of Christ that's credited to the believer and received by faith alone. And so by a wedding garment, I would understand this to mean the purity and the holiness of that transforms and regenerated life, which is required of all those who are brought inside the true and invisible church. And though he immediately qualifies this as like righteousness, that is inseparable from justification. It is not earned, but it is received. In fact, I think, uh, I have my Logos Bible software up as I'm talking to you, and I see that Matthew Henry comments on this by saying, the righteousness of Christ is the robe of righteousness, the garment of salvation in which true believers are closed. I mean. That's a great turn of phrase, brothers and sisters. I love this idea of what the scriptures tell us elsewhere of putting on these garments of praise or worship, the garments of Christ, of being exchanged out as it were, for what is dirty and unsuitable for something that suits the occasion that is given to you to wear by faith alone. And of course, this wedding garment is not a work that the guest has produced, but it's a garment provided, uh, presumably like the king's servants actually supplied it. Uh, I, I think that's like a detail implied by the ancient custom and the severity of the guest condemnation for lacking it. It's almost as if the king is saying. Uh, like you were, should have been provided. Why did you not put this on? Why did by faith you not accept this? And this underscores the so gratia and so fide. The righteousness by which we stand before God on the last day is not our own, but Christ, it's received through faith. And the man without the garment represents those who presume to stand before God on the basis of their own righteousness. Whether that's religious profession. Moral achievement, charitable giving, mere church membership rather. And instead of. That alien and beautiful righteousness of Christ. So the fact that this man is inside the hall, you know, he's come in through the general call confirms that the parable addresses not only those outside the church, but those within it who lack genuine saving faith. It's almost, to me, kind of like an intra ecclesial warning. It's, it's not merely a missional observation. I think that is for all of us. It's why Paul elsewhere says. Check test, confirm to see whether you yourselves are in this faith because it is by faith that we put on these wedding garments which are appropriate and suitable for this great eschatological Messianic wedding feast with the lamb. [00:42:48] Speechless Before Judgment [00:42:48] Jesse Schwamb: So in verse 12, the king says to him, friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment? And notice the man's response. I, I almost find this kind of funny because he just says, and he was speechless. Like there was, there was nothing for him, uh, to, to say it all. And of course, like this question that's posed here, this, how did you get in here without the winning government? It's not a real question, right? It's not a question of genuine puzzlement. It's the same way in which when we find God walking in the cool of the day, in the garden after the sin of Adam and E, where he says, Adam, where are you? It's not a genuine question of a quizzical nature. It's instead, this rhetorical structure is God questions through judgments. And when he says to Cain, where is Abel your brother, where is Abel, your brother? He's exposing and he's condemning. He's not merely inquiring. And so this man in response, sensing this condemnation, discerning this condemnation, this judgment that's been brought against him, I think this is why the Greek says he was muzzled. He was silenced, his mouth was shut up. He had no answer. Uh, it's not because the question was unfair. But because there was just no legitimate words that he could bring there, there was no argumentation. In other words, there's no poll mic. There was no great debate that he could have. In this moment. Every mouth will be stopped before God. I mean, that's like Romans three. The silence of the ungodly before the Divine Tribunal is a consistent biblical theme, and we find it here. Again, this is the eschatological end to those who are condemned. No one loved ones is gonna stand before God on the last day and successfully argue their case on the ground of personal merit. I love William Perkins on this topic. He was apparently really moved. I learned by this verse and by what he saw in the silence as a profound warning against false assurance. So he actually wrote many a man in this world. Silence is his own conscience. With many fair excuse. Do you hear that? I, I love that turn of phrase. So we're talking about silence. It's about being silence, but I love how he says it's very easy to, to silence, not yourself, not like somebody coming against you with debate, but your own conscience. So he writes, again, many a man in this world will silence his own conscience with many a fair excuse. But in that day, there will be no excuse, no plea, no delay. So that time of plea is now, it's in this life. It's by faith and repentance, which is why there's an urgency to this gospel message. And so the king.  [00:45:17] Outer Darkness Warning [00:45:17] Jesse Schwamb: In hearing this and knowing that this man has no excuse for his outer attire, he says to him, listen to the servants. Bind him hand and foot, cast him into outer darkness. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. The sentence is severe. It's total. Of the command is given to the servants and attendance maybe in this parable and parabolic form, likely the angelic executors of divine judgment and it is binding. It renders the condemned utterly helpless. It's a picture of total divine control over the destiny of the ate. He has cast into this outer darkness, outside the light and warmth of the banquet hall entirely. And I think it's incumbent upon us to take a second and to grieve the repercussions of what is being said here. That the death and destruction of the ATE should make us grieve. It should compel us to go out into the highways, the byways, and to share this message. Unreservedly. One of the ways we know really the full anguish of what this entails is this phrase, weeping and gnashing of teeth, actually occurs seven times in Matthew, and it functions as this refrain, this chorus, this common language of this eschatological condemnation, it combines interestingly in this wordplay here, both the anguish of grief with the rage of frustrated pride. It's a portrait, not of this just like regret, but continuing imp penitent, hostility against God and eternal punishment. And I think if Tony were here, he would agree with me that we have consistently affirmed the doctrine of eternal conscience punishment. You know, the Westminster Confession says, the wicked who know not God and obey not the gospel of Jesus Christ shall be cast into eternal torments. In other words, this outer darkness is not annihilation. The weeping and the gnashing continues. It implies an ongoing conscious existence. It's the image of a binding stands against the notion of this kind of postmortem repentance or universalism. The severity of that verse, I think, really must be allowed to stand in its canonical context without mitigation. The, the severity of this judgment ought to fill us with fear, not theological domestication. We, we shouldn't set this aside and be saying, well, this implies that there is nothing after that time. No, there continues to be only time with God in his presence, in eternal, consummate joy and harmony and peacefulness and celebration. Or there is literally. A weeping and a gnashing of teeth, an unresolved rage and anger where that is punished by God because he's absent where there's unmitigated pain and suffering because it is absent the presence and the mediation of God himself, who even now in this world, holds us back so that while we are sinful and we are not as bad as we could or ought to be because of his great kindness, all of us, even those. Who are not believers.  [00:48:37] Called Yet Chosen [00:48:37] Jesse Schwamb: And so because of that, it ends with these very famous in stock words in in verse 14, for many are called, but few are chosen. And that concluding aphorism is, I think, the theological linchpin of this entire thing. The contrast between this idea of called and chosen, you know, this is the vocabulary that is deliberately covenantal and elective, and we shouldn't shy away from that. Of course, it's referring to this external call, the universal proclamation of the gospel to all the hearers. The call is genuine, it's earnest, it's gentile, it's sufficient as an offer. It is the call that goes to all the highways, all who hear the gospel are truly called to repentance and faith. And for me, in my own journey of understanding what this means as God has allowed me to, that has been critical. This idea that this universal call means that it is sufficient as a call to repentance and faith for all those who hear it. And then it does become the responsibility of all those who hear it to respond to it. And so this idea then of this pairing then with the chosen and the elect is referring of course to those whom God has chosen from before the foundation of the world. The elect are those who not only receive the external call, but are effectually drawn by the eternal efficacious call of the Holy Spirit. We can look to Romans eight 30, those whom he predestined, he also called, and those whom he called, he also justified. And I say, because this is a Reformed Theological podcast, and this is what you came here for, I presume, brothers and sisters. Then it behooves us to at least mention again that the reformed tradition has classically distinguished between that external or general call, the sincere well meant proclamation of the gospel to all without distinction, inviting everybody to faith and repentance. That call is genuine on God's part and God's doing the verbs in that as well. And then again, we, we set that over in next two, the internal, what we call like effectual efficacious call. It's sovereign. It's irresistible work of the Holy Spirit by which the elect regenerated, have their will renewed and are infallibly brought to saving faith. All those whom God has predestined unto life and those only he's pleased in his appointed and accepted time to affectionately call by His word and his spirit out of the state of sin and death to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ. I was thinking recently of this idea of the narrow path and somewhere between like the scriptures there and pilgrim's progress, and paths and journeys. I had this image in my mind of the road on which we walk. And in this life, the natural man on that road encounters all these like intractable boulders, these things that cannot be traversed. These just great mountainous pieces of rock, which block the path. And so prevent us from at least accomplishing the thing that we would like. Like to live forever, to have peace with God, to be at peace with ourselves, to love our brothers and our sisters as much as we love ourselves to honor something that is greater than us. And those boulders are things like sin, death in the devil, which constantly invade us, which constantly thwart us, which constantly block us. And in Christ, what he has accomplished in salvation is not just, I think to remove those boulders, though that would've been good enough of course to just get them outta the way. Instead, it's as if he's taken them and he's crushed them, and now to the softest sand between our toes and we walk over them in victory by the power of his name through the Holy Spirit into eternal life. Into that grand wedding feast spoil, which we have been invited because he has done this because he loves us. And so verse 14 places these two realities side by side without resolving the tension. Philosophically, this is one of the great mysteries of theology. Uh, reformed theology does not collapse the distinction by limiting the external call to the elect alone as like maybe kind of a hyper Calvinist model, but it doesn't make the internal call dependent on a human decision. As like Armenian theology would instead, you know, the tension is, is biblical. This is here for us. It's here for us, because I believe that God wishes for us to submit our knowledge and our reasoning to him knowing that he is far and above us. And because this tension is biblical, it has to be maintained. The invitation is genuinely universal. The effectual drawing is sovereignly particular. How great is our God loved ones? There is no one like him. And so there's so much in this that I think we could spend all of the rest of our life thinking about, and that would be a noble, I was just thinking today that, um, you know, unless the Lord Terrys like, maybe this will be the last series me and Tony ever do, because there's so much that's rich and deep in these parables and there's so many of them, and the teaching of Christ is, is so complete of course, for us because it gives us everything that we need for life and salvation and godliness that. We find that the more that we look into them, the more that we ask the Holy Spirit to bathe us in a realization that comes from the spirit of God, the more that we will find. They challenge us. They encourage us. They equip us. So I'm thinking and praying for you all as I hope that you are for Tony and I as we continue to wrestle with these things as we continue to talk them out, because I'm asking God that he would equip us as we look at the teaching of his son in these parables with a firm understanding of the truth and equip us with his promises and with his encouragement so that. As he grows us in our faith, our faith for us would be like a thousand eyes and a thousand wings that we would find ourselves moving from glory to glory. Because we see in these parables the great work of God for us. What he has accomplished through his son and how he continues to be for us and the son who is given for us is with us. That we have his Holy Spirit within us and who discerns the mind of God, accept the spirits of God. So love us. Let's continue to get after what's being said in these parables here because there's so much for us here.  [00:55:14] Living The Commission [00:55:14] Jesse Schwamb: And might I add, just to tack onto the end, there's also so much for the world. I know that we're quick to say, or like colloquially Christians have said in the past like, Jesus is the answer, but you I think cannot necessarily fault the world for sometimes asking, well, what is the question? And unless we go forward with this proper understanding that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. That all are in need of this savior and that this gospel message is for, in fact, for all people without reservation. Full stop. I guess I ask for you and I and Tony who's editing this episode, are we going out into the highways and byways? What is the proof of the pudding in the eating look like when we examine our lives, but with specifically our finances and our time and our prayer closet and our service? Aren't we in fact concerned with the great commission that is reflected here? Are we concerned with the emergence and urgent need of this gospel message, which is for all people because God so loved the world that he gave his only forgotten son. That whosoever shall believe in him will not per but have everlasting life.  [00:56:27] Community And Support [00:56:27] Jesse Schwamb: So come hang out with us. Come talk about this parable. You know where to go. But I'm gonna tell you anyway because that's what we do. If you go to your browser, type in T Me Back slash Reform Brotherhood, t Me Back slash Reform Brotherhood, that link will take you to an app called Telegram. Telegram is just a messaging app. It's like, I dunno, iMessages for Apple or whatever you Android people are using these days. And there's just a little community that we've sectioned off there. And it's a community of listeners to the Reform Brotherhood who are talking about all kinds of things. You, you wanna be in that group? It is. It is a great group. Don't, don't reject the invitation. Don't reject it. Just, just come. I know you're thinking, listen, I got land. I got commerce I gotta deal with. That's fine. Come, come and join us. So go to t.me/reform brotherhood. One last thing. I would be remiss if I didn't thank all of those who make sure that this podcast still goes out to all the highways and the byways of the internet. That there is no Jericho paywall around it because it does cost money to put out there all the subscriptions, all the distribution. It's surprising, but there are. Intense fees with a lot of that stuff, and so I wanna say thank you, thank you, thank you to those who have listened and said, you know what? I would like to make sure. That this continues to go on. I've been blessed just by the conversation. God has done something here because again, he does all the verbs. Tony and I do zero verbs, and so because of that, they've gone to patreon.com Reform Brotherhood, and they've just decided to give a little bit of the kindness of their heart and generosity to the Lord. So if you're thinking, you know what? I've been listening for a while, and I do appreciate that this just magically, as it were, pops up in my feed and I continue to listen to it. Would you please consider helping us? Uh, Tony and I and so many other listeners who give a little bit just to make sure that together we can keep this thing going strong. And again, you can just go to patreon.com/reform brotherhood. There's also a website, uh, reform brother.com and all kinds of other fun stuff. But I will leave that to you. I, I didn't even bring it up. See, I'm just so glad that you mentioned it yourself 'cause it would've been awkward otherwise.  [00:58:31] Final Blessing [00:58:31] Jesse Schwamb: So loved ones. There are still so many more parables to go. They're all so good. So I hope that you all come back and join us next time as we continue to move through these parables. But until then, there's something that you should definitely do honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. 

Dr. Leighton Flowers walks through some recent online discussions in order to dig a little deeper into the issues that Calvinists often bring up in our disagreement.   Get your copy of Dr. Flowers new children's book, LOVE CHOOSES, go here: https:// loom.ly/8I1BNFg   To get your copy of Dr. Flowers book, Drawn By Jesus, go here: https://a.co/d/6s767Ey   To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: https://soteriology101.com/support/   Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter   Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/   DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: https://play.google.com/store/apps/de... LINK FOR APPLE: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/soterio...   Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software development needs! Show them some love for their support of Soteriology101!!!   To ORDER Dr. Flowers Curriculum "Tiptoeing Through Tulip," please click here: https://soteriology101.com/shop/   To listen to the audio only, be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, or one of the other podcast players found here: https://soteriology101.com/home/   For more about Traditionalism (or Provisionism), please visit www.soteriology101.com   Dr. Flowers' book, "The Potter's Promise," can be found here: https://a.co/d/iLKpahj   Dr. Flowers' book, "God's Provision for All" can be found here: https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Provision...   To engage with other believers cordially join our Facebook group: https://m.facebook.com/groups/1806702...   For updates and news, follow us at:  www.facebook/Soteriology101   Or @soteriology101 on Twitter   Please SHARE on Facebook and Twitter and help spread the word!   To learn more about other ministries and teachings from Dr. Flowers, go here: https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22...   To become a Patreon supporter or make a one-time donation: https://soteriology101.com/support/   #LeightonFlowers #Calvinism #Theology

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down and discussed his thoughts on the Thomas Massie Congressional race, and some of the interactions he has had with pro-Trump Boomers. Enjoy! Dominion Wealth Strategists are the only Kingdom minded company that you need to use. Set up a free consultation here today! You need to protect your sword! Beautiful, classic, and one of a kind! Design your bible rebind from Deus Vult today! 10% for all Dead Men listeners with the code "DEADMANWALKING" Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

How did giants reappear after the flood? How were stones moved to build the pyramids? What are your thoughts on the Calvinist "tulip"? Is it a sin to say curse words?

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with Dr. Chuck Baldwin. Chuck is a Pastor, Radio Host, and former Presidential Candidate. They discussed his journey from a Moral Majority Pre-mill Dispensationalist to his current understanding on what he calls "Fulfillment Theology". They discussed the modern national of Israel, who God's Chosen People are, as well as the upcoming midterms and his eschatology. Enjoy! Dominion Wealth Strategists are the only Kingdom minded company that you need to use. Set up a free consultation here today! You need to protect your sword! Beautiful, classic, and one of a kind! Design your bible rebind from Deus Vult today! 10% for all Dead Men listeners with the code "DEADMANWALKING" Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

Your region was already shaping what you wore, what felt normal, and what got you sideways looks at dinner, long before you had any framework for personal style at all.   Colin Woodard's American Nations framework proposes that North America is actually 11 distinct cultures, each with founding values that have persisted for centuries.   The eleven nations: Yankeedom (New England to the upper Midwest): Founded by radical Calvinists. Deep investment in education, community improvement, and civic duty. New Netherland (New York City metro): Founded by the Dutch as a commercial trading hub. Pluralistic, cosmopolitan, entrepreneurial from the start. The Midlands (Pennsylvania to the central Midwest): Founded by Quakers who welcomed all. Moderate, consensus-driven, deeply suspicious of extremes. Tidewater (coastal Virginia and the Carolinas): Founded by English gentry who recreated a feudal aristocracy. Hierarchical, formal, oriented toward tradition and lineage. Greater Appalachia (the Appalachian backcountry to the Ozarks): Founded by Scots-Irish borderlanders. Fiercely independent, deeply suspicious of outside authority. Deep South (South Carolina to east Texas): Founded by Barbadian planters who built a slave society. Ceremonial, hierarchical, intensely communal within its own ranks. El Norte (the southwest borderlands): The oldest European culture on the continent. Hardworking, independent, shaped by two nations simultaneously. The Left Coast (coastal Alaska to northern California): Founded by New England missionaries and Appalachian prospectors. Idealistic, innovative, convinced it can build something better. The Far West (the interior West to the Great Plains): Shaped by the extraction economy and harsh climate. Pragmatic, self-reliant, resistant to outside control. New France (Quebec and Louisiana): Founded by French colonists who prioritized relationships over hierarchy. Communal, convivial, with a strong sense of place and pleasure. First Nation (northern Canada and Alaska): The nations that predate all the others. Cultures built on deep relationship with land, community, and living tradition. In this episode I'm applying that lens to style, introducing the 11 nations and their regional style archetypes, and asking a question most style advice never thinks to ask: which parts of your style are actually yours? Let's connect! To suggest a podcast topic, send email to hello@signaturestylesystems.com. Want to learn more about how to discover your Style DNA? Start with The Congruence Code! Check out the FREE video masterclass: The Myers-Briggs Key to Signature Style.  

In this episode, we track the work of John and Charles Wesley during the fall of 1740 as they deal with challenges from the Moravians, the Calvinists, the Church of England, and the law. Here is a link to The History of Methodism Volume 1 & 2 in English.Here is a link to The History of Methodism Volume 1 & 2 in Spanish. You can support the podcast here: https://www.patreon.com/historyofmethodismYou can check out the updated website here: https://www.historyofmethodism.com/You can check out our books here: https://www.historyofmethodism.com/wroot-press.htmlAnd you can look at the Wesley Corpus website here: https://corpus.historyofmethodism.com/

Topic: Testing the Spirits: Biblical Discernment in an Age of Media Lies, Tribal Echo Chambers, and “Christian” Extremes   Whiskey Review: New Riff Bottle in Bond Connect: Instagram: @manhoodneat X: Manhood Neat (@ManhoodNeat) / X Youtube: Manhood, Neat Podcast - YouTube  email: manhood.neat@gmail.com Show Notes: Zionism- “Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have a rightful claim to a national homeland in the land of Israel, historically and politically.” Reformed Bro- “Reformed Theology is a stream of Protestant Christianity that emphasizes God's sovereignty, the authority of Scripture, and salvation by grace alone.” -But the Bro's take it to the extreme - Reformed Reformed Reformed Dispensational- “Dispensationalism is a theological system that teaches God works through distinct periods (‘dispensations') and maintains a clear distinction between Israel and the Church.” - 2 roads to one God “We've watched brothers and generations swing from naive Zionism to reactionary antisemitism. Both fail the test.” I'm reformed, I'm evangelical, I'm catholic, I am Baptist, I am a Calvinist…why not Christian Reminds me - I am of Paul; I am of Apollos.  1 Corinthians 3:4-9:  4For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely human? 5What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. 6I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. 7So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. 8He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor. 9For we are God's fellow workers. You are God's field, God's building. Fellow Christians (regardless of denomination) - Let us come reason together Unity of the Body of Christ for His work The enemy loves to divide. “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity” - Rupertus Meldenius Key Text: 1 John 4  Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.4 You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5 They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood. God's Love and Ours.7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.13 This is how we know that we live in him and he in us: He has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.19 We love because he first loved us. 20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. 21 And he has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister. How do Christian men discern truth without becoming tools of deception or hatred? God demands we test the spirits (v.1) Confess Christ rightly (v.2-3 Listen to apostolic truth (v.6) Love as evidence of knowing God (v.7-21). Confronting the two ditches History (Brief Overview) Early Church: Mixed – some respect for Jewish roots, but supersessionism/replacement theology grew No longer Jew nor Gentile, but the Church and the world  Justin Martyr, later hardened replacement theology Led to disdain, pogroms (violent, mob-driven attacks—typically riots involving looting, assault, rape, murder, and destruction of property—targeted at a specific ethnic or religious groups.)  Martin Luther's later writings (On the Jews and Their Lies) exemplify tragic failure of love. Reformation/ Puritans: Varied; some future hope for Jewish people (pre-Darby).  John Nelson Darby (1800s, Plymouth Brethren) systematized dispensationalism:  distinct Israel/Church track  pre-trib rapture  literal futurist readings  Popularized via Scofield Reference Bible (1909). Fueled 20th-century evangelical support for Israel. Zionist movement: Jewish political nationalism (Theodor Herzl, late 1800s) responded to European antisemitism. Christian Zionism often overlapped but with eschatological motives. Scofield influence: Shaped views of unconditional land promises. Post-Holocaust: Shifts toward Philo-Semitism (the admiration, respect, or obsession with Jewish people, culture, or history, often by non-Jews) in reaction to Church failures, but some swung to uncritical political allegiance. Modern swing: Newly Reformed / postmillennial / reconstructionist circles reacting against shallow dispensationalism by over-correcting into ethnic suspicion or outright antisemitism.  Examples:  Holocaust minimization “Zionist Occupied Government" echoes Treating all Jewish influence as cabal-like.  This is not discernment – it's another false spirit. Practical tests for Discerning information from 1 John 4 (This is the point): Does the source confess Christ preeminent - Love the Lord your God with everything  or push fear/hate/nationalism as gospel? Does it promote love for neighbors?  Prayer for enemies? Cross-reference history, primary sources, multiple views – not echo chambers. To "Reformed" Bros: Opposition to dispensational errors is fine; becoming ethnic scoffers is apostasy from apostolic love. To Zionists: Israel's existence isn't carte blanche; critique policies Biblically. This is one area - lots of other ditches  Women's role / value Poet and Warrior Both: Media profits from division. Web algorithms radicalize.  (1 Thess 5:21). but test everything; hold fast what is good.

In this episode of the Outlaw Radio Show, Pastor Zach and the Boys discuss Calvinism vs Arminianism.

Why do Americans support Israel? The standard answers—D.C. lobbying, shared democratic values, strategic benefits—all miss something. Walter Russell Mead, one of America's foremost foreign policy scholars, traces the real answer back to 17th-century Calvinist theology, and argues that Christian Zionists were advocating for a Jewish homeland long before most Jews were. Mead joins the show to make the case that the famous Israel Lobby thesis is actually historically incoherent. To explain where antisemitism comes from and why it keeps coming back, he offers a nuanced defense of American global engagement against the America First movement's more isolationist impulses. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the Grace in Focus podcast. Today, Bob Wilkin and Sam Marr are answering questions about “The New Perspective on Paul.” What is this about? Have Lutherans, Calvinists and […] The post What Is the Free Grace Response to the New Perspective on Paul? appeared first on Grace Evangelical Society.

Introduction: What if My Conviction Offends Someone? (1 Corinthians 10:23-11:1) CHOOSE to CONSTRUCT. (1 Cor 10:23-24) CONCEDE for the CONSCIENCE. (1 Cor 10:25-30) CELEBRATE our CREATOR. (1 Cor 31-11:1) Sermon Notes (PDF): BLANKHint: Highlight blanks above for answers! Audio Transcript 00:36Morning, Church. Go ahead and turn in your Bibles to 1 Corinthians 10.00:41We're going to start in verse 23 and go through the first verse of chapter 11.00:48Have you ever had one of those moments where you walked away from a conversation and immediately thought, well, I really stepped in it on that one?00:59You know the feeling. You say something and at first you think it was just something harmless, right?01:07But then you notice the silence. Where you see the look on someone's face and the room gets just a little awkward, right? And suddenly there's this chill in the air and you start replaying the conversation in your mind and you start thinking, well, what did I just say? Most of us have had a moment like that, right? I remember one time in particular when Elizabeth and I were a young couple before we had any kids.01:35We got invited over to a dinner party. And we didn't know one of the couples in particular very well. And so we were brought together and they were trying to do some, you know, friend matchmaking kind of a thing. It was nice. We had a good dinner and a good time and we were just chatting with one another and telling funny stories and whatever. And I seized on the opportunity to tell a really, what I thought was funny story about an experience that Elizabeth and I had had just a few days prior.02:05And Elizabeth and I had gone to a high school band concert. You remember this? Yeah. Of course she does. We had gone to a high school band concert just a few days before. And I'll just tell you that it was not the greatest concert ever. In fact, it was, in my opinion, it was pretty bad. And I thought it would be a great opportunity to make everybody laugh. So I'm telling about how the trumpets are squeaking and how the trombones were just a few notes, a little off and you know the the kid playing the triangle got a little too excited and you know i'm getting laughs and it's it's a great time we're all yucking it up i did notice there was one couple though the couple we didn't know too well they weren't really engaged in my story and so you know i just bore in i'm telling it a little more getting a little trying to get some more laughs so i finished my story and then uh the husband of the couple that was quiet that we don't know very well he kind of leans in and raises his head and says I'm the band director at that school. That's a true story. That one hurt. That one really hurt, you know? Maybe you've been there. I don't know. Maybe I'm the only one. Maybe that's the worst example in the room. But I felt awful. You know the Homer Simpson meme where he just backs up into the shrubs? You've seen it, right? You've sent it, right? Yeah, that was what I wanted to do. I just wanted the earth to open up, swallow me whole, and I just wanted to be gone. But you know, honestly, they took it really, really well. They were very gracious. And we laughed about it. And I think they got over it. We never got invited over for dinner again. But you know, I think they got over it. At least that's what I tell myself. You know, in most circumstances like that, most social mistakes, they're just accidental. I didn't mean to offend them. I thought I was just being funny. And they're awkward, but eventually we get over it and we work through it and we laugh and we kind of move on.04:06But sometimes that sort of thing, that can even happen here in the church, right? You know, some of the hardest conflicts that we find ourselves in in the church and in our lives, sometimes they're not accidents. They happen when we are absolutely convinced that we are right about something, and we need to get that out of our heads.04:35It can happen when our personal convictions, our preferences, and what we believe, that we have every right and good purpose to say, begin to collide with someone else's preferences or someone else's conscience or conviction. And that is a much, much harder problem. Because now it's not just, oops, I misspoke, I didn't realize. Now it's, I believe I am right. I believe I have the freedom here to say what I think I need to say and to express myself.05:05And so, what do we do in that instance? What do we do with that conviction if it offends someone or if it's going to offend someone? Maybe just to make sure you understand, maybe it's a situation like this. Maybe you're in a group, even here at church, right? And you're having a conversation and you say something like, I just, for the life of me, I can't really understand how people can send their kids to public school. I mean, it's just a terrible place.05:35Do they know what they're doing? And then someone in that group goes to public school. Or is a school board member. Or is a teacher, right? Or how about you're expressing that absolute correct conviction that anyone who goes to a non-Christian concert or, heaven forbid, takes their kids there, right? They're doing a terrible disservice to their family. Or how about expressing the very strong and, of course, correct that anyone who chooses not to follow the right vaccination schedule for their kids, they're just a looney tune, right? Or anyone who lets their kids participate in Halloween in any form, they're just inviting their children to be overcome by evil spirits. Or one more, maybe you have a strong conviction that you know that someone who is not a five-point Calvinist, right? They know what all the tulip letters stand for.06:34Maybe they're destined for help. And you know that you're right. You know that your purpose is to declare your conviction in these circumstances. And you don't really have to have much regard for the people around you. And this is where 1 Corinthians 10 brings us this morning. I mean, we all have convictions, of course. These strong opinions.07:04And if it's not one of the ones I listed, maybe it's the idea of drinking that Jeff talked us, walked us through with that example in the small group, right? We had a few months ago or heaven forbid politics or dress standards or social media. So the question then becomes, what do I do with these convictions? What do I do with my convictions on a non-essential, non-salvation issue that offends somebody else?07:34thinking.07:36Because I know you.07:37Some of you right now are thinking, I'm a black and white kind of a person.07:41I'm right.07:42The rest of the world, they're wrong.07:46So what do I do?07:47What do I do?07:48If I have this strong conviction, do I stand my ground, defend my rights?07:52Do I prove my theology?07:54Do I push harder because I know I'm correct and it's just going to require a little more convincing?07:59You might be thinking, of course I do.08:01That is my role in this world.08:04Why else would God put those things in my head or on my heart? Paul has some things to say about this issue, and that's what we're going to dive into. So before we get into Paul's instructions, let's pray. And in our normal harvest tradition, I would ask that you take a moment and pray for me, and I will pray for you.08:33Holy Father, I pray that your word would speak loudly this morning. I pray, God, that the wisdom that our brother Paul brings us in the Holy Scriptures, God, would convict us where we need to be convicted and would encourage us where we need to be encouraged. And God, that we would leave a changed people in whatever way you know that we need to be changed. It's in Christ's holy and precious name we pray. Amen. So Paul has been building us up. We've been in 1 Corinthians for a while now, right?09:02And Paul has been building us up to this point. In chapters 1-4, in this letter to the Corinthians, he's correcting their wisdom. He's saying, are you following human personalities or are you following Christ and the cross? Remember the sections we had Taylor and Jeff and Rich? He's saying, who are you following? And then in chapters 5-7, Paul is correcting their conduct. He says, how do Christians, how are we supposed to handle these topics of sexuality, marriage, holiness? The body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.09:33And then in chapters 8 and 9, he spends some time correcting their rights. He says, knowledge without love is pretty dangerous, actually. The Christian liberty is real, but liberty without love, it can become really destructive. And then here we are in chapter 10. Paul is going to show us how to actually live this out. This is the practice of this liberty that Paul has been talking to the Corinthians about. Because he acknowledges you have rights, you have freedoms, you have convictions.10:02But how do we use them in a way that helps people instead of hurting people or pushing them away? How do you handle these convictions in a way that is honoring to Christ? So let's look at three clear responses from Paul for us on this particular topic. If you look at verse, starting in verse 23 and we'll look at 24, Paul begins by saying, all things are lawful, but not all things are helpful.10:32All things are lawful, but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. Apparently this phrase, all things are lawful, it had become kind of a favorite slogan of the Corinthians. So much so that you might remember that Paul already talked about this and used this same language back in chapter 6. And back in that chapter, Paul was using this rhetorical argument, This rhetorical technique to say to the Corinthians and now to us, freedom isn't just what you can do, but rather what you should be looking at what you should do. This idea that we all have this freedom in Christ, Paul asks us, how are you using it in light of what is good and what is helpful to do? See, the Corinthians were saying, and you might remember from a few weeks ago, or maybe you don't, so I'll remind you, I'm free, I'm under grace, I have rights, I can do this. And in some sense, they were right. But actually, Paul is talking about a term that some theologians will use. It's called adiophora. It's really just getting to this idea of these matters of indifference. These things that are neither clearly commanded nor forbidden by God in Scripture. They're not sin. Not holiness issues.12:00with explicit commands, but you might call them gray areas. Questions like, can I eat this? Can I eat that? Can I go here, participate in this, celebrate that, enjoy this freedom? So Paul doesn't deny Christian liberty and Christian freedom at all. He doesn't say actually nothing is lawful. Instead, he applies two simple, profound filters. Yes, it may be lawful, but he says, but is it helpful?12:31Yes, it may be permitted, but does it build up? And that is a completely different standard, isn't it? It's not, what am I allowed to do? Whether or not something is lawful, that is really the bare minimum for a believer. Instead, whether something is helpful should be our standard, and that's what Paul is calling us to. So I want to focus a little bit on this word build up, this two-word phrase build up.12:59In the Greek it literally means to build a house. And Paul is saying your liberty should function like a construction project, not demolition work. Christian freedom is not a license for self-gratification. It's a tool. It's a tool for church building, for people building, and disciple building. So the question is not what can I get away with? The question is what helps build up the people around me.13:29And that's our first point this morning that Paul is bringing to us. What do I do if my conviction offends someone? You choose to construct. You choose to construct. If my freedom tears down a brother, then my freedom has actually become selfish. Paul then takes it in a slightly different direction than he did back in chapter 6 when he says, Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. Boy, that's really hard, isn't it? Because what's our natural tendency? Do you naturally seek your neighbor first? Probably not. Probably not, at least most of the time. We think about my preference, my conviction, my right, my comfort. But Paul says, with all this freedom, with all this liberty, start with your neighbor instead of yourself. That is the way of Christ. Let me illustrate it to you maybe this way. Maybe this will help. Drive home the point. Let's just say I decide to do a renovation project in my house. Actually, you know what? Better yet. Let's say I have a neighbor who calls me up and says, hey, you know what? I want to do a renovation project in my house. Would you help me? I'm a good neighbor, right?14:55This guy lives next to me, Larry. He's a pastor. He's a good guy. So he gives me a call and I say, you know what? Yeah, I'll help you out, Larry. I'll come over. I'll help you with your renovation project. Well, what's the first step in any good reno job? Demo day, right? So Larry calls me up and I decide, okay, yeah, I'm going to go help Larry and I go grab my sledgehammer like a good neighbor and I walk over there and I am prepared. I am ready to help him do some demo.15:25I have every right to be there, don't I? I mean, he invited me. So legally, I'm allowed in his house, and I brought the right tool. I brought the sledgehammer, right? And Larry, I mean, he knows. He knows how I feel about demo. He knows that I'm really excited about this, and I'm going to have some skill, and I'm probably going to have some, maybe some opinions, too. So Larry invites me over, and we're maybe talking a little bit about the project. He gives me some of his opinions and some of his thoughts, and I'm thinking, you know, and I'm like, yeah, you know, okay.15:55Larry knows me. He knows I've done some demo in my day and I've got some things to offer here. And I'm thinking, you know what? I heard his ideas, but there's this one wall. It's right in the middle of the house. And I have a very strong conviction that that wall, it's got to go. I mean, for the good of his family, for the good of Larry and Kimmy and their girls and grandbabies, that wall, it's going because I feel very strongly about this. In fact, I feel strongly enough that my sledgehammer, I take it.16:25And I just knocked that wall down. That wasn't Larry's idea. That was my conviction. Well, that wall just so happened to be very structurally integral to the house. So what happens when I take that wall down? The second story of that house is now directly on the first floor. But it didn't just fall on me. It fell on Larry and his wife and their girls.17:00See, my exercise of my freedom in that instance, it became destruction. And Paul says that's exactly how some Christians handle their own personal liberty. They swing the sledgehammer of personal rights without asking what they're hitting, without thinking about it. They say, I'm free, I'm right, I can do this, I feel very convicted about this. In a sense, I'm free, I'm free, I'm free, I'm free, I'm free, I That's okay. That's true. But are you building the house or are you collapsing it? With your conviction. Because in the church, just like in Larry's house, it's not just you. There are other people under this roof. There are younger believers watching. There are weaker believers learning. There are unbelievers observing. There are hurting people trying to heal. And your liberty, it affects them too.17:55So the application here, it's simple, but it's kind of uncomfortable. Ask yourself, am I more interested in defending my rights or protecting the structural integrity of my brother's house? And in this week, instead of swinging a hammer, a sledgehammer of your conviction, maybe choose to lay a brick of encouragement. Maybe instead of proving your point, you protect a person. And maybe instead of demanding liberty, you ask, what would help them the most? So what do I do if my conviction offends someone? I choose to construct. And then Paul goes on to take it even further because sometimes this issue, it's not just about general building up or edification. Sometimes someone else's conscience is actually involved. And that leads us to Paul's second point. Look at verses 25 to 30. Paul goes on to say, eat whatever is sold in the meat market.18:55without raising any question on the ground of conscience. For the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof. You can pause there. Paul maintains a very high view of God's creation. Paul's actually quoting King David here from Psalm 24 and he's telling us, listen, this is similar to back in chapter 6. He says, meat is just meat. The earth, all of this, it belongs to the Lord. An idol, it's nothing. Food itself is morally neutral.19:24So Paul tells strong believers, stop turning everything into a theological investigation. Go buy the meat. Eat dinner. Don't interrogate the butcher. You do not need to walk into the meat market saying, excuse me, before I purchase this ribeye, I need a full spiritual background on this cow, please. No. Relax. That is not Paul's point at all.19:54He says, enjoy the meat, enjoy God's provision without unnecessary anxiety.20:00And He goes on to say, if one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience.20:14He says, if you want to go to the unbeliever's house and have dinner, if you think it's a worthwhile time, if you think it's going to be good, it's a good opportunity, then go and eat.20:24And don't worry.20:26He says, without raising any question on the ground of conscience.20:33Concede your conscience on this non-essential and non-sin issue and go.20:42But then the situation changes somewhat.20:45Verse 28, look at that.20:46It says, But if someone says to you, This has been offered in sacrifice, then do not eat it.20:56So now there's an informant at the dinner table.20:59A believer sitting next to you who says, he points out that this meat, it's been sacrificed to idols.21:04It's tainted, right?21:07He says, now someone's conscience, now someone else's conscience is involved in this scenario.21:12And now the issue is no longer about the meat.21:15It's now about the person.21:19Paul then says, stop eating.21:22Stop.21:23For the sake of the one who informed you and for the sake of their conscience. Not yours, but their conscience. Not because the meat is suddenly bad. Not because the conscience of another person is at stake. This is where we Christians get it wrong so often. We think the goal is to prove, that we have to prove that we are theologically on this non-essential issue. That we think we have to convince the weaker brother that we are totally right on this issue. And if we don't, then we've done something wrong. But Paul says the goal is to protect the person. For the weaker brother, eating that meat would have been a violation of his conscience. Even if the act is objectively fine, which Paul has already told us, it is.22:22If he believes it's wrong, but does it anyway, he's training himself to disobey what he believes God wants him to do. It's kind of like what Paul says in his letter to the Romans in chapter 14 where he says, But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. The issue isn't just about the external act.22:52of eating.22:53It's about the intent of the heart on these negotiable issues.22:57These negotiable convictions.22:59If this guy were to go ahead and eat the meat.23:01And go against his conscience.23:04His conscience guided conviction.23:07He would actually be sinning.23:10Because as it says in Romans.23:11This man's faith.23:12Or in that context.23:14Faith means a conviction or an assurance.23:17His assurance is that eating the meat does not honor God.23:21So would he be honoring the Lord? And Paul says to concede. To yield. Not because your theology has changed. Not because your conviction has disappeared. But because the love of your brother matters more than proving your point. So we have to concede for the conscience. That's our second point. Concede for the conscience.23:52So to drive this home a little bit, why don't we reverse the scenario a little bit and say, imagine the believer goes into the marketplace and he starts just making a total scene. He's flipping tables over. He's tossing meat away. He's tossing it on the ground stomping on. He says, this whole place is compromised. This meat, it's pagan. Everyone here is wrong. You're all going straight to hell.24:20None of us would ever do anything about a particular issue we feel strongly about on social media, right? But what does that accomplish? What would that accomplish in this scenario? Would that help to reach anyone? Or does it simply create noise and disagreement? So continuing on in Paul's scenario, imagine that you get invited to dinner by an unbeliever and you say, yeah, I'll come over. I'll come over.24:50But only if... Fill in the blank. I'm only going to come over if there's no alcohol there whatsoever. Or, you know what? I'm only going to come over if everyone agrees with my political... No MAGA hats, please. There's not going to be any MAGA hats, right? Or everybody's vaccinated, right? Everybody's had the COVID and the double and they're wearing the masks, right? You remember those days? Or I'm only going to come... You know what? You guys only read from the ESV version of the Bible, right?25:21Okay, good. And I'll come over then. Or, you know, there's no evolution or there's no old earth people at this dinner, right? We're all seven-day young earth people, right? I'll come over if your family does things my way. Is that building a bridge to the gospel? Is it building a wall, isn't it? And then continue on, right? Imagine that someone at the table, they're struggling with the conscience issue of, eating whatever's in front of them for whatever reason, instead of gently stepping back, the stronger believer, maybe you in this case, you actually launch into a theological debate. You are going to convince this guy why he is wrong about his conviction. Nobody gets helped in that scenario. In fact, the dinner becomes a courtroom scene, right? Everybody gets exhausted, and Paul says, stop trying.26:20to win all the arguments in the moment all the time. You've lost your focus when you're doing that. He says sometimes, or we can say that sometimes, that weaker brother's conscience, it's not an invitation for debate. Maybe it's a check engine light on our liberty or on what we think. The Holy Spirit might just be saying to you, you know what? In this instance, slow down. This is not about you. This is not about your rights anymore. This is about your witness.26:50of me.26:54So, is there a non-essential issue where you could maybe take a step back?26:58Not because you're weak.27:01Not because your convictions are wrong.27:04Maybe it's in your family.27:06Maybe it's in your small group.27:09Maybe it's in your workplace or with a newer believer or somebody you're trying to win for Christ.27:14If your conviction on a non-essential issue, on a non-salvation issue, is consistently resulting in people being pushed away or being hurt. Maybe your knowledge isn't the problem. Maybe it's your pride. Because sometimes the greatest display of spiritual maturity is not just standing your ground in a confrontational way. It's actually being willing to take a step back and concede to the conscience of someone else. Now I know, Again, because I know you, because I know myself. Some of you are out there saying, Brian, I cannot, I can't, I can't believe Jeff and Taylor are letting you stand up there and say this. I mean, I have strong convictions. Is Paul telling me to just take them all and just set them aside? Set them on fire over here? They're useless? Isn't that a violation of my own conscience? That's not what's being said here at all. Our convictions are important.28:18And do you really think Paul, a guy who has a fair amount of pretty strong convictions on issues like sex, marriage, gender roles, spiritual gifts, etc., do you really think he would tell us your personal convictions, they don't matter at all? No. And in fact, I would say that discussing your convictions with believers or non-believers in a non-confrontational way, it can be really helpful. That's where iron sharpening iron can come, right? You can help a believer with your convictions. But remember, like Jeff told us last week or two weeks ago, we should all be believers in legalism. But what kind? Personal legalism, right? We should be very strict on ourselves according to conviction from Scripture, but to have that be general legalism to everybody else, that's where we get in big trouble. And all of this, that leads us to Paul's final and biggest point.29:18Why do all of this? Paul goes on to ask a couple of questions. He says, For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced? Because of that for which I give thanks. In other words, why do this? Why lay down my rights? Why surrender preferences? Why choose people over liberty? Why choose to concede for the conscience? Is it so that people think we're nice?29:48Is it so they think that we're really winsome and non-argumentative and non-confrontational? We're just go along to get along people? Is it so we can fill every seat in this auditorium two Sundays a week? Is that why we do this? Let's see what Paul has to say. Go ahead and look at verse 31. Paul lands this entire argument when he says, So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all for the glory of God. Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God. Just try, just as I try, to please everyone in everything I do. Not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved. Be imitators of me as I am of Christ. This is the center of everything. Glory to God alone.30:43If you eat the meat, do it, give thanks, and go. If you abstain in order to protect your brother's conscience, do it to the glory of God alone. Not just in the big spiritual moments either, not just church and missions and all that, but in the mundane. The eating, the drinking, posting, talking, working, walking. Because every ordinary moment Paul is sharing with us can become an opportunity to put the character of God on display. And he is most with His people when we value Him and His family more than our own freedoms and our own right to express those convictions. So this is the how. How do we keep our conviction from becoming barriers? Or what do we do when our conviction offends someone? Our third point is that we celebrate our Creator. We celebrate our Creator.31:43We need to ask, does this make God look amazing and beautiful? Does this glorify Him and bring honor to Christ? We need to celebrate the Creator. Because if eating the meat, if it creates a scandal and confusion and makes your neighbor think that Christ is compromised, then it doesn't matter how correct your theology is, you are not glorifying God.32:12Verses 32 and 33 just shows us how broad this responsibility is. Paul says again, give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God. He's got all the bases covered there. Jews, they were people with religious history and pretty strong convictions. Greeks, people outside the faith who are watching Christianity and seeing what it looks like. And the church, fellow believers who have different and may have different maturity levels than we do. And Paul is saying, be a universal witness to them all. Don't put any unnecessary obstacles in front of them. I've got to pause one more time and say, I think I know what you're thinking. This is just not right. We can't be this way. I know those kinds of Christians. The ones that are so agreeable, so winsome that they stand for, nothing.33:15They're just a bunch of people-pleasing, gospel-compromising weaklings.33:21Guys, this is not, do not misunderstand Paul or me.33:25This is not about people-pleasing.33:28Because people-pleasing, what is it?33:30It's self-centered, right?33:31It's me controlling all your perceptions of me.33:34That's not what's going on here.33:35Paul is talking about being a person who is strategically on mission for Christ always.33:43He is saying, I will gladly set aside my negotiable preferences and hold my convictions personally at every opportunity I have if it removes barriers between someone and Jesus.33:56And that is radically different than a washed down or watered down, unoffensive gospel.34:01That is not what we're talking about here.34:04Paul says, he goes on to say, be imitators of me as I am of Christ.34:09And he's pointing us to Christ.34:10He wants us to celebrate Christ.34:12and to celebrate the Creator. There might be someone here this morning who doesn't usually come to church. Or maybe you've been to church a lot, but you know the truth in your heart is that you've never trusted Christ as your Savior. And maybe all of this hasn't really resonated with you for that reason. Well, this point, Paul's point here, our Creator, that's to you. It's to all of us. But I want to make sure that you tune in here. Because he says, look at Jesus. Jesus as God's Son, who was with Him from the creation of everything, had every right, every freedom, every authority, all power, and yet what did He do? He laid it down. Philippians says that Christ did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, But he emptied himself. Christ didn't cling to any of these divine rights, divine privileges that he had as the Son of God. Instead, he moved toward sacrifice. His entire earthly life was a steady march to sacrifice. Toward death on the cross so that he could overcome death and become the perfect substitute for spiritual death for all of those who choose to follow him.35:41And if that's not something you've done yet, if you haven't trusted Christ as your Savior, if you've never looked to Christ as your only refuge and strength, please talk to me. Talk to Jeff or Taylor or go to the prayer corner after church. We'd love to talk to you more about that. Because Paul says, look to Christ. And he says, watch me do the same. Paul says, I'm just a regular guy following Christ.36:10If I can lay down my rights for the sake of the gospel, then you can too. And honestly, that is where we probably need, I know I need sometimes, the strongest correction. Because so much of our culture and in our mindset, it sounds so often like Corinth, right? We say, I know an idol is nothing. I know Halloween is pagan. Democrats are evil. Republicans are selfish. Drinking is wrong. Drinking is right. Whatever. You fill it all in. Maybe sometimes we're right, but Paul is saying, hear me on this.36:40there's a better question. Do you know what your neighbor needs? Do you know what your neighbor needs? He needs Christ. That's the point. We say, I have all these freedoms. Yes. But you also have the power through Christ to abstain from freely expressing all of those convictions that you have all the time to everyone.37:10Or even better yet, perhaps, you have the power through Christ to be patient. To be patient with someone else, a weaker brother, to come to a better understanding of their faith. And to grow in their own convictions. So do you have the patience to allow the Holy Spirit to work in your brother's life in that moment? Or do you feel like you have to be the Holy Spirit in their life?37:40for them.37:43That is maturity.37:45Having that patience.37:48In the Corinthian way that Paul is pushing back against says, my goal is personal liberty.37:53I am free.37:54I am independent.37:56I am a Corinthian.37:58I'm an American.38:00The way of Christ says, my goal is to win people for Jesus.38:05The way of Christ is self-denial for the good of others.38:10The way of Christ says it is not about me. It's about Him. It's about people's eternal souls and the gospel and God's glory. Our worship team can make their way on up as I finish up. Because the Corinthian way, which is oftentimes our way, it produces pride and it produces division.38:40Christ's way produces humility and unity and brings glory to our Heavenly Father, but I've got to ask you this morning, which way will you choose? The Corinthian way or Christ's way? So what if my conviction offends someone? Choose to construct. Use your liberty to build people up and not demolish them.39:09What if my conviction offends someone? Concede for the conscience. Value the person more than proving your point. What if my conviction offends someone? Celebrate the Creator. Let your highest goal be the glory of God, not the defense of self. Let's pray. Heavenly Father, we thank you, God, for your word. We thank you that, God, that it answers all of our questions.39:39God, that it so clearly cuts into all of our circumstances. God, and we just, we think of this word from Paul this morning, and God, I pray that our hearts would be looking to our neighbor. God, that through the power of your Spirit, that we would be turned away from ourselves, from selfishness. God, and that we would look to the needs of those around us. God, that we would seek to build others up.40:09God, and that we would follow the leading of your Holy Spirit in those moments when we're wondering, do I say what I feel strongly about? Or do I hold back? Do I concede on this issue or do I push in? God, I pray that your Spirit would work strongly in each of our lives, God, and that we would hear Him. Lord, and most of all, I pray that our goal would be to bring you glory, to look to you in all things. To celebrate you as our Heavenly Father. And to look to Jesus as our one and only Savior. We love you and we're grateful for all you do for us. It's in Christ's name we pray. Amen. Small Group DiscussionRead 1 Corinthians 10:23-11:1What was your big take-away from this passage / message?In what area of life are you most tempted to defend your “rights” or personal convictions instead of asking, “Is this actually building others up?” What would it look like to choose construction over demolition there?Can you think of a time when someone's conscience, weakness, or spiritual maturity should have mattered more than proving your point? How did you handle it, and would you handle it differently now?Where is God calling you to “concede for the conscience” of someone else right now—maybe in your family, friendships, workplace, or at Harvest? Why is that so difficult for you?Paul says, “Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” How can you tell when your convictions are truly about God's glory versus when they are really about pride, preference, or control?BreakoutPray for one another.

Responding to questions from listeners about how to disagree in a church that chooses to sing Bethel, Elevation, and Hillsong; how to be a Calvinist in a church that hates Calvinism; and is Kinism biblical. To send us a voice mail, go to https://www.speakpipe.com/wwutt

In this candid monologue, Greg retraces his own path from campus-ministry apologetics at a liberal university into the tight, intellectually satisfying world of Calvinism—training in a Calvinist seminary, embracing TULIP, and finding real comfort in the doctrine of Total Depravity. He walks through what made that system feel so compelling at the time: its logical clarity, its honest reckoning with human sin, and its God-centered awe. But as he circled back to the medieval Catholic thinkers he'd first glimpsed years earlier, and then encountered the big, colorful, sacramental fullness of Catholicism, that earlier framework began to feel incomplete. Greg contrasts the Calvinist view of a totally corrupted human nature with the Catholic teaching—rooted in Scripture and two millennia of tradition—that original sin wounds us profoundly but does not destroy the image of God within us. The result is a far more hopeful vision of grace that heals, elevates, and invites real cooperation in the lifelong work of sanctification. SUPPORT THIS SHOW Considering Catholicism is 100% listener-supported. If this podcast has helped you on your journey, please become a patron today! For as little as $5/month you get: • Every regular episode ad-free and organized into topical playlists • Exclusive bonus content (extra Q&As, Deep-Dive courses, live streams, and more) • My deepest gratitude and a growing community of like-minded listeners ➡️ Join now: https://patreon.com/consideringcatholicism (or tap the Patreon link in your podcast app) One-time gift: Donate with PayPal! CONNECT WITH US • Website & contact form: https://consideringcatholicism.com • Email: consideringcatholicism@gmail.com • Leave a comment on Patreon (I read every one!) RATE & REVIEW If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating (and even better, a review) on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen — it really helps new listeners find us. SHARE THE SHOW Know someone who's curious about Catholicism? Send them a link or share an episode on social media. Thank you! Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat.

Send us Fan MailThis week was a family episode! Just Greg and the Dead Heads. Have you ever wondered what the biblical difference was between knowledge, understanding, wisdom, and discernment? Christians often use these words interchangeably, but the bible make a very clear distinction for each of these, although a common thread runs through them. Enjoy the episode! Are you a Christian company looking to partner with a low-cost, high-return service that shares like-minded principles? Then AdventDS is for you!Are you ready for your church conference? Contact Striving For Eternity HERE!Dominion Wealth: "All of Christ for all of life, All of Finance for Christen Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

Eleanor Janega joins PTO to talk about the Christian right and the role of Christian Zionist ideology in the minds of key figures in the Trump administration and the decision to launch the US-Israeli war on Iran. We chatted about why the religious beliefs of US policy makers are often under-discussed, whether it's conceivable that Donald Trump is undergoing some sort of religious turn under the influence of the various religious fanatics around him, and we talked about the different religious strains of Christian right-thinking that exist within the administration - from Calvinists to Catholic Integralists. And we also talked about Christian Zionism and how attitudes towards Israel, and the role designated to Jewish in the apocalyptic scenarios of the Christian right, has changed over time. And finally we touched the extraordinary spat between the administration and the Vatican and Pope Leo. Notes: Issue three of The Breakdown: https://www.break-down.org/tag/issue-03/ Launch event and party: https://luma.com/3r5t0jyf?tk=jXzIbb

What if the way we've been taught to read the Bible is actually creating the very divisions we see today? In this episode of Considering Catholicism, host Greg Smith shares his experience from classical Calvinist seminary training 40 years ago — investing in 22 volumes of Calvin's commentaries and the massive Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English lexicon because exegesis was required to stay within the guardrails of historic Christian interpretation. He then contrasts that with today's evangelical reality: small groups asking “What does this verse mean to you?”, pastors mixing and matching translations to fit their message, YouTube and social media teachers offering personal takes, and even AI being asked to interpret Scripture. The result is interpretive chaos. The same Bible produces wildly different — and often contradictory — doctrines on core issues. To drive the point home, Greg uses one viral seven-word sentence: “I never said you stole his money.” By simply stressing a different word each time, the meaning shifts dramatically — proving how easily even plain English can be misunderstood without context. If that happens with modern English, how much more caution do we need with ancient biblical texts? Greg examines real examples from John 6, James and Paul, baptism, the nature of the Church, and more — showing how sincere readers reach opposite conclusions from the same passages. He then explains the Catholic solution: Scripture must be read within the living apostolic Tradition and under the authoritative guidance of the Magisterium that Christ established to guard and interpret the deposit of faith. If you love the Bible but are weary of the endless disagreements and fragmentation, this episode offers a fresh and hopeful way forward. SUPPORT THIS SHOW Considering Catholicism is 100% listener-supported. If this podcast has helped you on your journey, please become a patron today! For as little as $5/month you get: • Every regular episode ad-free and organized into topical playlists • Exclusive bonus content (extra Q&As, Deep-Dive courses, live streams, and more) • My deepest gratitude and a growing community of like-minded listeners ➡️ Join now: https://patreon.com/consideringcatholicism (or tap the Patreon link in your podcast app) One-time gift: Donate with PayPal! CONNECT WITH US • Website & contact form: https://consideringcatholicism.com • Email: consideringcatholicism@gmail.com • Leave a comment on Patreon (I read every one!) RATE & REVIEW If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating (and even better, a review) on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen — it really helps new listeners find us. SHARE THE SHOW Know someone who's curious about Catholicism? Send them a link or share an episode on social media. Thank you! Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat.

4: Andrew Graham-Dixon Previews his biography of Johannes Vermeer, revealing how the artist's paintings reflect the hidden religious beliefs of persecuted movements while navigating the strict and often intolerant Calvinist-led social atmosphere of Holland's long history.1748 HOLLAND

Full Text of Readings Friday of the Third Week of Easter Lectionary: 277 The Saint of the day is Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen's Story If a poor man needed some clothing, Fidelis would often give the man the clothes right off his back. Complete generosity to others characterized this saint's life. Born in 1577, Mark Rey became a lawyer who constantly upheld the causes of the poor and oppressed people. Nicknamed “the poor man's lawyer,” Rey soon grew disgusted with the corruption and injustice he saw among his colleagues. He left his law career to become a priest, joining his brother George as a member of the Capuchin Order. Fidelis was his religious name. His wealth was divided between needy seminarians and the poor. As a follower of Saint Francis of Assisi, Fidelis continued his devotion to the weak and needy. During a severe epidemic in a city where he was guardian of a friary, Fidelis cared for and cured many sick soldiers. Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen was appointed head of a group of Capuchins sent to preach against the Calvinists and Zwinglians in Switzerland. Almost certain violence threatened. Those who observed the mission felt that success was more attributable to the prayer of Fidelis during the night than to his sermons and instructions. He was accused of opposing the peasants' national aspirations for independence from Austria. While he was preaching at Seewis, to which he had gone against the advice of his friends, a gun was fired at him, but he escaped unharmed. A Protestant offered to shelter Fidelis, but he declined, saying his life was in God's hands. On the road back, he was set upon by a group of armed men and killed. Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen was canonized in 1746. Fifteen years later he was recognized as a martyr. Reflection Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen's constant prayer was that he be kept completely faithful to God and not give in to any lukewarmness or apathy. He was often heard to exclaim, “Woe to me if I should prove myself but a halfhearted soldier in the service of my thorn-crowned Captain.” His prayer against apathy, and his concern for the poor and weak make him a saint whose example is valuable today. The modern Church is calling us to follow the example of “the poor man's lawyer” by sharing ourselves and our talents with those less fortunate and by working for justice in the world.Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with Justin Johnson. He is the Owner and President of High Calling Fitness. This episode was packed full of fitness information, myths, conspiracy theories that keep you lethargic and slow, and new breakthroughs that can help you get and stay in shape. If its finally time to get in shape, tone up, or start lifting real weight, Justin or one of his coaches can help! CLICK HERE to schedule a free consultation. Enjoy the episode! Are you a Christian company looking to partner with a low-cost, high-return service that shares like-minded principles? Then AdventDS is for you!Are you ready for your church conference? Contact Striving For Eternity HERE!Dominion Wealth: "All of Christ for all of life, All of Finance for Christen Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

Phil Bair is back to talk with Leighton Flowers about the most recent debate between Calvinist, James White, and Morman, Jacob Hanson.   Is the God of Calvinism reprehensible?    Get your copy of Dr. Flowers new children's book, LOVE CHOOSES, go here: https:// loom.ly/8I1BNFg   To get your copy of Dr. Flowers book, Drawn By Jesus, go here: https://a.co/d/6s767Ey   To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: https://soteriology101.com/support/   Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter   Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/   DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: https://play.google.com/store/apps/de... LINK FOR APPLE: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/soterio...   Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software development needs! Show them some love for their support of Soteriology101!!!   To ORDER Dr. Flowers Curriculum "Tiptoeing Through Tulip," please click here: https://soteriology101.com/shop/   To listen to the audio only, be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, or one of the other podcast players found here: https://soteriology101.com/home/   For more about Traditionalism (or Provisionism), please visit www.soteriology101.com   Dr. Flowers' book, "The Potter's Promise," can be found here: https://a.co/d/iLKpahj   Dr. Flowers' book, "God's Provision for All" can be found here: https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Provision...   To engage with other believers cordially join our Facebook group: https://m.facebook.com/groups/1806702...   For updates and news, follow us at:  www.facebook/Soteriology101   Or @soteriology101 on Twitter   Please SHARE on Facebook and Twitter and help spread the word!   To learn more about other ministries and teachings from Dr. Flowers, go here: https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22...   To become a Patreon supporter or make a one-time donation: https://soteriology101.com/support/   #LeightonFlowers #Calvinism #Theology

Dr. Bing explains Free Grace theology: salvation is God's free gift received by simple faith, distinguished from views that add works, sacraments, or lifelong proof to be saved. He contrasts Free Grace with Arminian and Calvinist perspectives, emphasizes assurance of salvation, and separates justification (A-truth) from sanctification and discipleship (B-truth). This can be found at our website, gracelife.org.

Send us Fan MailThis week Greg sat down with Nick Speweik and Isaac Miklovic, hosts of the Fellow Heirs podcast. They talked testimony, podcasting, challenges for young men, and some conspiracy theory. It was a fun episode. Enjoy! Get 10% off your bible rebind with Deus Vult Rebinding with the code "DEADMANWALKING" at checkout!My favorite coffee and now yours! Get your mystery gift from Squirrelly Joes Coffee by clicking here! Covenant Real Estate: "Confidence from Contract to Close" Facebook: Dead Men Walking PodcastYoutube: Dead Men Walking PodcastInstagram: @DeadMenWalkingPodcastTwitter X: @RealDMWPodcastExclusive Content: PubTV App

"God will provide" is a comfort when you're facing uncertainty. A reminder that you're not in control, that God is sovereign, and faithful. There's a common misstep when Christians use "God will provide" to justify inaction. But that's not faith. There's a big difference between faith and abdication.

By David Chornomaz - This message examines the doctrine of predestination and contrasts the Calvinist view with the broader biblical teaching on salvation. While Scripture speaks of God's purpose being established before the foundation of the world, it does not teach that individuals are predestined to salvation or

Journalist Jasper Nathaniel joins us to talk about both Christian and Jewish variants of Zionism, Israel's expansion into Lebanon, the ongoing U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, and finally the recent pogroms of Palestinians in the West Bank FACT CHECK: Billy Graham was not a Calvinist, and was actually a Southern Baptist Support Jasper here: www.infinitejaz.com And support us here: www.patreon.com/trillbillyworkersparty