In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse dive deep into Matthew 21:33-46, examining Jesus's parable of the wicked tenants. The hosts unpack how Christ masterfully draws the Pharisees into pronouncing their own condemnation, revealing not merely theological error but intentional usurpation of God's authority. Through careful exegesis, they explore the shocking setup of the parable—where the landowner does all the work while the tenants contribute nothing—and how this mirrors God's sovereign initiative in salvation. The discussion touches on confession, the value of full-time ministry, and the scandal of rejecting the Messiah despite recognizing His authority. This episode challenges listeners to examine whether they, like the Pharisees, attempt to claim God's work as their own.
The concentration of action verbs attributed solely to the landowner in Matthew 21:33 is theologically significant. The landowner plants, builds, digs, and rents—creating a fully functional, productive vineyard before the tenants ever arrive. This arrangement differs radically from typical first-century agricultural practices, where tenants would lease raw land and develop it themselves, sharing profits with the landowner. Jesus deliberately presents an extraordinary scenario where the tenants receive everything prepared and ready, requiring only stewardship of what already exists. This parallels God's sovereign initiative in election and salvation: believers contribute nothing to their standing before God, receiving instead a fully accomplished redemption. The Pharisees' rebellion wasn't against burdensome requirements but against simply acknowledging God's rightful ownership of what He alone created.
The hosts challenge the common sympathetic reading of the Pharisees as well-intentioned legalists who simply got sidetracked. Instead, verse 38 reveals the tenants explicitly recognize the son as heir and plot to murder him to "seize his inheritance." This isn't accidental rejection but calculated rebellion. The Pharisees weren't confused about Jesus's identity or authority—they understood precisely who He claimed to be and deliberately chose to destroy Him rather than submit. This interpretation carries significant weight for understanding the nature of unbelief: it's not primarily intellectual confusion but volitional rebellion. The religious leaders didn't need more evidence or clearer teaching; they needed transformed hearts. This same dynamic appears whenever humans recognize divine truth yet choose self-sovereignty over submission to God's rightful claim on their lives.
The parable begins with a scandalous premise that would have startled Jesus's original audience. Unlike normal tenant farming arrangements where landowners simply provided land in exchange for a share of whatever the tenants produced through their own labor, this landowner invests everything. He doesn't just own the property—he plants the vineyard, constructs the protective wall, digs the wine press for production, and builds the watchtower for defense. The tenants receive a turnkey operation requiring minimal effort. This extravagant preparation mirrors God's unmerited favor toward Israel and, by extension, the church. God didn't merely create humanity and wait to see what we would produce; He established covenants, sent prophets, preserved His Word, and ultimately sent His Son—all before requiring any response. The only "payment" demanded is acknowledging His ownership of what He created. The parable thus exposes the absurdity and ingratitude of claiming God's work as our own achievement.
God does all the verbs. All of the verbs are done by the landowner. There is nothing expected of these tenants—they really add nothing to the landowner's land.
Christ is not painting the Pharisees as well-intentioned but ultimately wrong. He's painting them as usurpers who recognize the proper authority and rather than submitting to it, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own.
Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man's duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (Westminster Confession 15.5)
Welcome to episode 491 of the Reformed Brotherhood.
I'm Jesse.
[00:01:12] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.
[00:01:17] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.
[00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picture this, Tony, your landlord. You've built the perfect vineyard. We're talking wall watchtower, wine, press, the works like what everybody says. Everybody knows you need all those things. You've got it all set up, and then you hand the keys to some tenants.
You take a long trip, you go enjoy yourself. And when the harvest rolls around, you send your servants to collect the rent. And shockingly, your tenants, they beat. Stone. Another, the kill a third. So naturally you think, you know what? I'll fix this. Lemme just send more people. That's obviously the problem.
There's some kind of just profound misunderstanding about what's going on here and about our relationship in this business. And then when that doesn't work, you send your son now loved ones. If this were a business strategy, we would already be calling hr. But of course it's not a business strategy, it's a parable.
And Jesus is telling it to the very people about to prove the parable true. So welcome back to the Reformed Brotherhood because we're in Matthew Chapter 21 and we're gonna be actually getting all the way into the parable of the Vine growers where the patience of God looks, I would say, to almost anybody else, to humanize at least almost reckless until you realize that's exactly the point.
So yeah, grab your beverage of choice, grab your Bible, pull the car over, will you? Because this is gonna get real and we're going to reason together. But before we do all of that, let's do a little affirming with or denying against, what do you got?
[00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: So this is a sort of inside baseball, uh, affirmation. Um, I'm not sharing anything, although it may feel like I'm sharing something that is private and like, uh, like confidential.
It's not No, this is good. Um, so I had the opportunity to visit. Um, my presbytery, um, for those who are listeners of the show or people who like, have been with us a long time, um, I was part of a Baptist church. Uh, I've always kind of been a Presbyterian at heart, but, um, our church closed, uh, a little over a year and a half ago now.
And, um, uh, I've joined an OPC congregation in membership now. We've been members there for about a year. And, um, so I've been visiting Presbytery, which is the, the meeting of all of the leadership of all of the churches. So we won't do a polity breakdown here, but basically like, it's, it's the regional meeting.
It's the regional business meeting or church meeting for a group of churches in the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. And so a lot of the meetings, you know, have the normal kind of business type stuff. You have reports from different committee committees and stuff. Um.
[00:03:48] Tony Arsenal: Where this is affirmation is coming in here is at this most recent presbytery meeting, um, was pretty heavy on, um, licensing or, or, uh, not licensing on approving men who had received a call to formal ministry within the presbytery.
And so in the OPC, and I would imagine that other Presbyterian bodies are not like super different, although I'm sure there's some variation in the OPC. Um, when a church intends to extend a call to a pastor, to a teaching elder, um, to a minister, they must have the call, which is. Is both theological but is also eminently practical.
Like the call is a physical piece of paper that details, you know, what the pay is, how much vacation time. So it's kind of a combination between like a theological call and also a contract. Um, the presbytery has to approve that call. And so at this most recent one, there was a couple calls that were more or less uncontroversial.
There was no question about them, and they were approved pretty quickly. But there was one call, um, one call to ministry that took, I, I, I didn't time it, but it was probably like four or five hours of debate and discussion in various fashion in order to get to a point where the presbytery could approve the call.
So this was a call to a minister who is being called part-time, which is unusual in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, the OPC uh, acknowledges the fact that bivocational tent making ministry is sometimes a necessity, but really views the ministry of the word in sacrament as something that should not have.
Distractions. And actually our book of church order talks about, doesn't use the word distraction, I think, but it talks about a, a properly ordered call to a full-time minister includes phrasing that the congregation promises to compensate them in a way that allows them to be free of worldly burdens and cares.
And I might have not, not have gotten that wording exactly right. But that's the idea. And so this call was. Explicitly, um, not a full-time call it, they actually took the language out of promising to pay him in a way that he's able to ignore or to not be distracted by worldly care. And that was intentional, but there was a lot of question in discussion at presbytery level about the fact that the call did not include the phrase or the wording of part-time or bivocational.
So the conversation started out of like, can this call be modified to include that? So it's explicitly known in this man's call that his calling is part-time, which is both theological, to make sure that the call is properly formatted, but also like very practical that the congregation should acknowledge explicitly that they recognize that this person is not, not going to be putting, you know, 40 hours a week or 50 hours a week towards this position.
[00:06:34] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:06:34] Tony Arsenal: Um. What I'm affirming is where it got to, right? So there was lots of discussion about that. There was some finagling about the retirement package. The OPC recommends that a, a minister be given a retirement contribution of no less than 5% a year of his salaried package. Um, which there's a couple line items that go into that, but 5%, and this was a little bit less than that.
And this is what I'm affirming and this, I, I don't know that this is a super widespread thing that would happen all across the, um, the OPC, but it happened in the presbytery of New York and New England this past week, and it's just amazing. And I just, I just want to lay it out there and then I want to hear your reaction.
[00:07:13] Tony Arsenal: And I, I wanna hear your reaction as the son of a minister who labored his entire adult, more or less, his entire adult career in ministry, working two or three additional jobs on top of his ministry, the presbytery decided. That because it did not like the idea of a part-time minister. They didn't think that was appropriate.
They didn't think that that was good or that that was really the right goal. The presbytery allocated, I'm not gonna say the figures 'cause they're not super germane, but allocated a significant amount of money to be dis to be dispersed to the church for the next three years in order to take what was a part-time call and enable it to become a full-time call.
[00:07:54] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.
[00:07:54] Tony Arsenal: And so there are a lot of, there are a lot of church bodies that would say, yeah, we don't love the idea of bi-vocational ministry. You know, we really think it's ideal that a minister could be full-time. Um, they may even put some, some theological freight behind that. Um, I have never encountered a body, um.
That was willing to put a sizable amount of money towards essentially supplementing a part-time call to make it full-time. Um, this was just amazing to me, and the candidate was there. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I would love to talk to him about what he felt. I, I can just imagine the phone call to his wife who was not, not at presbytery, but to his wife, following the outcome of this to be like, you are never gonna believe what just happened.
Right? This is a family who was intending to move across country. Right. He's currently a student at Westminster, California in seminary, uh, California, Westminster Seminary in California, finishing his M Div. They're planning a cross country move into a part-time position where she's probably gonna have to find a job, and then also he's gonna have to find a part-time job.
He had the ability to call her on the break and be like, you're never gonna guess what just happened? You're never gonna,
[00:09:09] Jesse Schwamb: it's wild.
[00:09:09] Tony Arsenal: Uh, sorry, I'm getting a little emotional here. You're never going to. Believe how faithful God is in this. Right. So I'm interested to hear your reaction to that as the son of a, of a try and quad at times Quad vocational.
Yeah,
[00:09:23] Jesse Schwamb: for sure.
[00:09:23] Tony Arsenal: Minister who labored his entire, more or less, his entire adult career, um, working full-time in a call as a part-time, part-time minister. You know, like that's a, that's a crazy situation. So I'm just affirming that again, I don't know how common that kind of thing is in the OPC. I don't wanna make it seem like that's the norm.
Um, I actually get the sense that this is probably not the norm, but it was amazing to see and it made me in intensely like. Proud in the right way of being a part of this broader body that would, would so emphasize and so value the ministry of the word and the sacrament, and the importance of a man being able to dedicate himself to that without distraction.
That they would put forward this amount of money and this kind of money. They had no reason to do so. And there's no real direct benefit to the presbytery for doing this. I mean, there's an indirect benefit of like not having a church with a part-time minister, but like there's no direct benefit to this.
There's no direct return on investments that's gonna come out of this. Um, it was pretty amazing to see. It was, it was, it was super encouraging.
[00:10:28] Jesse Schwamb: That is really encouraging. I, I think it's, there's no doubt that for the called pastor, their heart is in the ministry of the word. That's what they want to be doing.
They wanna be doing it all the time and as much time as they possibly can, and they wanna be able to have all of their intentional focus on it. So I. I'm excited for that guy. I mean, that's just an incredible blessing to go in hoping for funding, essentially for a part-time role and to basically be told, no, no, no, no, that's, that's not enough.
We want you to be committed to this fully as we know your heart is committed. As we validated that call.
[00:11:00] Jesse Schwamb: I do love being a part of churches, well, lemme say it this way. There is, I think, a benefit of being part of congregations that have like a wide resource network that has like appropriate hierarchy and structure and that can be one of them.
I've seen something similar in the Christian Missionary Alliance, which is the church that I'm in, not exactly the same, but I've seen some surprising allocations of resources where they basically said, you know, this is important. Like, it even trumps we're, we're gonna. Allocate or resource something so that this can move forward because it is important in a way that was like better than the person who was bringing it before them could have hoped for.
Yeah. And uh, suddenly it's as if everything aligned. And it was really in part because there was this structure to come alongside, to validate as you're saying, and then to authenticate and then again to resource assets that could be used. There's, there's something to be said for that interdependency where there is kind of this hierarchical structure in which all that's happening at a level where things are codified.
And again, like there's a structure and a way in which we move through those decisions to make sure that they suit the objective of the entire movement. So I guess there's nothing I'll say, but that's a beautiful thing, isn't it?
[00:12:14] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: It was, it was, it was cool because it was like this, it was like this real.
Actualization of the principle of outdoing one another and showing honor. Yeah, sure. Because you know, like the initial debate was like, Hey, you know, I'm not sure we can approve this call because the, the OPCs guidelines tell us not to approve a call that has less than 5% of the retirement benefit. And there was a lot of discussion of like, well, the presbytery can't modify the call, but we don't wanna delay this guy coming in and like, we don't wanna delay his ordination, his installation.
And so the initial proposal was a, a. What feels like a large amount of money to me. But after I understood more about the, the budget of what's going on in, in the presbytery was actually a very small amount of money. Started with a very tiny, very modest proposal of basically like supplementing the retirement fund to make sure that like we could, they, I say we, like, I was part of this, I was just observing, but to supplement the retirement fund in a way that allowed the church to still proceed with the call as written, but still also make sure that this person had the appropriate retirement fund.
And then that just basically was like, there would be some instruction given to the church that like, you've gotta bump this up in the next budget cycle. Like you've gotta get to the 5%. That's, that's the expectation. It went from that. And like I said, I won't give you the specific numbers, but one of the presbyters and I, I'm, I, um, I, I've known this presbyter from a distance for quite a long time and, and I have an immense amount of respect for him.
He stood up and he's like, well, if we're gonna give X, why don't we just give 10 times X instead? And then actually, like the discussion was like, well, is, are we sure that 10 times X is even the right amount? Why don't we have this particular group meet over the lunch break and figure out whether that's the right number and then come back after lunch and we'll vote on it.
And then they came back after lunch and it was actually a number that was even greater than 10 times X. So it was like this exercise in like. This very small proposal that was still imminently generous, right? The presbytery has no obligation to do this. There's no obligation from any of the presbyters to stand up and say like, we should.
We should supplement this fund. They would've been well within their right, and no one would've looked, I think. I think some people would've been frustrated by it, but I don't think anyone would've looked sideways at it or thought it was sinful. If the presbytery just said like, we can't approve this call.
You guys are gonna have to come back with it and we'll vote on it at the next presbytery. Like that would've been problematic. This, this kind of poor guy who's coming outta seminary, his call and his beginning of employment would've been delayed, but like. That would've been good and orderly, but instead they were like, one, we don't want this pulpit to stay empty longer.
We don't wanna disadvantage this guy who's just getting done with seminary. We want him to get started. We don't wanna discourage him. So here's a small proposal, a very modest amount of money that we can put forward for this purpose. And then it was like, let's just keep seeing how much closer to a real full-time call we can get.
And they finally came back and said like, we're gonna do this. We're gonna do this in a wise fashion. They structured it. So like the first year he gets more, the second year he gets a little bit less. The third year the church gets a little bit less with the idea that like each year the church should be adjusting their budget to compensate and get this guy to that with the, the hope that like with a full-time minister, they're able to grow their congregation to the point where they can support a full-time minister.
So it was just this really cool, super encouraging exercise. And what I loved about it is the only real debate that was going on was about do we need to do more? There was no one being like, wait a second, why are we, why are we putting more money to this? The whole thing was like, is this actually enough to accomplish what we think God wants to do with this person's call?
Because if, if God is truly calling this man to this, this particular church, and we believe that he is. Then what do we as a, as a people of God need to do to enable that call to look like what we actually believe calls to ministry are supposed to look like, which is a full-time call to ministry that is undistracted by the cares of the world.
What do we need to do? The answer in this case was like, I think we need to put a sizable amount of money to it. Um, it's a, I mean, and again. I'm not gonna say it on the air. It was not a small chunk of change. Um, it was, it was a, it was a large amount of money that was devoted to this cause and that just goes to show how much this body values the importance of a full-time minister of the word, so.
[00:16:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:16:51] Tony Arsenal: That's enough about that. I, I could gush about how proud I am to be a part of this body and how encouraged I am and how amazing it was and how awesome this, this guy, how, how much this guy must be thanking God for the providence and like, this is the last thing. I'll say this, this young man younger than me, I think he's graduating seminary.
I saw him across the room. He looks like he's probably in his mid twenties, right? Young guy. He's got a wife doesn't have kids yet coming into this ministry, not only is he coming into this ministry, but as a Presbyterian minister, when he's installed as the minister of this church. He will be joining this body of presbyters as the, as his brothers like.
He is not a member of the local church. He's a member of the presbytery, which is the regional church. So now he's coming into this fully supported by his brothers in the presbytery that he saw go to the mat to make sure he was properly taken care of, that the congregation was not unintentionally taking advantage of his labor, but also that he knows that all of these men are willing to do what they need to do to make sure that his ministry is successful and edifies the church like that is.
Uh, I don't want to gush on Presbyterianism too much, but like that is Presbyterianism at peak form, right? This is the body of elders making sure that every church in the region, even the ones they're not directly ministering in, has what it needs to succeed and to honor God and to do what needs to happen.
So I'm affirming the presbytery of New York and New England and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, I have been so blessed by knowing many of these presbyters. I've been so blessed by being a part of the congregation that I am. There are lots of really great churches and really great denominations out there.
If you are looking for a church and there is an OPC congregation in your area, absolutely go check it out. I know it feels stuffy sometimes, and I will admit, like sometimes it feels a little bit overly traditional in terms of like just the vibe of the congregation,
[00:18:52] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:18:52] Tony Arsenal: But press past that because I don't think, I don't think you will find, um.
You may find lots of congregations that are as faithful. I don't think you're gonna find many that are more faithful than your average OPC congregation. So I could be wrong. I just, I just love the OPC. I just really, really love it. So that's my affirmation. What do you got for us, Jesse?
[00:19:18] Jesse Schwamb: I think I got denial, which is maybe a little bit unusual for me.
[00:19:21] Tony Arsenal: As long as you're not denying the OPCI think we're fine.
[00:19:23] Jesse Schwamb: No, it's, it's not, it is church related and I, I'll try to keep it short 'cause I think I can make this way longer than it, it probably should be, but lemme think how to phrase this. So, I don't know with a devil negative, I guess when I'm a denying against is maybe not enough confession by your own standard.
So the, I'm gonna try to make this so brief. I, I just happened to be out with my wife this afternoon and we had to run errands. We got stuck in traffic and this gave me longer than usual to sit in front of our. Very local and very large Catholic church. So I happen to be looking at their sign. It's a very large congregation.
I've been actually been in this one on a couple of occasions for funerals. So not only do I know its size and scope, but again, if you get, if you get on this road at the wrong time on the Lord's day, you're gonna be stuck for a long time because there are so many people that attend. I say that because I noticed on the sign that there were three times for mass on the Lord's Day.
So that also says something about the number of people coming through. And then on the sign though, underneath it said for confessions, go to our website. Mm-hmm. So I was like, man, I gotta lick this up because I can't tell if they're telling me I can confess on the website or if it's go to the website for the times.
And I said to my wife, only half jokingly, if I can confess online, I'm gonna confess something. So I went to, I went to the website and, and sure enough it was almost disappointingly. It was just the times.
[00:20:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:20:46] Jesse Schwamb: Here's what I've found interesting, which just launched me into this like deep rabbit hole.
There were three times for confession. Two of those times were just a half an hour, and the third time was an hour. So, uh, what I did was I went through, actually, I think what they had on there was, was three full hours a week. It was a little bit confusing, but I think it was three full hours. Now I think about it.
So I went back, I just couldn't help myself, Tony. So I started to think, alright, let's say. I think it's fair to assume
[00:21:15] Tony Arsenal: math, Jesse is kicking in right now. Yes. You're gonna calculate how many minutes per, per person is what you're doing. I'm thinking, ah,
[00:21:22] Jesse Schwamb: yeah, it's something like that. So what I thought was, I don't think it's, uh, I was gonna be conservative.
I wanna be fair. I wanna be fair. So, and now we should say like, I think most people realize that the Catholic understanding of confession and the Protestant one is, is very different. The Catholic sacrament of confession is the right through which Catholics are gonna confess their sins to a priest receive absolution, and it's gonna restore the relationship with God in the church.
And, and they're gonna believe that the priest acts as a person of Christ and is bound by the seal of confession and an absolute kind of obligation. Uh, of course never to reveal what was disclosed during that process. So, by the way, the website that I went to, lovely instructions. I mean, I was like, wow. I was reading it to my wife who was, uh, not familiar with this at all, and she was like, they can make you do stuff.
And I was like, well, yeah. I mean, obviously like there's, there's a portion of this where there's contrition or penant penance. It could be a prayer, it could be act of charity, like all kinds of stuff. So I went back and I thought. I don't think it's unreasonable that there's 350 persons that would say, let's say an average, uh, that would wanna take part of confession.
Now, let's say that they did that at, at least monthly, just once a month. And, and I don't know how people's conviction is on that, but I'm gonna say conservatively once a month. Let's say that, and I don't think this is unreasonable, Tony, but you tell me. Let's say you're, you're trucking, you're moving through confession.
Let's say it's five minutes a piece. So we're up to 1,750 minutes, uh, per month. That's the demand on the priest because I was, I was looking at this time and I was thinking something is strange here to me, so. That was the demand then, and I'll spare you the other math, which could be very long and un uninteresting.
I'm coming up with, you'd need 2.24, two and a quarter priests, which of course you can't have a quarter priests or a quarter person for any reason. So you'd hire, you'd hire three priests, which satisfy the demand if, and the major assumptions here, that is like everybody can't show up at the same time.
Obviously, I'm assuming that like everybody has their own time, they're spreading it out. So everybody gets the confession, but it's just five minutes. And I, I have no idea. I mean, if you're a Luther, that's certainly not sufficient time.
[00:23:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:23:20] Jesse Schwamb: And you would need three priests. Now here's the thing that I just kind of backed into that, besides like three being like, okay, that, that's, you would need three priests just to satisfy this congregation.
If they're confessing for five minutes, once per month. Uh, by the way, if you said, well, half the congregation is going to go weekly, uh, then you, you would double the number of priests you need to 5.98 or six. But here's, here's the bottom line for me. This is why the denial comes in about maybe not enough, is.
If you were just to distill that down to like, if you could have one priest cover that time, that there's a demand for like 779.4 hours, or excuse me, minutes of confession, that priest would only be allocating approximately like seven and a half percent of their working hours, their work toward handling confession.
This seems like not enough confession given the standards of confession in the Catholic church. And again, I know that I'm, I'm now allocating that to one priest and I just told everybody you need three. That's true. So if you had these three now, if you hired three just to meet the demand, that would only be about like three and a half or a little under three and a half percent of their combined time.
So the denial is Catholics, I think, unless I'm way off in some of my assumptions here, you might not be confessing enough by your own standards because
[00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, that seems like not enough time.
[00:24:38] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:24:39] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think, um. I don't want to be too bombastic here, but I think,
[00:24:46] Jesse Schwamb: I think I already started this on this
[00:24:48] Tony Arsenal: path.
Maybe this, maybe this isn't all that bombastic. Um, because this is so much about ritual and actually I say this is gonna sound really, we, we go, but trying to think from the Roman Catholic perspective, it's actually not, and I'll I'll tell you a brief story, uh, to explain it. Um, a lot of Roman Catholics are just going through the motions.
[00:25:13] Jesse Schwamb: That's true.
[00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: But the point, the, the, the point of contention actually is that going through the motions is valuable for the Roman Catholic, right? So I, I knew this, uh, this young woman when I was in college who was a Roman Catholic, and we had many discussions about, about the differences between Protestantism and and Roman Catholicism.
And what I came to understand is that going to mass for her. Itself was an act of faith. And so for the Roman Catholic, the concept of, of faith is different than the concept that Protestants operate under. So for the Roman Catholic who, um, goes to mass, even when they feel like they're, like, when they think they're just going through the motions, going through the motions is itself the act of faith.
And that's because for most of Roman Catholics, most of Roman Catholicism, faith really equals faithfulness, right? So, so doing the act is the act of faithfulness. Doing the act is faith. Where for the Protestant, like faith is about belief and trust and knowledge. Like it's, it's an. Not entirely intellectual, but it's, it's an inward thing for the Roman Catholic faith is an out is primarily an outward thing.
It's what you do, it's how you act. It's faith formed in love. It's faith formed in charity.
[00:26:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:26:37] Tony Arsenal: So I think most Roman Catholics going to obligatory confession first. I think once a month is probably like, probably more frequent than most Roman Catholics go to mass or go to confession. Um, I thought I read a stat that it was like every six months is, is pretty average and I think that's what's required by the church maybe even once a year is, is required by the church.
Um, I think like most Roman Catholics go into the, the confessional booth and like father forgive me for I've sinned. It's been such and such a number of days since my last confession. Right. And they may bring up a couple particular things that they've done and, and then I think the priest commonly absolves them of all of their sins.
Like, almost like in an omnibus fashion and then prescribes their acts of penance, which is it, it like, honestly, it's probably things they should already be doing as a faithful Catholic saying Hail Marys and doing our fathers and acts of charity and things like that. So I think your math is probably right.
[00:27:39] Tony Arsenal: I think your, your theory that more confession is probably like, I'm gonna read this from, uh, the Westminster confession, just to, just to say it here, is, this is chapter 15, which is titled of Repentance Under Life. And this is, uh, this is section five or paragraph five. It says, men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but is every man's duty to endeavor, to repent of his particular sins, particularly.
And I think that's just such a beautifully phrased sentence like. Not only is it like potent theologically, but like, it just, it just feels good, like in terms of like the English language to repent of your particular sins, particularly. And like the idea is yes, Protestant reform, Christians affirm a general repentance from sin, right?
We repent of our sin before the father, uh, as a result of our, of our coming to faith in Christ. And as part of our sanctification, we mortify our sin and we, Viv we are vivified by the spirit and repentance falls in that ongoing sanctification process. And there is this general repentance of like, I repent of the fact that I'm a sinner and that I commit sins, but there is this element in the reformed faith of like, I should be confessing to God.
And I think by extension, like we should be confessing to our fellow Christians, our particular sins, our individual sins, and we should be doing that on particular occasion. And I think like. The Luther style confession of like going into the confessor and confessing like every particular sin.
Particularly I think most Roman Catholic priests would, priests. Priests would probably have the same reaction Tobits did where he was like, get outta here. Like, come on dude. Like just go live your life and like deal with it. I think that's probably the reaction most Catholic priests would have. But yeah, I think you're right.
Like if we're really talking about like. Five, five minutes of confession once a month and that somehow having some sort of spiritual efficacy. I'm not sure I buy that math. Like I think you're, you're probably spot on.
[00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: I just was curious about how many priests would be required and then the allocation of the duties.
By the way, you are right. So I, because I had to check on this, the, the fourth letter in council of 1215 does say that the church requires confession of any grave or mortal sins at least once a year. But the church, yeah, strongly encourages more frequent confession as a spiritual practice, even for, of course, like the venial or the less serious sins in their eyes.
So yeah, my thought here was just that. I think it's actually undervalued by way of the math. Like the, as the kids say, the math just isn't math thing for me on this one. But I was more curious about, since this is one of the seven sacraments, even if you just said like, well, it should have at least one seven of the allocation.
That's like, what? Like something like 14%. And so this is, um, almost half of that. I just found it a little bit, a little bit odd and yeah, I think you'd have to be, uh, so in other words, when I looked at the, basically, here's the bottom line. When I looked at the hours for confession one, there were weird times and uh, two, I was like, that doesn't seem like enough hours.
Like, it was just more like that. Like how that's like saying like, Hey, the post office is open three hours a week, and by the way, one of those hours is from seven to eight o'clock on Friday. Like they had some hours. One hour just on Friday was like, I guess that's the way you wanna start your weekend is like, let's get all of this off my chest.
Yeah. And, and do it. Right. And the last thing I'll say by the way, is you're correct. When you look at the instruction they give you, and this is common of course, toward the end, when they say like, here's how you like wrap up your part. Actually everybody should go read, go to the local, local Catholic church website and read the instructions.
'cause in some ways they're just interesting and kind of, um, I don't wanna say funny 'cause I'm not making fun. I'm just saying like, they have to give you instruction if you've never done it before. And so most of us are not really probably familiar with the process and they give you explicit instruction and toward the end it's like, here's how you kinda like hang up the call with the priest.
And it's like you said, you know, these are my sins and all others, would you be willing to forgive? So you're right. Right. They just kinda wrap them all up because it's sins of omission, sense of commission, it's all to be together. But I, I wonder, you gotta think there's people in there that are like. The priests are like, okay, man, just yeah.
Wrap, come on, wrap, wrap it up.
[00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: And other people that come in are just like, you know, forgive me father. And uh, lastly to your point, when they give you instruction about how you should start, of course you're always to signify how long it's been since your last confession. Right. Confession. And they say parenthetically, like, reference the days, weeks, months, or years.
So you're right. There are gonna be people that probably do it very frequently and probably people who do it infrequently still, I would say I just couldn't believe for a church this large, that there was just three hours a week.
[00:32:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:32:21] Jesse Schwamb: For everybody else.
[00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:32:23] Tony Arsenal: This leads me to two very brief sub, uh, denials slash affirmations.
Uh, I don't know if you saw this, um, this is not a political statement, right? I, I have lots of feelings and thoughts about the current administration and I think most of my feelings and thoughts would surprise. Everybody. But I thought it was hilarious because JD Vance, who is a Roman Catholic, uh, confessed Roman Catholic part of the Roman Catholic Church, uh, he ha I, I'm not sure if I'm affirming or denying this, there was this funny, uh, funny exchange.
I think he was at doing like a, doing like a TPU, I don't know, speech. He was doing a speech at some conservative event and he said something like, I think that the Pope should be more careful when he makes theological statements. I'm wanna be like, do you understand what the pope is in your religion?
That was one of my sub denials. Uh, I don't remember what the other one is, so it must not have been that important. It'll come back to me at the worst possible moment and I will try very hard not to interrupt our show for it, but I probably will fail.
[00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we, we gotta get to some scripture because.
We're, we're doing this old school style where we take like half the time and just talk about affirmations. It's true in house. It's true. Which is great fun. But let's, let's get back to Matthew 21. And I, I know we did this last time, but I am gonna rock through the passage 'cause of course, that's the best part of any of our discussion, is actually hearing from, from the Holy Spirit through the scripture, uh, which he's given to us.
So this is, uh, Matthew 21, starting in verse 33. And you're gonna hear the, the whole thing right here. Uh, this is Jesus speaking. Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard and put a wall around it and dug a wine press in it and built a tower and rented it out to vine growers and went on a journey.
Now, when the high risk time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit, and the vine growers took his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Again, he sent another group of slaves larger than the first, and they did the same thing to them. But afterward he sent his son to them saying they will respect my son.
But when the vine growers saw the sun, they said among themselves, this is the heir. Come let us kill him and seize his inheritance, and they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine growers? They said to him, he will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons.
Jesus said to them, did you ever read in the scriptures the stone, which the builders rejected? This has become the chief cornerstone. This came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it.
And he who falls in the stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust. And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that he was speaking about them. And although they were seeking to seize him, they feared the crowds because they're regarding him to be a prophet.
[00:35:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: This is like a super heavy parable. Right. And we talked a lot last week about how like the point of this parable is not necessarily to try to instruct the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Like it's not to instruct the people who were going to reject Christ, uh, the, the builders who would reject the cornerstone.
It's really a parable to teach those. Who are observing this process happening. But I think it's, I, I think it's really interesting just listening to you read this and reading through it, and I guess this is a question I haven't asked and I, I need to study a little bit more. It's crazy to me in verse 41, um, Christ seems the, the, the, um, Matthew seems to say here, and maybe I need to do a little bit more Greek study, so bear with me and, and have grace if I'm wrong here.
Matthew seems to say that like Christ asks the people he's speaking to, the Pharisees he's speaking to, what is he gonna do to these people? And the Pharisees answer, he's gonna put those wretches to a miserable death.
[00:36:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:36:37] Tony Arsenal: Like the people listening to this parable understand the outcome, like they understand the.
The consequence that the, the, the vineyard owner or the vineyard tenant tenants are facing based on their lack of faithfulness to the covenant. To me, that is like a really striking part of this parable. And, and it's not even like the parable proper, but like the striking element of the context of this is that nobody listening to this parable, including the Pharisees that this parable has basically spoken against, nobody fails to see the gravity of the consequence of rejecting God's emissary, like rejecting the Messiah.
That to me is like a really, I dunno, paradigmatic. Portion of this that I think we need to grapple with. This is not an unclear, an unclear outcome. This is not, this is not masked or vague or OPA opaque. Like everybody understands, the people who reject the Messiah are going to face dire and eternal consequences for that act.
[00:37:48] Jesse Schwamb: That does make this really interesting, doesn't it? Because it's not just entirely like Romans one adventures or even Romans two. It's that this is what Jesus does and he does it in a profound way that's not trickery like I think kinda like you're saying like the lead up to this isn't as if he's even leading the witness.
He's making it very clear, all like the parameters of the story and the characters involved and what should be the proper judgment. And it's not as if like they start saying, they're like, oh, we shouldn't say anything more like we, we plead the fifth because it's gonna condemn ourselves. He draws his audience in to producing and pronouncing like their own sentence.
It's very much like, I think I mentioned this last time, the prophet Nathan and David, isn't it? It's the exact same. Yeah. And the verdict is unanswerable, like even in its own terms. These other, like these other vine growers, prefigures of course like the inclusion of the Gentiles and the apostolic office.
But I like that what Jesus does here, even before he gets to that point, is he extorts from them an acknowledgement of the punishment which awaited them. And so in this way there's like, I think the Puritans use this passage a lot actually to demonstrate that the natural conscience even of like the unregenerate, still bears witness to divine justice.
That's Romans two. Like they, they can't get out from underneath it and Jesus isn't using any trickery on them to get them to say this thing. They are compelled in their own way, even being unregenerate to, like you said, even as they're rejecting the Messiah to recognize that punishment is due these characters in the story, even as they perceive at the end that they are those characters.
[00:39:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Saying we'll receive the judgment.
[00:39:24] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:39:25] Tony Arsenal: And I think too, like, um, this is kind of one of those chicken or the egg scenarios, right? Like Christ is both recognizing the intention of their heart as well as prophesying. And, and not just prophesying, but like inception level prophesying the, the outcome of the intention of their heart.
And so like, again, like we've, we spent a whole week kind of like leading into the parable and now we spent a whole week, we're gonna spend a whole week again kind of leading into the parable. This is such a deep parable, and that like Christ is not just laying bare. The fact that the, the people who were going to reject him were doing so out of this sort of like attempt and intention of usurping the kingdom of God for their own purposes.
I think that brings a layer to this that we don't often appreciate in. Christ's interaction with the Pharisees. I think sometimes, and maybe this is because I just listened to an episode of where Matt Whitman on the 10 minute Bible hour talked about this. I think sometimes we actually have a tendency to sort of be sympathetic to the Pharisees where we think, you know, they were, they were just trying to obey God's law and they got a little sideways on it and you know, they were putting these boundaries in place, but they were doing it in this sort of like misguided attempt to protect the people.
Christ actually here seems to contradict that in that the comparison he's making is not to a, a well-intentioned group of people who just get it wrong, but he's painting the Pharisees, the, the religious leaders, the Sadducees, the chief priests. He's painting them as these usurpers who recognize the proper authority of right.
The master and his emissaries and ultimately of his son, they recognize this proper authority and rather than submitting to it and submitting to the covenant obligations that they, they already actually agreed to, instead of doing that, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own right.
It's not just that they do the wrong thing, it's that they recognize the heir, which is Christ. They recognize this heir and they kill him to try to take his place. That is a really heavy element of this parable. Christ is not painting. Um, the, the, the Pharisees here, the, the religious leaders. He's not painting them as um, well-intentioned, but ultimately wrong, which is I think a lot of times, and I think there's reason to do this right.
I'm not being overly critical and I've done this, I've actually done this myself, and I think there's some. Space for it. Like the Pharisees were wrong, but they were wrong, kind of in the right direction sometimes. Um, Christ is not really on board with that, at least in this parable. Right. This isn't about them thinking that the heir was a threat, and so killing the threat in, you know, inadvertently this is them absolutely seeing who the hair, who the heir is, and intentionally deciding to reject that heir and to murder him and to try to take his inheritance.
Mm-hmm. That's an affront to not only the heir who they murder, but an affront to the owner of the vineyard himself, which of course in this parable is figured to be God the father primarily. But God in sort of general terms, like the whole Godhead, um, with Christ as the second Adam has, as his representative, as his heir.
This is a really heavy parable and I think where this comes into play for us in our own Christian life is. Are there times where we. Sort of do the same thing in refusing to, maybe it's tie into your denial a little bit. Like refusing to acknowledge our own sinfulness, refusing to acknowledge the ways that God has provided for us.
Um, do we at times look at what we have and lay claim to it as though it is our own inheritance that we've taken? Um, right. Do we kind of crucify the son of God anew in, in refusing to repent of our sins particularly? I dunno. I think those are some open questions for us to kind of explore as we dig into this a bit more.
[00:43:54] Jesse Schwamb: And that may relate as well to, well eventually at some point, I dunno, like 2040, get to like the parable of the talents. There's some similarity there with a little bit, right? You're saying? I think you're right.
[00:44:06] Jesse Schwamb: And where I think we can anchor some of that is in those first couple of verses. I'm really always impressed by really the number of action verbs that are packed within, like that just initial statement of Jesus explaining the situation.
[00:44:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:44:19] Jesse Schwamb: So he sets it all up and he's saying there's a planting that goes on, this landowner puts up a wall, digs a wine press. Builds a tower and then RINs it. So there's all these like amazing things being done, all this action verb. And I, I think in part why he comes against the Pharisees so hard in the same way that we're looking at like the parable that, uh, the, uh, talents for instance of saying like, what did you do with that was entrusted to you was like this great treasure which Christ has entrusted or God has entrusted to his people, which is, is the gospel essentially is, is all a prophetic witness, is like the truth of who God is and his revelation of himself.
And so I think. The first thing we gotta see in those verbs is that there's this emphasis that the vineyard was God's sovereign creation. You know, he plants it, he chose it, he established it. Israel didn't plant herself. She was planted. And that sovereign initiative is foundational, I think in, like you're saying, the parables indictment, because these vine growers, they don't possess anything that they did not receive.
Right. You know, they did not find a vineyard already planted, but God himself made it from the wilderness that all his glory, all the glory might be his. So. I think it's helpful for us to observe that the church is always the planting of the Lord and that no congregation flourishes that is not first planted by God.
And so there is a major offense here when those who are to care for it, who know, like you're saying, that they ought to care for it, who understand something about the hierarchy and the way it has been entrusted to them. Not to only break that covenant, but then seek to try to usurp the power in the roles of those whom they should be, quite frankly, in our own language, like under shepherds too.
And so it starts with all, all those verbs. Like I think we could probably spend a. A lot of times just speaking about what does it mean? Why? Why is there all this explicit in particular language about the fact that there's a hedge and there's a press besides just these are part in piece mail or part and parcel of what it means to have a vineyard, apparently, but that they're all part of this narrative of God talking about how he protects and cares for his people and sets them in a place and chooses them and is particular about the construction and does so with great volition and authority and care and concern and creative ability.
And then again, you have those who are meant there to do the very job that he's entrusted them with. And not only are they not doing that, and of course you're right. Jesus elsewhere, comes in, comes in hot, right, with a Pharisees saying like, listen, you set burdens on people's backs that you yourselves cannot lift.
You're twice as in the hell as anybody else, and that's who you are. Yeah. It's not just hypocrisy, but you're literally setting people up to fail in this. So you can see how you're right. It's not just like, guys, I appreciate that. Like you wanted to set up some additional boundaries and maybe you took it a little bit too far.
This parable is just scorched earth. It's, it's nuclear. Yeah.
[00:47:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:47:11] Tony Arsenal: And you know, I think, um, we are obviously gonna spend another week on this 'cause we still have not really addressed a single verse in this parable. I, I think like a lot of ink has been spilled on explaining sort of like the feal agricultural arrangements of this passage.
What it represents. M my understanding is. A typical arrangement would be that a, a landowner would basically just lease out land and the tenants would be responsible for the planting, for the development. Right. And the, the, the landowner would essentially just collect a portion of whatever they produce.
Right. This parable is actually taking this a step further. Exactly. That it's not as though the landowner just says like, all right, you can use this land. Right. And I own the land, so I get a portion of the pro, the profit. He's actually done all the work. Yes. And all that. The, all that the, the tenants need to do essentially is reap the harvest and then provide the portion of the harvest that belongs to the landowner, and so there is a greater investment.
Of the landowner into this land than would be expected. We've commented in the past about how a lot of times the, the parables start on sort of a premise of shock. Like there's a, there's an element of the setup of the, of the parable where the audience would kind of like sit back and gasp or kind of be like, wait a second.
Like that's not normal. Right. In the parable of the, the, um, lost son, it was the idea that like the son demanded his inheritance. And that wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part was that the father just granted it. Right. Or, um, the lost sheep, like the, there's actually a sort of a shocking element to the fact that like the, the land, the like sheep owner would just go get this other sheep.
So we've, we've commented on there's kind of like. There's sort of like a scandalous setup. The scandalous setup in this is not that the land has been leased to tenants, right? It's that the land has been prepared for the tenants before it was leased out in the first place. And I think that's something we might miss if we read over this too quickly, is.
The landowner has prepared everything for these, these tenants.
[00:49:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.
[00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So the, the, at the, the punchline of the parable where they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of, um, sovereignty and maybe a lowercase s in the, in the context of the parable, they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty and the rightful claim of the tenant or of the landowner on the, the profit of the land.
And sort of like highlighter emphasized by the fact that they actually didn't do any of the work. There's a certain kind of like Amer, like American rugged individualism where we're kind of like, yeah, like if I planted all the crops, then it's kind of lame that this guy's coming in expecting to take a portion of it, right?
Like, yeah, I guess he owns the land, so maybe he gets a little piece of it, but like, who does he think he is? All of that already is already short circuited. Like I. The, these tenants are not actually, um, portrayed as doing anything in this parable. That's right. Like they just lease the land. They, they, um, and leased is not really like the right.
The right word, the, the Greek word is omi, which is like he gave over the land to them. Um, when we say leased, we have this idea that like the tenants pay to use the land and then like part of their contract is that whatever profits they reap, uh, off the land goes back to the, to the landowner. This is really more like the landowner graciously allowed them to live on this land, and the only payment he required was that they would eventually provide him part of the profit back.
Like he's planted the land, he's put up the fence around it. He dug the wine press so that they could make a product out of it. He built the tower so it would be defended. Yes. And he gave it over to them essentially just to like live on until it was time for the harvest. And all he is asking for is basically like, alright, so this is my land.
I've planted the vineyards, the profit is mine to have. And so when the time came for him to come claim that that's where they have now rejected him. Yes. That's where they've now said like, I know you did all the work and really graciously allowed us to live in this land, but we're gonna keep all of it for ourselves.
That's the scandal of this. That's what I think like the original audience would've set up and like, wait a second here. Like, hold on. They didn't even plant the vineyards themselves. They didn't even build the tower themselves. That's really the force of this that I think we miss when we, when we overemphasize, trying to think through like what the original agricultural arrangements were.
'cause this is painted. Very different than what the original arrangements would've been typical for. Like this is a different scenario and I think intentionally so,
[00:52:09] Jesse Schwamb: and we need those words like rented, at least in English, to help us understand that it didn't belong to them. It wasn't a gift, right? It wasn't as if like it was just turned over in the sense that it belongs to you now do with it what you will.
And it's very clear in the passage one, like you said, that the landowner does all those things. So it was a, you know, he completely set it up. I mean, this is just such a beautiful, I think, depiction of the hold of prophetic, you know, understanding of God's word here, but it's very clear that says the, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit.
So you're right. The scandal is that they're like, well, obviously. They need to give him his fruits, like
[00:52:48] Tony Arsenal: right.
[00:52:48] Jesse Schwamb: It was all set up before he left on this long journey. He then turned it over to them to care for, and that was really all that they were supposed to do. They had no role in this. And so it does like lead us in into this weird space where it's like, well, well what, what did the Pharisees think they were trying to do themselves?
What does actually Jesus commenting on, on their own, like licit on their own initiative here, is he basically saying that not only are they not respecting his sovereignty, but they were trying to claim for themselves what only rightly belongs to God that even their position right. Society in culture as their representatives, God himself, they wanted to take that over for themselves, which he does bring that condemnation upon them in other parts of the scripture.
So again, this is really hot. I think it's a, it's both heat and light, but there's no doubt that there's fire to this, right? Because it's a direct indictment that God the father set all of this up. You yourselves are on rented property, but guess what? Even the property that you've rented, I'm not exacting a tax from you as if like you have put forward and grown or supplied or created some kind of profitable outcome here.
And I just want a piece of that. He's not even talking about tithing in that sense. What he's basically saying is, none of this belongs to you. Like how? Right? How dare you? None of this is yours. I set all of this up and in fact, because you've done so poor poorly at this, I'm gonna take it away from you and give it to those who actually produce fruit and guess what's gonna be the Gentiles?
So it's, there's a wild. Amounts of condemnation packed into a very small story.
[00:54:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It really is.
[00:54:22] Tony Arsenal: Um, there is nothing expected of these tenants. Right. There's no contract, like there's no terms, they, they really add nothing to the, the landowner's land, except I guess maybe they're the ones harvesting these, this fruit.
Right. But even that's not explicit in the parable.
[00:54:43] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.
[00:54:43] Tony Arsenal: Right. Right. He, he does all just to steal your thunder, like he does all the verbs. Yes. All of the ves are done by the landowner.
[00:54:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Right
[00:54:51] Tony Arsenal: on. There is an implication that the, the tenants are somehow like the ones harvesting this, or they're the ones producing the wine, I guess, in the wine vat or the wine press.
But at the end of the day. A normal tenant landowner agreement would be, I'm, you're, first of all, you're probably gonna pay me to use this land, right? You're paying me to use this land, and the way you pay me is you're gonna plant the, the gr the crop. You're gonna harvest it. You're gonna make the produce, and all I'm gonna do is let you live on this land.
I'm gonna take the pro, like the profit, you're gonna pay me outta that profit. There is nothing asked or expected of these, these landowners, except to give the fruit that is already hit.
[00:55:36] Jesse Schwamb: Yes, exactly.
[00:55:37] Tony Arsenal: And, and that's where like, I think our Christian life, John Piper, I won't get into too much, but like John Piper is all in the news again for the same like finance, final salvation stuff that he's, he's been controversial for, for years.
Right. And I think like this ties into that thi this is a, a direct parallel in many ways to the par, like the, the parable of the talents, which I'm, we we'll get into eventually is like. The, the landowner provides these talents or the, in this case, the land and the fruit. All of this is brought forth by his will and the fact that these, these worthless tenants do nothing and then still have the audacity to basically like refuse to.
Provide back to this landowner what he has produced.
[00:56:25] Jesse Schwamb: Right? Yes. That's
[00:56:26] Tony Arsenal: the key. That's, that's really the point of this parable.
[00:56:29] Jesse Schwamb: Yep.
[00:56:29] Tony Arsenal: Is somehow the Pharisees, and I think where the application of this is probably where we'll go next time, is like somehow the Pharisees have got in their mind that this thing that God has done in the people of Israel and is now doing in the Messiah, this ministry of the Messiah, in coming to claim the fruit, that somehow they have a right to lay claim to that and to withhold it from the Father.
[00:56:54] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:56:54] Tony Arsenal: Even though they had nothing to do with anything that brought about, its, its, uh, its occurrence. Right. The Pharisees didn't create the nation of Israel. They didn't create the gospel. They didn't create the Messiah, and somehow they think that they can withhold the fruit of that ministry from the father and take like lay claim to it for themselves.
And this is where I think. We have to trust the Holy Spirit and trust Jesus because there's really nothing in the gospels that explain what they were doing that sort of like showed them trying to like take over the Messiah's inheritance, right? But that's what this parable teaches, is that that's what they're being criticized for, that they were somehow trying to usurp the position of the Messiah.
They were trying to become the mediators. They were trying to become the sons of God or the son of God who interceded from God for God's people. They were the ones that were gonna do that. They were the ones that were gonna accomplish that. So I think what'll be interesting next week is when we come, come back to this parable and sort of try to talk about like what does that actually teach us as believers 2000 years later, who aren't Pharisees.
We're not trying to do that. What does this have to do with us? What does this have to say to us?
[00:58:07] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I think you're entirely right and I'm looking forward to, uh, well, we'll wrap it up officially.
[00:58:13] Tony Arsenal: Yes.
[00:58:13] Jesse Schwamb: In, in that next episode, it's gonna be
[00:58:15] Tony Arsenal: probably
[00:58:16] Jesse Schwamb: totally, probably, it's like a 70% chance, honestly. Loved ones,
[00:58:21] Tony Arsenal: 70%, 50.
[00:58:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. There's definitely a meaningful material probability that that still won't be the last one once we get started, but we're gonna try. As always. I, I'm totally with you. I, I hope people take a little time to go read through this because I think the more we slow down and really try to set ourselves into the details and actually be particular about maybe envisioning the circumstances exactly as they're laid out for us and not as we sometimes try to fill out in our minds.
I think maybe the biggest challenge that we've learned in this particular conversation is that verse 34, what is meant when the scripture says Now, when the harvest time approached. He that is the landowner sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit. And I think what you've challenged here is this idea of, well, it doesn't say like he sent to go get them to harvest it.
Right. Just saying like, listen, it's my fruit. Like let's do this thing. Like you knew I would show up. I've left you to, to care for all these things which I put into place. So here I am, I've sent my people to come and receive the fruit. And, uh, they can't do it. They refuse to do it. They won't do it. Uh, they kill everybody whom he sends, including his own son.
And so, you're right, it's not even here. We gotta be careful about the actions and of presuming that they here, like the Pharisees were these people who were in charge somehow of even harvesting. There's, there's actually no mention of that except for it was just harvest time.
[00:59:40] Tony Arsenal: Right?
[00:59:40] Jesse Schwamb: And so it's even there, I think it's purposely ambiguous to remind us that God is doing all the things.
I'm a little embarrassed that I missed the phrase. God does all the verbs when I was literally saying. The landowner does all these verbs.
[00:59:53] Tony Arsenal: It's okay.
[00:59:54] Jesse Schwamb: The first sentence I, I've, I've fallen down on you loved ones. I'm so sorry I missed it,
[00:59:58] Tony Arsenal: Jesse. It's okay because God does all the verbs
[01:00:02] Jesse Schwamb: is factually. That is factually correct, so we'll give this one.
One more shot because at least there's so much for us. We could do a whole series just on this one, and I think if you're tracking with us, you're probably discovering that we also, sometimes in real time, as we really spend a little bit of effort kind of speaking about the particulars, find that these parables are more chock full than you think.
There isn't just one idea. There's often many ideas coalescing around. Yeah. The central theme and the setup in the context is important. The word choice is important, and I am as well, just as you were saying, blown away by the way in which Jesus really evokes from the audience here, their own condemnation, their own judicial decree, which is, yeah, he's gonna take those wretches and kick 'em out.
And they're saying it about themselves. This is what sin does, isn't it? This is what the natural man is like. Ken has to bow down to this great sovereign justice that comes from God while at the same time they think in their self-righteousness. They're proclaiming that in somebody else, and what they're really doing is they're putting it on their own head apart from God.
We are all like that. All of us are like this. So glory beats a God who through the Holy Spirit, opens our eyes to receive and to understand the gospel, to be changed by, to be transformed by it because he does all the verbs. I'm so grateful that that's in fact what he does, that that God has planted us, that he's pull a wall around us, that he stick out this wine press for us, that he's built a tower to protect us and that he has grown the fruit in us because of all the things that he has done.
[01:01:42] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Well, this is normally the part of the episode where we would do all of our announcements, uh, which just shows you we are not great podcasters. 'cause really we should do that at the beginning of, of the episode. Uh, but you know what, like if you wanna know what all of our announcements are, you're just gonna have to come back next week.
'cause we are out of time. We're not gonna do that. So I, I know that that's the most cliff of all cliffhangers is if you have listened this far and you want to hear about Oliver of our housekeeping assignment, an announcements and whatnot, you're just gonna have to come back next week and listen to it.
Uh, because as much as my brain is telling me I should tell you all about it now, I'm not going to. So, Jesse, until next time when people join us for our housekeeping announcements, honor everyone.
[01:02:31] Jesse Schwamb: Love the brotherhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse return to their parable series with an in-depth examination of the Laborers in the Vineyard from Matthew 20:1-16. This often-misunderstood parable confronts our natural inclination toward merit-based thinking and exposes the scandal of God's grace. The hosts unpack the covenantal language embedded in the text, particularly the workers' "grumbling"—a loaded term echoing Israel's wilderness rebellion. Through careful exegesis and theological reflection, they demonstrate how this parable dismantles religious entitlement while celebrating God's sovereign freedom to bestow mercy according to His purposes, not our calculations. The discussion offers fresh insights into grace, election, and the radical generosity that defines God's kingdom economy.
The parable's opening establishes a formal agreement between the landowner and the first workers: one denarius for a day's labor. This contractual arrangement is crucial for understanding what follows. Unlike marketplace haggling, this represents a covenant—the landowner binds himself to provide what he has promised. Tony emphasizes that even this initial contract is an act of condescension and grace, as the master had no obligation to employ anyone at all.
As the day progresses, subsequent workers are hired with increasingly less formal agreements. By the third hour, the landowner promises only "whatever is right," and by the eleventh hour, no wage is even mentioned. These later workers enter the vineyard based entirely on the landowner's character and trustworthiness. This progression mirrors the movement from law to gospel—from contractual obligation to trusting promise. The theological implication is profound: those who relate to God based on His gracious word rather than calculated merit are actually in a more secure position than those who attempt to earn their standing through works.
The hosts make a critical exegetical observation about the Greek word for "grumbling" (γογγύζω) used in verse 11. This is not casual complaining but the identical term used throughout the Septuagint to describe Israel's covenant rebellion in the wilderness. When the workers grumble "upon receiving" their wages, they're not merely expressing disappointment about pay inequality—they're filing a covenant lawsuit against the master, accusing him of unfaithfulness.
This connection to Numbers 16 and Exodus 16-17 is devastating. The Israelites' wilderness grumbling wasn't about logistics or comfort; it was fundamentally about doubting God's covenant fidelity. By employing this loaded terminology, Matthew signals that the first workers' complaint is nothing less than accusing God of covenant violation. The landowner's response ("Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius?") is a covenant defense—he has fulfilled his obligations precisely. The workers' real offense is not miscalculation but begrudging God's freedom to show mercy beyond what is contractually required.
The final rhetorical question—"Or do you begrudge my generosity?"—contains another Jewish idiom often lost in translation. The Greek literally reads, "Is your eye evil because I am good?" This "evil eye" imagery appears throughout Scripture as a metaphor for envy, stinginess, and resentment toward another's blessing. The landowner's question cuts to the heart: are you cursing me for being generous?
This directly parallels Jonah's response to Nineveh's salvation. Jonah had just experienced miraculous deliverance through the great fish, yet when God showed identical mercy to the Ninevites, Jonah's response was essentially, "I knew you were gracious—that's why I ran!" The parable exposes the same perverse logic: those who have received covenant mercy begrudging that same mercy extended to others. For the Pharisees listening to Jesus, this was an indictment of their resentment toward tax collectors and sinners receiving the kingdom. For Christians today, it challenges any sense of spiritual superiority based on how long we've been in the kingdom or how much we've sacrificed.
Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? That 'or' is a logical connector—either I'm not allowed to do what I want with my belongings, which is ridiculous, or if I am allowed, then you must be mad at me for being generous. Those are the only options. — Tony Arsenal
The grumbling in the Old Testament in this context is a covenantal accusation. These workers aren't just complaining about not getting what they thought they would—they're questioning the veracity of the covenant that was made. — Tony Arsenal
Most of us are this eleventh-hour call. It's much better to be in the place of that younger brother who comes in and repents than to be the older brother who is stubborn and finds some reason to come before God with self-righteous grievances. — Jesse Schwamb
[00:01:05] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 488 of the Reformer Brotherhood. I'm Jesse
[00:01:13] Tony Arsenal: and I am still Tony, and this is the podcast where Tony comes back. Hey brother.
[00:01:19] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. The band is back together again, man. It's reunited and boy, do you feel it? It feels good, doesn't
[00:01:26] Tony Arsenal: it? I do, I do. I'm excited to come back. It was nice to take a break.
[00:01:29] Jesse Schwamb: Good.
[00:01:29] Tony Arsenal: I, uh, I've been, you know, texted with you a couple times. Just it was, I did my best to sort of not think about the podcast because that's sort of defeats the purpose of taking a break from something if you spend a lot of time thinking about it. Um, so I'm back. I'm refreshed. I'm ready to go.
[00:01:44] Tony Arsenal: I appreciate the listeners' patience.
Uh, it's been sort of a weird, crazy busy time at work. Uh, there's a lot going on. I, I lost like. 60% of my staff in the course of like three weeks. And, um, I'm still kind of in the thick of it, but we're coming out of it. So took a little bit of time to just make sure that I was having a, an appropriate space to de-stress from that and take care of my family and attend to worship.
And, um, it was really a, a blessing to have that. Uh, sort of sabbatical. Ironically, the sabbatical wars were going on at the same time on Twitter, and Jesse is blissfully unaware of that 'cause he's not involved in in the Twitter. That's true. Um, but yeah, just took a little break and it's kinda like overblown it, to call it a sabbatical.
Like this is a podcast, it's a hobby, but, but it was nice to have, uh, a little bit of extra time, you know, couple hours extra week, uh, uh, each week of extra time to just decompress and, uh, play with the kids and spend time with my wife and clean the house a little bit, which was good.
[00:02:36] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, it is always good to have a clean house.
You look great. You seem refreshed. The voice sounds good, and I'm like, I don't know, in year seven or eight of my Twitter sabbatical, it's going great so far. I feel like I haven't missed a whole lot. The world still seems wild and I'm sure, or X, right? We gotta go X on this. It's
[00:02:53] Tony Arsenal: always Twitter. It's always gonna be Twitter.
I don't care what Elon Musk
says.
[00:02:56] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I'm listen. I'm totally fine with that.
[00:02:58] Jesse Schwamb: And I teased this in the last episode, but we can't be stopped. I mean, people should know this by now, we have an inexorable march through the parables of Jesus's true. That will not be stopped. We're always gonna come back until there are no more.
And on this episode, we're gonna be hanging out in Matthew 20, talking about laborers in the Kingdom of Heaven.
[00:03:17] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I'm stoked. I'm, I'm, I'm excited to get back into it. I'm excited to get back into the word together with everybody. I'm excited to clear whatever that was on in my throat out
[00:03:27] Jesse Schwamb: emotion,
[00:03:27] Tony Arsenal: live on the air.
Uh, but yeah, it'll be good. I'm, I'm stoked. I mean, I love this stuff and it's good to be back.
[00:03:32] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, you had the rest. Now let's talk about labor. So speaking of labor, it's, it's time for you to work up here, Tony. Are you affirming with or denying against on this episode?
[00:03:42] Tony Arsenal: Uh, I'm affirming something and I'm hopeful, uh, that just a little behind the scenes activity here.
Jesse recorded episode 487, like an hour and a half ago. I have not yet listened to it, so I don't know if you did an affirmation and I I did. If you did. I hope it's not the same one.
[00:03:58] Jesse Schwamb: I did not. You're
[00:03:59] Tony Arsenal: safe. Uh, good. So I'm safe.
[00:04:01] Tony Arsenal: So, um, I'm affirming the Artemis two mission. Um, oh, nice. Have you been, I mean, I know you're not on Twitter, but I'm sure there's news elsewhere.
Uh, this amazing mission around the moon, um, for astronaut, for astronauts, I think, um, the furthest man space travel, um, since the Apollo program. Um. Pretty intense, pretty amazing pictures, right? The camera technologies amazing. Increased exponentially, uh, since we were there last. Um, this is ostensibly in preparation for an actual moon landing, which who knows when that will be?
Um, but as far as I've seen, the mission was a resounding success. There was no right. I think they had, they ran into a few little hiccups early on with some technical things, but nothing crazy. I have not heard. Um, I know they did touch down and they did reentry. Um, I've not heard anything one way or another, but I'm assuming since I have not heard terrible, tragic news that they made it through, did they do the reentry?
I'm really, apparently I'm not actually paying as much attention to this as I thought I was. I saw a lot of information about reentry, but I guess, I don't know for sure when that happened or is happening.
[00:05:05] Jesse Schwamb: I mean, by this point, when people listen to it, it'll be old news anyway, right? So
[00:05:09] Tony Arsenal: For sure. Yeah. And either, either it went terribly wrong and I'm gonna feel awful, or it went fine and I'm gonna feel a little silly for.
Throwing a caveat that it went terribly wrong out there. But, um, it's cool. It's, it's amazing. I mean, I, I commented to my wife the other day and she's kinda like, yeah, maybe we should like, spend that money on people who are on the planet. I was like, okay, I can, I can buy that wisdom. But, um, there's something very cool and very Genesis, uh, one, ask Genesis one and two, ask about flying out into space and taking dominion over Yeah, for sure.
Over a, a little ball of rock, uh, you know, uh, 25,000 miles away or whatever it is. Um. And, you know, I'm like an engineering nerd. I, I don't know anything about engineering, but I love watching YouTube videos that explain stuff like this. And
[00:05:52] Jesse Schwamb: me
[00:05:52] Tony Arsenal: too, all of the videos that have cropped up now about free return and how, like they're able to basically like do minimal burn on the thrusters to get into the right trajectory and then just like meet the moon in the place it's gonna be.
And then the, you know, the moon's gravity captures it and whips it back around and then shoots it back towards Earth. And for the most part, they're able to do all of that with relatively minor, um, relatively minor energy output because they're just utilizing physics and gravity and math, um, to fly to the moon and come back.
Yes. It's pretty crazy amazing. So, yeah. Amazing. And the photos of like the, the sort of like new versions of the Earthrise photos are really, really phenomenal. Um, they're crisp, they're clean, they're obviously like the best, the best actual pho photographic images we've had of the lunar surface. Um. And the, the far side of the lunar surface, which we get all sorts of like telescopic photos and things of this side of the lunar surface because it's tightly locked and is facing us at all times.
We don't get a ton of really great photography of the far side of the moon, which is a big part of what this mission was, so,
[00:06:56] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:06:56] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. If you haven't seen the photos, I mean, they're out there, they're amazing. There will be even more available once we get back. You know, they, they're transmitting only the most stellar, amazing ones.
Um, and, but they're taking, I'm sure thousands and thousands of photos and, um, so yeah, it's pretty cool. I'm affirming the Artemis two mission. Um. It's just amazing what, what people can do with common grace, you know? That's right. In insight into nature. Um, I don't know anything about the astronauts. I don't know anything about their religious faith or their spiritual life or anything like that.
But, um, the people who design this, the people who fly it, they're just tapping into the truth that's present in God's creation. So good on them. Uh, either I'm glad they got home, wish they have a safe home coming, or something along those lines, I guess. I don't know.
[00:07:40] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, you'll be happy to know that NASA is reporting that the four astronauts are an excellent condition after they landed in the Pacific Ocean.
So
[00:07:47] Tony Arsenal: good.
[00:07:47] Jesse Schwamb: All, all appears to be well. And it says they have a giant SD card of pictures that's they've been taking. Yeah. And saving. I'm sure. They were just, they were just too big to send to over wifi.
[00:07:58] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Like massive wideness. Yeah. I mean, I'm sure they have a ton that they didn't send because you know Right.
Data rates to the moon are pretty high. Yeah.
[00:08:05] Jesse Schwamb: Ex. Yeah.
[00:08:05] Tony Arsenal: This economy is crazy. So
[00:08:07] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly. In this economy. Really In this economy. Yeah, exactly.
[00:08:11] Jesse Schwamb: I think you're right. This is good. I haven't talked about this at all. It's hard not to get just stoked, even in the amateur way about the science, the technology, the physics of all this stuff, and then even the astronauts just being overwhelmed by what they're seeing.
[00:08:24] Tony Arsenal: Mm-hmm.
[00:08:25] Jesse Schwamb: It's hard not to get pulled into that and think about the universe that God has created and find that there is something transcendent just, uh, by observing all of these things. Yeah. Like even casually, which I think shows, again, this is literally the, the heavens and the earth crying out for God, showing his immeasurable power and, you know, immortal nature.
It's incredible that we can even see and be a part of some of these things. Just wild.
[00:08:49] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, and I think it's crazy that they can get signals to the moon. I mean, I drive home from Dartmouth College and I go through half of the spot there, and I don't have a cell signal, but we can get images from the moon.
Um, so yeah, it's great. It's great. Check it out if you haven't seen it. If you haven't heard about it, I don't know what you're doing. Uh, this is probably the largest major scientific advancement in our generation. Um, in terms of like big scale scientific enterprise projects. There's been a lot of really amazing technology that's been developed.
But this is like the first big. Almost like risky kind of scientific,
[00:09:30] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:09:30] Tony Arsenal: I dunno. Gambit or I dunno, gamble that we've done in a long time. Big deal. I mean, big a lot. Deal of things. Deal. Nothing went wrong. Nothing ma major went wrong. Praise God that they all got back to the planet safely. Right. But, um, a lot of things could have gone wrong, uh, and they didn't.
So check out the photos, check out the scientific data they're gonna get. I mean, I'm sure they've got all sorts of information about the way the, the, the space ship moved, all of that stuff. It's gonna be really interesting to see kind of how this all comes about.
[00:09:56] Jesse Schwamb: Get some worship on, right? Yeah. I mean this is what a one, a thing to be reminded about how big and how glorious God is.
[00:10:01] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:10:01] Jesse Schwamb: And, and to realize, like you said, the risks of this exploration. And this is God again, creating all of this outta nothing. Why? Yeah. Just absolutely wild. Incredible.
[00:10:12] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, for
[00:10:12] Jesse Schwamb: sure. Blown away.
[00:10:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. What about you, Jesse? What do you have for us?
[00:10:15] Jesse Schwamb: I got affirmation. It's equally nerdy, and actually this is as is always the case.
This is why one of many reasons I miss you is it, it dovetails so nicely, so I'm affirming with a book. It's called Everything Is Predictable, how Esy and Statistics Explains the World. It's by a guy named Tom Chivers. I know this sounds super nerdy, but hear me out on this because Thomas Bayes, if you don't know this guy is first kind of like a wild and interesting guy, but this whole theory he put forward is super interesting.
And this book is not like a mathematics book. It's like reads almost like a statistical thriller, which as it came outta my mouth, realized it was not maybe more ingratiating. I could have chosen better words than statistical thriller. But Thomas Bayes was alive in the 17 hundreds. And what's interesting to me at least about him, is he was an English statistician, who was a Presbyterian minister actually.
He was a non-conformist and his, this whole theorem that he developed was actually published after his death. And the non-conformist part is super interesting. It's all in this book, even some of his different theological ideas. But because he was non-conformist, it basically meant like he couldn't learn.
He was kicked out of all the English universities. He had to go to Scotland. Even all of that shaped how he came up with this particular theorem. But the gist of it is. Rather than treating like probabilities, as we think about it as this fixed frequency, you know, how many times does this thing occur? He argued and realized that it should represent a degree of belief and then you would update that belief rationally as new evidence comes in.
And I know that sounds super quaint, but this is like what machine learning is based on medical diagnosis. A lot of like space travel is based on this in terms of understanding uncertainty and systems spam, all of that stuff. Here's an example, I think Tony, because we are, we have to carry forward with the top 50 medical podcast thing, right?
We've got going on here. Lemme just give everybody an example of why you need this and why you automatically think this way. So. Statistics is really important, especially in medical testing. This was really prevalent in during COVID. So there's two ways that you can describe how a medical test performs you.
You know this already, Tony, you're an expert. So one would be like sensitivity. So like how AIG
[00:12:19] Tony Arsenal: not an expert.
[00:12:20] Jesse Schwamb: Oh, you're definitely an expert in testing. Here we go. So one would be like sensitivity. How good is the test at catching people who are sick? So if you're sick, you, you want the test to identify that, that you're sick.
That's sensitivity. So a test with a 99% sensitivity is gonna correctly identify 99 out of a hundred people who are truly sick. It always gonna miss one person. It's a false negative. The other half of that coin is something called specificity. So if sensitivity is all about catching the people who are sick, specificity is gonna say, how good is the test at clearing people who are not sick?
And so a test with 99% specificity, you might have correctly guessed, is gonna identify or clear 99 out of a hundred healthy people. Now if you have a test. Both of those 99% sensitive and 99% specific, you might be thinking, that is the dream. That's exactly what I want. That that test is gonna be so precise and accurate.
How could my intuition fail me? But this is the thing. It actually fails all the time, and here's why. Let's say that. You go out and you screen a group of people, a general population for a rare disease that affects one in a thousand people. One in a thousand people, rare disease. So if you screen 10,000 people from the general population, that means that truly only 10 of them are going to have the actual disease.
I'm not gonna do all the math 'cause it'll, oh, this is already making for amazing podcasting. But here's the bottom line. That test, which sounds so good on the face, is going to identify 109 people as truly sick or truly having disease. But the problem is that only 10 of them actually have it. That means that only there's, it only has a success rate of 9%.
There's only 9% chance you actually have the disease, but it's falsely identified. The short end of this is Bayes corrects that problem. He fixes it with his theorem so that we get to the right number of people. That's what's called like a base fallacy rate. It's not taking into account that really only 10 people should have this particular disease or this sickness.
So I know that's sounds super nerdy, but so much of our lives are based on this. We have a prior belief or a prior set of things that we understand about the world. And then as evidence comes in, we refine that. That sounds so normal and normative, but it's revolutionary in this book actually. Bayes versus what's called like frequentist or frequent, um, probability is like hotly debated.
People actually throw down over this theorem. So it's a really fun read. Go check out. Everything is predictable. Al Bayesian statistics explains our world. It really is for everybody. And then you can impress your friends with all the statistical pross you're gonna have when you're done reading it.
[00:14:56] Tony Arsenal: Like the medical administrator hat that I can't always take off is like, why would we screen 10,000 people?
Are, are they all symptomatic? Are none of them symptomatic? But suppose it doesn't really
[00:15:08] Jesse Schwamb: matter for the example. That's a great, so generally what happens here is, let's say it's like some kind of rare form of cancer, unless you use Bayesian statistics, what you'll find is you'll get these false positive rates.
So these tests do use Bayesian statistics. It corrects, in other words, for this problem. So there might be a lot of people that are gonna screen for this because if you, you wanna know if you have it, but you don't wanna get it wrong and say that you do. So this ensures his approach ensures that you get it.
Right. It's wild. Fascinating stuff.
[00:15:34] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and I would think actually, you know, there's probably, there's other mechanisms as well where they would, where they would sort of screen out. People that shouldn't be tested or help identify false negatives, false positives. Um, but yeah, that's, that's interesting. I probably won't read that book, but it sounds like an interesting read.
I just don't have a lot of room on my A TBR shelf.
[00:15:55] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, listen. That, that's fair.
[00:15:57] Jesse Schwamb: By the way, here's like a, a side affirmation. I think you and I both share speaking like books and cataloging books. If you use Good Reads, good Reads. Right. Finally adding a list of the Do Not Did Not Finish book. That's fantastic.
This, this might be an example for some people, so pick it up and even if you don't have a place for it, guess where you can put it on the did not finish list. Yeah. Good Reads.
[00:16:16] Tony Arsenal: That's finally, that's one of those like, like why didn't they add that 15 years ago? Kind of an updates and you get the email and they're like, we're so excited to introduce the did Not Finish thing.
And we're like, yeah. Like of course. Like, duh. It's likes, like, we're proud to introduce that. Your keypad now has a zero on it.
[00:16:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right. So
[00:16:37] Tony Arsenal: yeah. I'm, I'm excited about the DNR, um, the DNF, um, I'm so excited. I can't even remember what it's called. Yeah. The shelf. But, uh, very, very useful. The DNR list
[00:16:47] Jesse Schwamb: is a diff it is a different list.
Speaking of medical things, it's a different
[00:16:50] Tony Arsenal: list. Yeah. Yeah, that's definitely a different thing. Usually it's not a list. It's a list of one in most cases.
[00:16:56] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly,
[00:16:57] Tony Arsenal: yeah. You can't put other people on your
[00:17:00] Jesse Schwamb: DNR
[00:17:00] Tony Arsenal: This,
[00:17:00] Jesse Schwamb: I suppose. Yeah, I should clarify that. You can really, you can only really put yourself, or I suppose somebody for whom you have that kind of authority over on that list, but I was thinking that more from like a medical perspective, that somewhere there would be a database in which there might be a list of DNR.
I don't know.
[00:17:15] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, maybe. I don't know. I'm not sure. Probably there was at some point, but I think with medical chart technology now, that's probably like a. A moot point. Yeah. They don't need to be able to like cross reference a master list anymore. They just look in the patient's electronic record. We're really like in the weeds here.
You can tell it's been a while since I've, I've podcasted. I don't really remember how to do this.
[00:17:35] Jesse Schwamb: This is great.
[00:17:36] Jesse Schwamb: I think at this point we try to make some kind of awkward segue that is mildly successful. Again, probably has statistically like a 20 to 27% chance of being successful and really hitting the mark.
Yeah. So do you have anything that's gonna move us into this?
[00:17:49] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I mean, I feel like you've been podcasting for the last several weeks without me and I've been working hard and now I'm kind of coming in as Johnny come lately and we're gonna get paid the same amount so. Even though you've worked harder for longer and I'm coming in late to the game here.
[00:18:03] Jesse Schwamb: Oh man. Ple loved ones. Please tell me you got that. Please tell me you got all of that. That's, that's what you show up for here. Yeah, that was
[00:18:10] Tony Arsenal: a deep cut.
[00:18:11] Jesse Schwamb: That, that was beautiful. And I think leads us right into Matthew 20. So I think we've got at least 16 verses to get through here. Maybe again, if we're gonna keep a statistical theme here, something about engineering and math, all that stuff, we'll let everybody else pick the over under and whether or not we're gonna get through this and how many verses that's going to be.
But at this point, we might as well begin.
[00:18:32] Tony Arsenal: Yes. Yeah.
[00:18:33] Tony Arsenal: I'll start by reading. Uh, we're here in Matthew chapter 20, the first 16 versus this is the parable of the laborers in the vineyard and it reads. For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborer laborers for his vineyard.
After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into the vineyard and going out about the third hour, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace. He said to them, you go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right, I will give you. So they went, going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same.
And about the 11th hour, he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, why do you stand here idle all day? They said to him, because no one has hired us. And he said to them, you go into the vineyard too. And when the evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, call the laborers and pay them with their wages, beginning with the last up to the first.
And when those hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now, when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. And on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house saying, these last worked only one hour and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.
And he replied to one of them, friend, I'm doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me? For a denarius, take what belongs to you and go, I choose to give the last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you beg, do you begrudge my generosity? So the last will be first and the first will be last.
Now I just wanna head this off. I did bite my tongue earlier and I probably am lisping and this is like a running gag. We thought that we'd resolved it. Uh, so if you hear me stumble over my words a little bit, it's just, it's just the struggle bus today.
[00:20:24] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, this is the, these are like the real things we have to deal with when the podcasting, like the real threats, the real injuries.
I appreciate you like working through it. Like you just get back up and you walk it off with your tongue.
[00:20:35] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, my, my, uh, my podcasting hiatus was actually just a recovery of the last time I bit my tongue. I just needed a couple weeks to, no, I'm just kidding.
[00:20:43] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, we didn't wanna say.
[00:20:44] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:20:44] Tony Arsenal: So, Jesse, this is a, this is a parable that follows right on the heels, um, of kind of everything we've been talking about.
And I think as we go through these parables and we look at them and we, we sort of pick them up and we look at the different facets of them, we sort of compare them to each other. We kind of, we kind of place them in their context really. They all have basically the same theme, right? Like they're all kind of circulating around these same topics.
In this parable, it's circulating around this idea that, um, the, the owner of the vineyard, the master of the vineyard, is allowed to pay the people he employs whatever he wants. And as long as the payment that is due to an individual is received by that individual, then what other people receive and how they receive it and how hard they've worked and how hard they didn't work.
That's really not germane to whether or not the, the laborer received a fair wage, uh, in the first place. Right. So we're, we're circling around themes of kind of fairness of, uh, of sort of resentment, I think for resentment at the master's generosity, which has been a big theme in previous ones. So this will be good for us to expand on.
There's always little nuggets and kernels of things that are different from other parables, and then it's interesting to always see the ways that they kind of line up and, and tell us similar things.
[00:21:57] Jesse Schwamb: And this parable is unique to Matthew. Yeah. And it does function as this exposition or expansion of what Jesus says in chapter 19 where it says, but many who are first will be last.
And the last first, which is repeated with this lovely like inverted emphasis in, at the end of this as you just read. So it belongs to this like interesting cluster of teacher teachings on discipleship and reward nature of the kingdom of God. And we've, we've spoken a lot about that. I think I was just reminded of this as you were, you were.
Reading this, I feel like I remember this from some teaching, like this parable is kind of like a unique chiasm that's anchored on the landowner, sovereign generosity, which you brought up. And then there's the complaints of the first hired, which is mirrored by the late comers vulnerability. And then the landowners, two speeches which divide everything, kind of provide sandwich and the like, the theological climax.
It does start in that really familiar way, which we've gotten accustomed to thinking about that introductory formula of the kingdom of heaven is like, and it signals of course that what follows is not gonna be a lesson in economics, but it's gonna use all this economic language as theological disclosure for how God's kingdom operates.
And it starts again, like you said, with this master of the house, which to me seems. Pretty clearly like a, a God figure himself. Yeah. It's, that's kind of like a reoccurring mathian image. I think. So we've got this vineyard, which of course has all this symbolism, steeply rooted in Israel's covenant imagination and evokes God's people and his redemptive labor among them.
So, man, now that I'm saying this all loud, is this thing like super pregnant with all kinds of like imagery and meaning?
[00:23:27] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And you know, it's, it's always good to remember, although parables have kind of some parables, most parables have sort of distinct discreet, symbolic elements where like, this represents that this represents that almost in an allegorical form.
And, and in some cases, like purely in allegorical form, where it's like pilgrim's progress where each, each individual, each entity, each location each represents some sort of symbolic value. But we have to remember that when, when it says the parable of the kingdom of heaven is like the master of the house, it's not just like the master of the house.
Yes. Right. It's like this whole scenario. Yes. It's, it's like. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It's like everything that follows, it's like the entire, um, the entire paree here. That's what the Kingdom of Heaven is like. And one of the things that I think is striking about this is the kingdom of heaven is like some people complaining, like the people complaining about, some people are getting the same wage for less work.
Um, that is part of what the Kingdom of Heaven is like. So I think we sometimes think of, of. The kingdom of heaven in, um, in the parables, we think of it as though God is just saying, this is what heaven is like. Right? Jesus Just saying like, this is what heaven is like, but the kingdom of heaven, that language is broader than what we normally would say, uh, is.
We're thinking of heaven, like in the, the spiritual abode where God lives and the angels live. Um, where, where the departed saints are waiting for the resurrection, the kingdom of heaven is, is also inclusive of the, the sort of like. Time now between the victory of Christ on the cross and the consummation of the kingdom and the last day, the kingdom of heaven is inclusive of that time period too.
And so this parable sort of situates us. I think it situates us in that pre consummated state where we're talking about what it's like to be a part of the kingdom of heaven here and now in our fallen state, but still solidly in the kingdom of heaven. 'cause there's not gonna be any complaining or grumbling about God's justice in God's fairness once we're in the final resurrected state.
Right? Sure. Nobody's gonna be looking back and be like, yeah, you were way too gracious for that guy. Nobody's gonna be playing the Jonah part when we're all resurrected and we're worshiping for, for all time going forward. So this parable, because there are elements of. Dissatisfaction or elements of grumbling or complaining similar to like the, the parable of the prodigal son.
There's this sun figure, the, the older sun figure who like is just a bonehead and doesn't get it. Well, that can't be talking about the people who are in the resurrection kingdom in the final kingdom. It's gotta be talking about people who are still awaiting the resurrection of the body and who are still not yet.
Uh, and even in, in that parable, the, the older son doesn't even seem to be a figure who's, who's regener. Maybe he does become regener at some point in the future, but he doesn't seem to be. In, even in God's kingdom, he doesn't seem to be, even among God's people, he's consistently placed outside of the field.
You don't even know he exists until Nick halfway through the parable. This is similar in that there are these workers, they're receiving their wages and some of them are, are outwardly dissatisfied and grumbling against the master of the house. Um, so I think if we think about parables as describing heaven rather than the kingdom of heaven, we can lose sight of, of what's actually being said in a lot of them.
[00:26:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's really good stuff because it strikes me that there are like, strangely, two groups here mentioned, I, I find this really kind of fascinating. We, I think we should talk about this, like the first group has like the most formal agreement, it's almost a legal contract, right? Various was like a standard day laborers wage sufficient mostly for subsistence.
And so that detail seems theologically loaded to me. These workers relate to the landowner on the basis of a contract and what is owed. And so their claim at the end of the day will be exactly that. They're owed something and they know it, and that sets up Then this contrast with a second group, which is mostly all about grace because by the time we get to that third hour, like.
Approximately like 9:00 AM then we're beginning this pattern repeated at the sixth and the ninth hours. And crucially, for those workers who go out, go out and get recruited, there's no wage that's specified for them. Only the promise of like whatever is right. And so they enter the vineyard, not on the basis of a contract, but on the basis of like the owner's word and character.
And that seems to be like more of a picture of trust and not, not calculation. Yeah. Separate than like the first group. And that marketplace, idleness, as I read this, doesn't imply like laziness because verse seven clarifies like they just had not been hired. Right? They were overworked, they were unemployed.
They were marginalized. So it does set up, like you said, everything you just talked about, about the kind of this, I like that. Like the Jonah, the Jonah whiners or whatever, like yeah, they want to complain about this, right? There are, and there are two, two separate groups that have kind of been brought into the fold, not under different terms or pretenses, but differently.
[00:28:17] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I think too, bear's saying, um. Although there are elements of parables that are very, very directly applicable. Mm. We shouldn't read this as though every, every specific thing in the parable is not a parable. Right. Right. I think we can look at this and we can go, you know, you can read this in a way where, oh yeah, there's some people actually earn their, earn their wage, they earn ary.
Right. It's a fair contract. And they work all day and he says, well, I'm gonna give you what's right, what you, what I owe you.
[00:28:45] Tony Arsenal: The reality is God doesn't owe any of us anything. Right? Right. He owes us wrath and judgment and destruction. And so even, even the people who are the hard workers in the kingdom of God don't merit and never could merit, um, to, in a certain sense, in a strict sense and stick with me before you send your, your angry emails in a real strict sense.
Even Adam couldn't merit. What was, well, it was guaranteed to him, according to the Covenant of Works, God had to condescend to make the covenant of works in order for Adam to have any sort of fruition of his blessedness. So there there's no natural obligation, strict obligation that God has to reward the work of his creatures because nothing they could do could ever be sufficient enough to obligate him.
So the, the obligation of himself, and that's, this is where I do think this is strong, the fact that he obligates himself to these workers to give them their denarius after a hard day's work
[00:29:37] Jesse Schwamb: exactly
[00:29:37] Tony Arsenal: is itself. A covenantal, um, contractual, yes. But I actually read this as sort of a covenantal thing and the, the strange part is that the people don't recognize the sort of semi gracious covenantal nature of this.
Yes.
[00:29:50] Tony Arsenal: I think, um, you know, there have been times when I, where I've been unemployed, um, not for very long. Now, I know some people face unemployment for a lot longer than I ever have, but I know there was times where I was, I was looking for work and someone would say to me like, Hey, you know, my, my, my lawn needs to be mowed.
Could you come over and I'll, I'll give you 25 bucks to mow my lawn. It's a small lawn. Um. That's a gracious act in most cases. Right, right. Um, yes, I'm performing a task. Yes, they're paying me, but they didn't have to offer me that work. They didn't have to offer me that job, especially when it's something that like they could have accomplished themselves.
They could have just done it themselves. Um, so I think there's an element of that here, that there's, there's a condescension of the master to these workers, to these laborers who are not part of his household. These are not, they're not slaves. These are not people who are part of his household, who are regular employees.
These are people that he goes out into the market to, to find and to hire. And as we see some of, some of these mark, like the difference between the ones that are hired and the ones that are not hired until later in the day, the parable's not super clear about what it is. Just that they're not hired, it doesn't say the lazy ones were left there.
The ones were exactly, that were ugly or had like limp legs or like just couldn't cut it. It just says like there was some that didn't get hired. Um, so there's a gracious element of this, and that makes the recognition at the end or the lack of recognition at the end by these full day laborers, the, the sort of like recognition, this, this entitled ness, um, that actually makes it all the worst.
It's like the people who are outwardly attached to the covenant of grace. Um, I know all the Baptists in our, our group, their heads just exploded, but like are outwardly attached to the covenant of grace, um, who wanna somehow complain about like the graciousness of the covenant of grace that they're outwardly attached to it.
It's just sort of like a form of, of theological and temporary insanity, I think. And that's what we see on full display here.
[00:31:40] Jesse Schwamb: It's definitely all grace. You're right that nobody's gonna get injustice right in this parable. And I think that's definitely exemplified the further out you go in this hiring order.
[00:31:49] Jesse Schwamb: So by the time you get to 5:00 PM which is pretty extraordinary, right? Only really like one hour remains before sense, right? It's the end of the working day.
[00:31:56] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:31:56] Jesse Schwamb: You can imagine like these guys who are being hired at the hour probably can contribute very little in the last hour of the day, right? But this owner goes out and hires them and no agreement is stated whatsoever.
It's just pure grace. The landowner's question, why do you stand here idle all day? I think to your point, underlies their vulnerability. They were not idle by choice, presumably. And so I think we rightly here in this, like a foreshadowing of those who are called the late in redemptive history, Gentile sinners, the seemingly least qualified for kingdom membership.
All of that I think is at play and it's all, it's getting this lovely setup of all these groups to help us understand what that kingdom is actually like.
[00:32:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:32:35] Tony Arsenal: And then we have this, um, this is where the sort of dramatic tension turns, right? The end of the day comes and, uh, the master calls the, the people that he brought last, right?
He calls the people who'd only been there for an hour and he starts to go down the list of the people who, the people who were last, and the people who came in next. And the people who came in next, right? And the workers who had contracted at the beginning of the day. Um, they're watching this happen and they're kind of going, oh, this is gonna be good.
Like, that guy's only been here for an hour and he got a denarius. You know, the logic is probably like, I'm gonna get 12 denarius, like I'm gonna go 12 days worth of work. Um, because I think there's an assumption on their part, um, that the master's fair that he is, he's providing an equitable wage. Um, of course the master is fair, but he's providing an equitable wage that's commensurate with the work delivered.
A delivered, delivered, right? And that, that's the key to this parable.
[00:33:26] Tony Arsenal: I think the expectation that God. Helps those who help themselves. Right? God rewards those who put in the hard work. God. God provides blessing or salvation according to the merit provided by the one who's being saved. That perspective is what's on full display here.
Yes. By the people who are, uh, the ones who contracted for the full day. They're not thinking about the covenant that they have with this person or the contract they have with this person. They're not thinking about the fact that they agreed to work for the day in order to earn a day's wage. They're thinking about how this actually is gonna work out great in their favor.
They're looking at this as a strictly merit-based kind of a, a thing. And you would think that like when the, the one hour people come in, they get a denarius, and then the three hour people come in and they get a denarius. You'd think they would pick up on it at some point, but then in the course of the payroll, it doesn't seem that they do.
They still get to the bottom of the list and think they're gonna get more compared to the other people who all got the same.
[00:34:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that display piece is critical to this. It is like complete setup. Like you can imagine he, the landowner calling everybody together at the end of the day and they're all standing around.
Some of them are exhausted because they've again born all their work in the heat of the day on their backs. They're tired, they're dirty, maybe they're exhausted. And he starts in this reverse order. And by the way, we should note that there is something here that's beautiful in that the law, the landowner is law abiding because right evening payment is mandated in the Torah.
So we see all this taking place as to fulfill the law in some ways. But the reversal of the order that last of first is like such deliberative and good narrative storytelling and staging, isn't it? 'cause it ensures that the first hired workers are going to witness the payment of those who work the least.
And if without that order, if you just did it the other way around, the more a crisis of the parable disc like completely goes away.
[00:35:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:35:10] Jesse Schwamb: So this execution of the payment at the owner's will, it just shows that he has. He's completely independent. His sovereignty belong. The sovereignty belongs to the master alone.
And so this 11th hour workers receiving a full day's wage for one hour of work, that's like an act of sheer generosity. It's not proportional justice. And I think as reform, people, maybe all of us at some point have had this conversation about predestination and justice and mercy. And again, really I think putting a crowbar between this idea that nobody is receiving injustice, but some are receiving mercy and grace.
And here these first hired workers seeing this form, like you said, this expectation that they're gonna receive more, like you said, where that came from. Yeah, it's just them, right? It's purely manufactured in their own reasoning. It's not anchored in the covenantal promise and certainly not witnessed in the grace that they should be receive, like perceiving as the payments get doled out, like sequentially moving in their reverse order toward those who have worked the longest.
But their expectation reveals that they have fundamentally misread like the landowner's character. They're still operating in the register of a contract and not grace.
[00:36:16] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And you know, I think to sort of lock this covenant covenantal frame and sort of like lack of recognition of the covenant into place too, when you look at the language of this parable, um, and especially kind of what it's following up on, it's coming on the heels of this interaction with this rich, rich young ruler who comes in and he thinks that he's gonna earn eternal life by keeping the commandments.
Um, and, and he, he has this outward sense or this outward display of pty. He's calling Jesus good. He's saying he, you know, he keeps the commandments, Jesus doesn't even disagree with him actually, that he has connect. Yes. You know, I think it's implied that, well, of course you haven't, but he, he still is graciously trying to like, convince this guy, no, you actually need to abandon your self righteousness and, and pursue and follow me.
Um. But this is a parable where like other people are listening, right? There's other witnesses. This isn't like the rich young ruler came to him in the middle of the night, like Nicodemus. This is something that's happened on PO on in the public. So we can anticipate that the Pharisees and the Sadducees and the scribes and the lawyers were all aware of this.
They may have been there, but they were at least aware of this happening. And I think there's some language in here that is actually directed at those people.
[00:37:30] Tony Arsenal: And, and here's where it comes in, is you get to verse, um, we'll start reading again at verse nine. It says, when those hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius.
Now, when those hired first came, so we're referring to the people who are hired at the beginning of the day. Now, when those who were hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius and on receiving it, right? So this is as, this is, um, uh, just unbelievable as they're receiving the denarius on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house.
Now, just the way that I read that and said the word grumbled tells you that that word is really important here. Yes. If you look at this Greek word. And you compare it to the, the word, the usage of this word in the, the, um, Sept. Yes. Which of course is the Greek translation of the Old Testament. This word most commonly appears in the wilderness wandering accounts.
[00:38:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:38:23] Tony Arsenal: Right. And the, the primary sin of the Israelites during the wilderness wandering was grumbling against the Lord. And this grumbling against the Lord in that context is not just a general complaining, right. It's not just like a, a sort of like a, a general dissatisfaction or like murmuring. This isn't like water cooler frustration about your boss.
The grumbling in the Old Testament in this context is a covenantal accusation, right. So this is tied to the, the accounts where Moses first is told to strike the rock, and he does so when the water comes out, and then second is told to speak to the rock, but he strikes it. I won't go into all the details, but the scene that's being, being displayed there is the people come, they accuse the Lord of abandoning them into the wilderness.
And this scene where Moses is set up on the rock and he strikes the rock, that scene is a judicial scene. The people have filed a covenant accusation against the Lord, and in reality, it's the people who have been unfaithful. But the Lord standing in the place of the rock is the one who is struck, right?
Jesus was the rock in the wilderness from which the water came. Paul says that in First Corinthians, right? So this language of grumbling in this is not just, they're not just complaining about the fact that they didn't get what they thought they were going to, they're questioning the veracity of the covenant that was made.
So they're, they're still locked into this merit-based. This merit-based idea even more than it seemed at first, right? There's a logic to the idea that like, oh, if the, the master is actually paying a wage of one denarius for per hour, like there's a logic to that. But it's not just that they're saying, and this is, this explains the response of the master.
It's not just that they're saying like, Hey, wait a second, like the wage rate that you're paying is not right. They're saying you have violated the terms of our covenant in the way that you have paid us. 'cause it's upon receiving it that they complain or they grumble and the master says more or less like, Hey.
You agreed with me for one Denarius, I'm giving you what you've earned. I'm giving you what you agreed on. Why don't you take it and go. So the answer is not to try to justify why he is free to pay these other people more, or why he's free to pay these people a perceived less. The answer is, again, they're complaining against the covenant.
He is bringing it back to the covenant saying, well, here's what the covenant relationship was. You work for the day. I give you Denarius. We're square here, we're on the same page. We've fulfilled our covenant obligations, and you've received your reward for that. So I, I think that's another thing we have to lock in here is this is not just a general idea of like unfairness that's being presented.
This is not just a general idea that people are saying the master of the house is unfair. They're saying he's covenantal. Unfaithful. Right? That's a pretty big accusation.
[00:41:09] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that is, thank you by the way, for completely stealing the whole tugen thing from me. Like I was just going hot to Tugen to find that reference.
And now all I can do is add to it. So that is from at least one of those occasions, a number 16, and I just wanna read the verse. This is 16 six. So Moses and Aaron said to all the sons of Israel at evening, you will know that Yahweh has brought you outta the land of Egypt. And in the morning you will see the glory of Yahweh for he hears your grumblings against Yahweh.
And what we are that you grumble against us. So I'm totally with you. This is not subtle. The workers first complaint here, the first workers' complaint is like theologically serious. Uh, I think that's what you're hitting us on. Like it charges the owner with injustice. Right. And as I read it, the grievance has like two layers or two parts, I would say.
One is this comparative part, which is basically saying, you made us equal to them. Right? And the second be like a meritorious part, they have worked harder and in worse conditions. And that's why they say things like, it's, it's all inflammatory language, isn't it? Like the scorching heat emphasizes like the real bodily cost and their complaint.
I think if we're honest, it's not irrational, but it's spiritually revealing at least because Right, they believe their greater effort, mayors greater reward and they resent that grace shown to others. So like you said, they're bringing forward a very serious grievance and it's, it's not just like, Hey, we think maybe could you give us a bonus?
Right. But that is a matter of faithfulness. And in fact, like as I'm looking at this tugen here, shout out to logos Bible software. And I'm saying that that verb that we're talking about in Exodus 16 is in the imperfect tense. So this is, they kept on grumbling and it is like an an echo of Israel's murmuring in the wilderness, which I presume like Matthew certainly had intentionally used there or had that view in part casting these workers as the same types of those who relate to God through entitlement rather than gratitude.
So it's like insults upon insult here, but it is to emphasize this fact that it's no small accusation, it's not subtle, it's meant to be in your face. They're coming in hot with this and they're making a big deal about it.
[00:43:16] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and again, I think like underscoring the covenantal nature of this is so key.
And I think, you know, when we look at this, we really have to land that this is not just saying. Your wage structure is not right. 'cause and, and we gotta remember, they weren't there when the master went and made this bargain, or, you know, brought these other workers into the vineyard. They weren't there to hear what covenant or contract he did or didn't make.
And as we've commented, they didn't, he didn't even make a covenant with them. He basically just said, I'm gonna put you to work and I'll pay you what's fair. I'll pay you what's right. Um, and they went, okay, you need the work and thank you. Like, I think, I think that's kind of like the, the scene here is they're standing there.
They recognize they're not gonna get a wage for the day, especially these ones that he's coming in at the 11th hour, they're not gonna get a wage for the day. And as you said, these are subsistence workers. Right. These are people that if you don't get a wage, and this is the, the grounding of the Old Testament, um, the Old Testament command of, of paying at the end of the day is that if they don't get their wage, they're not gonna eat.
They're not gonna have food, they're not gonna have the money they need to survive. Um, so he comes in and he basically says like. You don't have a job that's not gonna be good for you. I'll take care of you. I'll, I'll give you a job and I'll take care of you. And the ones who are complaining and grumbling, they have no line of sight to that process.
That, that's right. They make a lot of assumptions about the, and this is, goes back to, um. The parable of the talents, which we haven't really talked about yet. The, the, there's a lot of assumptions about the nature of this master that the, the contracted or covenanted day laborers are making that don't turn out to be accurate.
Right. They, they assume that he's working, as you've said, that he's working on this one-to-one, you know, quid pro quo. You do this, I do that kind of a, a methodology and he's actually operating on a basis of a much more. Basic, uh, grace principle. Uh, and again, even, even the principle of hiring these original workers and covenanting with them is gracious in the sense that he didn't have to hire them.
Right. So, so all along the way they're, they're, it's like the epitome of looking a gift horse in the mouth.
[00:45:24] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:45:24] Tony Arsenal: They've been hired, and so yes, it is right for them to expect their, um, to expect their wage, whatever that wage might be. But they, they are misinterpreting the idea of what the wages are and how the wages are to be delivered.
They're, they're applying, this is actually a lot like job's, friends, right? Their, their logic is not actually all that bad, but they have, they have missing parts of the picture that makes the logic. Apply differently in this particular situation. They think that this, this master works on a strict merit-based.
You do X amount of work, you receive X amount of money. And this master is actually more functioning on this covenantal principle of, I'm gonna pay you what's right, regardless of what, what work you've done, which, what work is actually owed to you. And the master makes these, this agreement with these other workers to just say, go into the vineyard and then when the evening comes, I'll pay you.
Right. Well, he intended to pay them what they needed to survive, regardless of how much work they provided. Right? So they're all, even though there's a formal contract to say these, this group works for the whole day and this group, you know, and, and they receive one day's labor, at the end of the day, he's graciously providing another day of survival for all of these people, for the work that they're, they're putting forward regardless of how much they actually contribute to his bottom line.
[00:46:41] Jesse Schwamb: And we see that in verse 13, where the landowner gives his defense, you know, it says. He and he replied, friends, I'm doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for Denarius? Now the address, because now I'm deep in the Greek Tony. Here we go. So the address I'm seeing in, uh, again, shout out to Locus Bible software, it, this use of friend is not like the warm fellows, but like a more formal or distance term of address.
It's used elsewhere in Matthew. But I think the point here is that the owner's first line of defense is this contractual point, which you're saying. I have not wronged you. He's kept his agreement precisely. No injustice has been done. And that's crucial. The owner doesn't re appreciate justice. He actually fulfills it.
He obligates himself and he fulfills that obligation. And what the worker receives is exactly what was promised and exactly what is due. And so by the time he gets to verse 14 where he says, take what belongs to you, and go, I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you here. I think this is like the theological beating hide of this whole bad boy.
Yeah.
[00:47:37] Jesse Schwamb: The landowner explicitly invokes his will, his sovereign freedom to do and to give as he pleases, which is exactly how God behaves. It's not a negation of justice, but this declaration of something beyond justice, it is grace. He exercises his freedom and generosity to those who had no claim, and the command, take what belongs to you and go is, is kind of like a world dismissal, like, like you were saying.
Yeah. We're in the courtroom. He's like, I, I've ruled on this already. Like, bring Brian, bring your grievance. Here's my ruling. Take what you have and go. Their grumbling has revealed that they're not celebrating the kingdom. They're actually grieving it. So yeah, you know, I think original invocation of like Jonah is right on the money.
It's basically like, are are you mad enough? Yeah, I'm mad enough to die. Like, how dare you give me, give me this great shade and then take it away from me. Yeah. And in some ways this is even worse because what they have been given has been that were promised to them, was given to them, and they get to retain and God says, go, or the landowner as God says, go now and take what is yours.
Take what I've given to you graciously. But your point that like what supersedes that, the antecedent to all of that is still God's covenant keeping, covenant making promise, making, right? That sets the whole thing up. But I love this idea that, you know, I will choose, it's my desire, it's language of divine volition.
And of course the reform theology, this single verb resonates with the entire doctrine of election. It's God's free, sovereign, and gracious will to bestow blessing without reference to merit, like praise his name.
[00:49:00] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And then we come to kind of the close of this parable, right? And this is, this really is like the punchline of the parable.
Like not every punchline or not every parable has like a real specific, like punchy punchline, but when he says, am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? Right? That or is a logical connector, right? It's he's saying like, these are the two logical options you have.
Either I'm not allowed to do what I want with my belongings, which of course is a ridiculous thesis, right? He's clearly allowed to do what he wishes and they would want him to do that because what he's done is he's provided them with a job and giving, giving them the labor.
[00:49:40] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.
[00:49:40] Tony Arsenal: He says, or if I am allowed to do with what I want with my belongings.
Then you must be mad at me for being generous.
[00:49:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:49:47] Tony Arsenal: Right. Those are the only options. And there's kind of a ridiculous, there's kind of, this is one of those like arguments to absurdity, right? Are you really this small and petty that you're gonna be mad at me for being generous to somebody? Right.
[00:50:00] Tony Arsenal: This, and this is, this is the Jonah effect.
This is exactly what happens in Jonah, is Jonah, um, comes from this, I'm, I'm actually preaching in Jonah too here in a couple weeks. So I've been studying, um, Jonah's prayer in chapter two, and Jonah, Jonah is rescued by the whale, right? We, we think of the whale sometimes as the judgment that God sends, and there may be an element of that.
But, but Jonah, Jonah views the whale as a vessel of salvation, right? He thanks the Lord for rescuing him from the deep of the ocean and from the, the bars of the earth and the mountains under the sea. And the, there's a lot of reasons textually to see not just Jonah's prayer, but in, in the actual narrative itself, that the, the whale is the way that God saves Jonah from drowning in the sea, not the way that he punishes.
Right. And so he comes from this, this regenerative SVA salvation process, right? He comes outta the whale, he's been praying and praising God in the whale, and he's been thanking God for his salvation, for rescuing him from the deep. And then he gets to Nineveh and he proclaims this message, and then he goes right back to like, I knew you were gonna forgive those chumps.
Right? And you can almost see God saying like, am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Am I not allowed to save all of these people and all of these cattle from destruction? Am I not allowed to do that? Or Jonah, do you begrudge my generosity with the implication of, do you begrudge the generosity that I showed you when I didn't let you sink to the bottom of the ocean and drown to death?
Or do you begrudge the generosity that I showed you where the whale was a vehicle of salvation that brought you to safety rather than digesting you and killing you? Right? Right. And that, that's the same force I think that we have here at the end of this parable. He's looking at the people and, and there's an element of like.
Put yourself in those shoes. It's almost, it's almost like a subtle retelling of the parable of the Unforgiven servant, right? Put yourself in the shoes of the people who needed a day's labor. Were not getting paid, were not being hired, and then all of a sudden, someone generously gives them the very survival that they need for the following day.
You're gonna begrudge me. That kind of generosity. If you were that person, you certainly wouldn't do that. Then there's also the, like, you're gonna begrudge me. My generosity with the implication of like, the generosity of having hired you in the first place could have hired anybody else. Um, he's really this, it's really this rhetorical master move.
And then again, then this is exactly what Jesus does. The people who are listening to him in many, many instances identify that the parable is told against them. They identify that the parable is actually a form of judgment against them. Right? I have to think that the Pharisees and the scribes, especially the Pharisees, um, and the Sadducees who only had the, only had the, um, the Pentateuch only recognized the Pentateuch.
I had to think, I have to think. They're coming out of this, looking at it and going, he just called us the grumbling Israelites. Can you believe this guy?
[00:52:43] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:52:43] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. He did. Like, that's exactly what you are, you are the grumbling Israelites, and, and that's the force of this parable on the heels of this young man who walks away sad.
I didn't look at the Greek yet, but walks away disturbed at the fact that he's not going to get the salvation he believes is, is guaranteed to him because of his love of obedience to the law. He's like, I have to do one more thing. I have to, I have to work one more work to get the salvation. I'm gonna walk away sad at that.
Well, the answer is that he's begrudging the generosity of the Lord in providing salvation apart from his mar and apart from his works.
[00:53:18] Jesse Schwamb: That's right. That's right. Yeah. That's, that's beautiful. By the way, just so like you said, Tony, we should giving it a warning so people don't like at us or send a bunch of random messages to our inbox, our form brotherhood.com.
Uh, we know great fish whale. We're using that interchangeably. Everybody calm down. It's true. Just in case. Could have been a whale. Yeah,
[00:53:35] Tony Arsenal: I mean,
[00:53:36] Jesse Schwamb: one of, doesn't matter. One
[00:53:37] Tony Arsenal: of the, one of the gospels uses the word whale, so I think we're fine.
[00:53:40] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, we're, we're covering all bases there.
[00:53:42] Tony Arsenal: Yeah,
[00:53:42] Jesse Schwamb: I totally agree with you on that.
[00:53:44] Jesse Schwamb: 'cause the climax of this is like something interesting I think in the orientation of the final statement. So this idea of the, the, so the first, so the last, see I already got it twisted. So the last will be first and the first last. It actually does reverse the formulation that we were just looking at in chapter 19 where Jesus says the first will be last and the last first man say that like six times best.
[00:54:04] Tony Arsenal: I know it's tough.
[00:54:05] Jesse Schwamb: So it, but it doesn't complete, it does complete like this kind of a, I inclusio, I guess around the parable. The inversion I think is not merely like a social statement in light of what's unfolding in this drama, but it is so te logical. So those who approach God on the basis of this accumulated merit like you've been saying, or.
Religious piety or even like, dare I say, covenant superiority or seniority. We'll find that those calculations are totally irrelevant in the kingdom economy. And those that receive the grace of God with empty hands, the gentile, the sinners, the 11th hour called if you want to, those are gonna stand fully on equal footing before this sovereign owner and the saying then resists any kind of triumphalism or celebrating over somebody else the last, or not exalted because of their lateness, but because of God's great grace, or the owner's great grace.
And so I think that's the thing that we get to kind of settle in. Like you take a deep breath at the end of this because really most of us are this 11th hour call. And again, it's, it's like understanding and putting yourself in the place of the humble, the place who is the sinner, because you know, that's.
Whom God has come and condescended to save in His loving kindness, like His has said, is for those people who recognize that they're exactly the kind of ones who need that. And so here we find it's much better, like you're saying, to be in the place in some ways of that younger brother who comes in repents than to be the older brother who is stubborn and find some reason, some justification to come before God with self-righteous grievances or what you believe to be self-righteous complaints in his kingdom and in his courtroom, because you do not wanna stand in that place.
You know, even, even, I remember there are times like in Israel's history, when they're in the wilderness, where they come against Moses and Aaron, even for like their relationship with like foreign women, and they complain to God and God basically says, stop complaining about. My servants. You know, even there like you must be very careful, I guess.
If you wanna come against God with what you think are your self or righteous grievances, you better not miss. Yeah. And so here now saying it's better for you to humble yourselves that he avenges this kind of behavior. He comes hard against those who are prideful, but instead the humble, he lifts up the humble, he comes and he rescues.
Like I said, even in Jonah, what we find there is the whale. The great fish is God's formation of Jonah as a loving father who disciplines and chastises not as one who punishes. And so here too, we find some of that echo, that it's better to understand that we don't want to be among the complainers. What we want to be is among those who are willing to recognize and receive God's gracious provision for us.
[00:56:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:56:34] Tony Arsenal: And one last, one last little bit of nerdy Greek here that I think underscores this covenantal, um, covenantal aspect of this that we're talking about when he says to them, or do you begrudge my generosity? Um, if the, if the, um, video caught my perplexed look, it's, 'cause I was trying to figure out why the word I was related to this.
Uh, the, the phrase here is actually, do you give me the evil eye for my generosity?
[00:57:01] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:57:01] Tony Arsenal: This is good. Good. And I think what it's getting at here is he's saying like, do you curse me?
[00:57:05] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:57:06] Tony Arsenal: Because of my generosity. So that does, that ties into this covenantal language. He's basically saying either I'm allowed to do what I want with what I, what it belongs to me.
Or are you gonna curse me in a, probably in like a covenantal sense, are you gonna call down the covenantal curses because I was generous to somebody else.
[00:57:23] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:57:23] Tony Arsenal: And it's, it's in this way. That so is not, it's not, therefore it's a demonstrative. So it's in this way, in, in this way where those who are, um, those who receive God's generosity, recognize it.
Um, and those who fail to recognize God's generosity are. Are dismissed because of it. It's in that way that the last will be first, right? Yes. The people who, who are sold out to the generosity of God and they trust him, and they, they, yes, they come and they work, right? But the, the response of a day laborer at the 11th hour when someone comes and says, look, I've still got work to do it.
It's one of overjoyed response. It's not, it's not thinking they're gonna earn a lot of money. It's not thinking they're gonna, they just get to work and they're thankful and they trust that person. Uh, and, and that's what we see is salvation in the Christian faith is we turn to Christ. We recognize his generosity.
We trust that he's going to, he's gonna do what's right. He's gonna take care of us. And in that way, the last will be first, those who are, are late to the party. Those who not necessarily like this isn't necessarily a parable with saying like. You know, like the people who have deathbed conversions are somehow the, the, the first, um, it, it's, it's not temporal in the sort of idea of like those who've been saved for the longest are represented by the day laborers and those who are sort of new converts are represented by the 11th hour people.
It's saying those who are, are, um, those who abandoned themselves to the mercy and generosity of God, those people will be first in the kingdom of God. And those people who are so like, tied to and connected to and, and, um, sort of locked into this idea of covenant merit as the primary EE economy of how God operates, um, those people will be last.
I'm not entirely sure, you know, like, this is still all operating within the Kingdom of Heaven, within this is what the kingdom of heaven on earth appears like. Um, so I think we, you know, I don't think we're gonna do another episode. I think we, we probably have covered this sufficiently, but it'd be interesting to sort of tease out like, what does that mean for the people who are in God's kingdom?
And let's just say it like, sorry, perform Baptist, like in God's kingdom, um, who are not. Apparently not actually sold out to the grace of God here. Um, what does it mean for those people who are in God's kingdom and are now the last? Are they the last, the last in terms of the last who will still be saved?
Are these the ones Paul talks about who are saved as though through fire? Or, or is there something else going on here? Um, I would love to hear people sort of theorize and think about that as they've listened to this. And Jesse, how could they do that if they wanted to talk to us about this little question I've dropped?
[01:00:01] Jesse Schwamb: Man, that was like so smooth. So smooth. Yeah. Listen, people you already know, do I, I know I don't need to say it, but like I'm contractually ally by way of the podcast obligated to tell you. That there's a little corner of the internet in this messaging app that's called Telegram, where we all hang out.
And by all of us, I mean all of us, except for you who's listening right now, that's not in it. Why are you not in it? So here are the instructions on how to find your way there. Go to your browser, type in t.me back slash reform brotherhood t me Back slash reform Brotherhood Do. Link will take you to that corner of the world.
And you can see we have a bunch of channels set up where people are conversing from everything to just general topics, to the episode, to prayer requests, to food reviews, to just good plain Christian reform, theological fun. I said, it's just fun. So come hang out, go to t.me/reform brotherhood.
[01:00:50] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And for those of you who are sick of us promoting the Telegram channel, I'll just ask you, are we not allowed to do what we choose with our airtime or do you begrudge us our free podcast?
[01:01:01] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Listen, do you have an evil eye? And, and do you said that so well, Tony. I love a good Jewish idiom. Like for instance, I love that when we read of God being long suffering, the text literally says he's long nosed.
[01:01:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[01:01:14] Jesse Schwamb: And here this idea of the evil eye is like this Jewish idiom, connoting like envy or stinginess or like, uh, miserliness or parsimonious.
So because I, I just happen to look that up by Proverbs 28 22 says, A man with an evil eye hurries after wealth and does not know that want will come upon him. That's so good. Yeah. So don't, don't have the evil eye. Come hang out, come hang out with us.
[01:01:39] Tony Arsenal: Well, Jesse, I'm glad to be back. I feel like, uh, I'm back in the saddle or Yeah, you are.
I dunno. Back, back in, I dunno. In the field. I dunno what the right analogy is.
[01:01:48] Jesse Schwamb: Backstreet's back.
[01:01:49] Tony Arsenal: I was backstreet's back. Yeah, I, I was trying to figure out whether I was gonna go with a Backstreet back joke or a slim shady joke. Um, in my mind they sort of merged together, like if I had good technical audio skills, I might make a sweet mashup of some really awesome out of date, like white boy semi hip hop or something like that.
Uh, but I'm not gonna do that 'cause. If anything is worse than I think so. Well, slim Shady, it's me trying to synthesize slim Shady, so I'm not gonna do that. Uh, but I'm glad to be back and it is the real slim shady. I'm the real slim shady something, something. Um, but yeah, it's gonna be great. We're gonna keep going in the parables.
We don't know how long it's gonna take. Uh, we didn't even know we were gonna do this parable tonight. We sat down let's, we were like, what are we talking about tonight? We're like, let's just keep going in the parables. So we're gonna keep at it. So stick with us. Um, pick up a good commentary, read ahead, pick up a good, you know, a good Bible translation and follow along with us.
Uh, and join us in the telegram chat so we can kind of keep talking about this and having these conversations long after the episode ends.
[01:02:50] Jesse Schwamb: You got it. Well, listen, everybody's been hearing me say it, but man, are they gonna be glad to hear you say it? Honor everyone.
[01:02:56] Tony Arsenal: Love the brotherhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this compelling solo episode, Jesse Schwamb unpacks one of Scripture's most famous—and misunderstood—passages: Jesus' confrontation with the Pharisees and Herodians over paying taxes to Caesar. Far from being a simple political soundbite, Matthew 22:15-22 reveals Jesus' brilliant wisdom in dismantling false dilemmas and redirecting our focus to identity rather than ideology. Through careful exegesis, Jesse demonstrates how Christ's response cuts through political posturing to address the deeper question: Whose image do we bear? This episode serves as both a masterclass in biblical interpretation and a timely reminder that our ultimate allegiance belongs not to any earthly authority, but to the God whose image we carry. Perfect preparation for the podcast's upcoming journey through the parables of Jesus.
Jesus' response to the tax question brilliantly redirects attention from political obligation to theological identity. When He asks "Whose image is this?" about the denarius, He's employing the Greek word eikon—the same term used in the Septuagint translation of Genesis 1:27 for humanity being made in God's image. This isn't coincidental wordplay; it's deliberate theological teaching.
The profound truth here is that while Caesar's image on a coin establishes his claim to that piece of metal, God's image stamped on humanity establishes His total claim on us. We are not our own; we were bought with a price far greater than any taxation. The coin metaphor works because it's a physical representation of ownership and authority—but our bodies and souls are the true "coinage" that belongs to God. This reframes every political question as ultimately subordinate to our identity as image-bearers, reminding us that our primary citizenship, allegiance, and obligation is heavenly, not earthly.
Jesus' statement "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" has often been misinterpreted as establishing a complete separation between sacred and secular realms. However, Reformed theology—particularly Calvin's interpretation—understands this passage as establishing legitimate but limited civil authority within God's sovereignty. Caesar's authority is real and should be respected; Christians are called to submit to governing authorities as Paul argues in Romans 13.
However, this authority is derivative, not ultimate. Caesar operates within a sphere that God ordains and limits. There is no zone of existence that belongs exclusively to Caesar, outside God's jurisdiction. The state has legitimate claims on our obedience, our taxes, and our civic participation—but never on our worship, our ultimate allegiance, or our conscience when it contradicts God's law. This creates a framework for Christian citizenship that takes earthly government seriously while never granting it the totalizing authority that belongs to God alone.
The conclusion of this encounter is sobering: the Pharisees and Herodians were "amazed" but unchanged. They marveled at Jesus' wisdom, were intellectually outmaneuvered, and had nothing more to say—yet they walked away to plot His crucifixion. This demonstrates a crucial truth for evangelism and apologetics: winning an argument is not the same as winning a soul.
Intellectual defeat can coexist with spiritual hardness. Someone can acknowledge the brilliance of Jesus' teaching, be unable to counter His logic, and still refuse to surrender their life to Him. This reminds us that conversion is the work of the Holy Spirit, not merely the result of superior argumentation. Our task is faithful witness and clarity in presenting truth, but we must pray for the Spirit to do what only He can do—soften hearts, open eyes, and bring dead souls to life. Astonishment at Jesus must give way to submission to Jesus.
"You can never corner Jesus. Of course, you can never catch him off guard. And while those seem like very just trite and straightforward explanations of who he is and what his character is like as the son of God, we should not go away from them too quickly because what we find here is the wisdom and the brilliance of God in providing teaching to cut to the hearts of what is actually in the question."
"Caesar can have his coin, but he cannot have you. Not in any ultimate sense. You and I, loved ones, we belong to God."
"Being out argued is not the same as being transformed. You can leave someone with nothing to say and still not reach the heart."
[00:00:08] Jesse Schwamb: So here's the trap. If Jesus says yes, pay the tax, he completely alienates the crowd of Jewish pilgrims who are beginning to believe that he might be the Messiah who will liberate Israel from Rome if he says. No, do not pay it. He could obviously be reported to the Roman authorities as a seditious rebel.
Either answer loses. There's really no good way out of this. At least on the face. Either answer costs him something, his popularity or his freedom, and this is what we call a false dilemma. The Pharisees think that they've got him cornered. But here's the thing, loved ones they haven't. You can never corner Jesus.
Of course, you can never catch him off guard. And while those seem like very just trite and straightforward explanations of who he is and what his character is like as the son of God, we should not. Go away from them too quickly because what we find here is the wisdom and the brilliance of God in providing teaching to cut to the hearts of what is actually in the question.
And Jesus doesn't play this game.
Welcome to episode 487 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse, and this is the podcast for all those with the Imago Day.
Hey, brothers and sisters, so let's talk taxes. Now you should know that the Reform Brotherhood is not that kind of podcast, but I suspect that you had one of two responses when you heard that topic.
Either it piqued your interest or you thought, I'm just totally gonna skip this episode, and I get that. That's a polarizing topic. It's in part why I said it at the top, but I want us to chat a little bit today about a passage of the scripture where Jesus himself brings up taxes, but not in that way. In fact, he demonstrates some exceptional teaching, showing the wisdom of God in a very difficult and complex circumstance.
And so we're gonna spend just a little bit of time hanging out in Matthew 22.
[00:02:17] Jesse Schwamb: Now, why are we doing this? Why this on this episode? Well, we're about to continue on the podcast, our inexorable march through all of the parables of Jesus as we go into the summer months. It's parable, summer loved ones, which I realize sounds like a horrible name for like a low budget drama.
But in this case, Tony and I are about to reem embark or pick up our journey in the parables of Jesus. And what we find in Matthew 22 is this little exchange. It happens. And it actually is in the midst of a bunch of parables that are happening. It's in some ways a response to the parables that Jesus is bringing forward.
And also, I just love this passage so much, and since we're doing one more solo episode, before we, we reunite and the band comes back together and we start talking about parables. I thought this is a great way for us to, again, consider the teachings of Jesus. In light of everything that he's saying and teaching in these really lovely stories.
And so we find ourselves to think right in Matthew 22, which is a great place to be. So come hang out with me there. Grab a Bible, go stop your car right now and pull up on your phone the Matthew 22 so you can read along with me because this is something fantastic. It's one of the most famous passages actually in the gospels.
And also at the same time, it's one of the most misused texts in the history of political theology. Because people on every side of almost every date about this topic, especially taxes since they're mentioned here, have reached for this passage, like it's some kind of Swiss Army knife. So I think the best thing that we can do.
Our conversation right now is, let's slow down a little bit. Let's chill out. Let's get easy. Let's read it carefully and figure out what Jesus was actually doing here because it is, I promise you, far more interesting than just like a soundbite about taxes and the way that I beta you. At the top of this episode by saying, let's talk about taxes.
[00:04:09] Jesse Schwamb: Now, before we get to this particular passage, here's a bit of scene setting, which I think is really important before we get to verse 15, which is where we're gonna pick up. Jesus has entered Jerusalem in the triumphal procession. He's cleansed the temple. He's cursed a fig tree, and he delivered three withering parables aimed directly at the religious establishment.
We've got the parable of the two sons. The parable of the Wicked Tenants, the parable of the wedding banquet, which by the way, we're gonna get to all those bad boys. They will all have their own episodes because they're all brilliant and exceptional in each their own way, and they deserve for us to sit in them a little bit.
But by the time we reach chapter 22, verse 15, I think at this point the Pharisees have heard enough. They are not stoked about the fact that Jesus is coming after them and coming in hot. And so the response is, let's set a trap. Let's now go back on the offensive. Let's give Jesus a test in front of everybody.
So he's gonna be pinned down with something very difficult to explain or to answer. And so that's exactly where we find Matthew writing in 22 verse 15.
[00:05:15] Jesse Schwamb: Here's where we pick it up. Matthew writes under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Then the Pharisees went and took counsel together about how they might trap Jesus in what he said, and they sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians saying, teacher, we know that you are truthful and teach the way of God in truth and deferred a no one for you are not partial to any.
Therefore, tell us what do you think? Is it lawful to give a tax to Caesar or not? But Jesus knowing their wickedness said, why are you testing me? You hypocrites, show me the coin used for the tax. And they brought him a denarius and he said to them, whose likeness in inscription is this? They said to him, Caesar's.
Then he said to them, therefore rendered Caesar, the things that are Caesar's and to God, the things that are god's. And hearing this, they marveled and leaving him, they went away. What an incredible passage. I love this so much in part because we're about to see here this wisdom in the teaching of God through Jesus.
It's both spicy. It comes with almost like a clenched fist. It strikes back, but it gets to the root of something that wasn't even part of the original question and unentangle the trap to such a degree that the end result is that. Everybody is left speechless and they just have to walk away.
[00:06:41] Jesse Schwamb: And it starts with this idea that the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words.
Matthew actually uses this interesting word here, this idea of they took counsel together. It's a formal deliberate scheme. In other words, they definitely talked about this. It's premeditated, it's not impulsive. It's a confrontation with design. And the Pharisees are doing opposition research. They want to.
Trap him, tangle him up. The Greek is to snare or to trap in a net. So they're hunting. They're trying to snipe Jesus, and they're going to send in this least likely combination of collaborators, collaborators, to do this whole thing. It's worth noting here. These groups that we have in the passage, the Pharisees and the Herodians, these guys were natural enemies.
The Pharisees were Jewish priests or purists who despised Roman rule, and the Herodians were political pragmatists who basically owed their power to Rome. And so these guys, you can imagine, they agreed on almost nothing except that Jesus needed to be stopped. And when your enemies join forces to come after you.
I guess you know, you've been effective. We might think about the own, own, our own times in which we live and the kind of polarized way our societies tend to be bending and tilting right now. And to think what would it take for everybody to come together, unite on common hatred or disagreement about some kind of third element or party?
What would it take for that to happen? And so here, there is. The sense in which both the Pharisees and the pros for all of their dislike toward each other, for all their philosophical and religious disagreements, for all of their political conniving against each other, they are completely united in this purpose.
And they easily come together to say, Jesus, we must deal with, and it requires all of us, let us come together and reason against him finding a way that we can consolidate our effort and power to such a degree that we leverage one another to entrap him. So there's something here where I think they're demonstrating what the Psalms say that God, when the nation's rage against God, he laughs.
He holds 'em in derision. And here's a perfect example of that. In a microcosmic kind of way, we find these two groups who really should never be with one another, finding common ground and unity to try to defeat. Jesus.
[00:08:56] Jesse Schwamb: And so this delegation arrives and here is their approach to Jesus. They say, teacher, we know that you are true and you teach the way of God truthfully, and you don't care about anyone's opinion.
For you are not swayed by appearances. This is some kind of magnificent flattery, and it actually, it's almost entirely true, which just makes this so ironic. There's a confession among the Herodians and the Pharisees, even as I tried to undermine Jesus, you know, that's what makes this so dangerous. They say you don't care about anyone's opinion.
You're not swayed by appearances. They're essentially saying you can't be pressured. You'll answer honestly no matter what. And in saying so, they're trying to pressure Jesus, of course, into answering honestly. But it's like a rhetorical judo move. The compliment is the trap spring mechanism. Calvin, in this passage, likes to know that they address Jesus as teacher to feign respect while concealing this animosity, this ho hostility that they have towards him.
They want him to be relaxed. Flattered off guard as if it's possible to take the son of God off guard, but notice what they're actually confessing in that flattery. Jesus is truthful. He teaches God's way accurately. He's not a respecter of persons. Every word they speak in false praise is true testimony about who he is, which makes their hypocrisy all the more damning.
And this is the thing, for as much as anybody wants to try to blaspheme Jesus for as much as anybody wants to come at him with one particularly. Facet of his character. For instance, he's a good teacher or he seems to teach peace and love and truth and that, and that's it. They compliment him while at the same time confessing themselves short of the true confession of who he is.
And so it's ironic to me that these guys. Who in their hearts are holding all of this malice toward Jesus. Say, well, you're not a respecter of persons because you th see things as they are and not merely as they appear to be, while all the time thinking that they're truthfully concealing the fact that they hate him and yet are flattering them with his, flattering him with their tongues.
The absurdity of this is absolutely insane. And so I think if you're in this moment, you have to be appreciating. This sense of what is building here? How is Jesus going to respond? The trap has been set. They've tried to flatter him, and of course he's not buying it. But they start with this question. All of that's a set up to say here is like the real punchline.
Tell us then, what do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?
[00:11:36] Jesse Schwamb: Now, if you're like me, quite honestly, you might wish that Jesus answered this question differently. This is the trap, the trap. Snapshots on this single question or so they think, I mean, I, I truly believe they think they're being really smart here, that they've come to terms with maybe lots of ideas.
I don't know what they did. Whatever the equivalent of using chat GPT was, they said, how can we entrap Jesus? They all got together. They devised a plan. I'm sure they had. Some kind of whiteboard where they're brainstorming ideas and some came up and said, no, that's not gonna work. And others came. I imagine they settled on this because they thought there was no way outta this.
And in some ways it's actually a really brilliantly engineered dilemma. The tax in question here is the kenzos. This was the Roman poll tax. A denarius per head paid directly to Rome, and it was incredibly and deeply controversial. Some Jews viewed paying it as completely an act of collaboration with an occupying pagan power, and the zealots called it outright sin, and the HEROs thought it was perfectly fine.
So here's the trap. If Jesus says yes, pay the tax, he completely alienates the crowd of Jewish pilgrims who are beginning to believe that he might be the Messiah who will liberate Israel from Rome if he says. No, do not pay it. He could obviously be reported to the Roman authorities as a seditious rebel.
Either answer loses. There's really no good way out of this. At least on the face. Either answer costs him something, his popularity or his freedom, and this is what we call a false dilemma. The Pharisees think that they've got him cornered. But here's the thing, loved ones they haven't. You can never corner Jesus.
Of course, you can never catch him off guard. And while those seem like very just trite and straightforward explanations of who he is and what his character is like as the son of God, we should not. Go away from them too quickly because what we find here is the wisdom and the brilliance of God in providing teaching to cut to the hearts of what is actually in the question.
And Jesus doesn't play this game.
[00:13:40] Jesse Schwamb: Jesus aware of the malice says, why? Put me to the test. You hypocrites, show me the coin for the tax. He doesn't even pretend to take the question at face value. He immediately identifies what's happening. This is a test and you all are hypocrites. Now, for me, I think if you are in the seats or standing in the shoes or the sandals, I suppose, of the Herodians or the Pharisees.
I would be like, if I were on the side, I would be like, pull up, pull up, get out, get out. He's onto us just just with Jesus directly coming at them and labeling them as hypocrites. I think that itself undoes all of this. They've been exposed from the very beginning and Jesus doesn't mess around. It's like him coming into the temple to cleanse the temple, and it's as if in his left hand, he has mercy in his right hand.
He has that cord that whip. And the word that Matthew uses here for hypocrites is one that Jesus deploys with like surgical precision throughout his this gospel. A hypocrite is someone performing virtue they do not possess. And right away he identifies it. These men are performing concern for Jewish law while actually serving their own political agenda.
And I love that the son of God in power does not put up with that at all. And then, and I think this is. Absolutely delightful. Jesus asked them for a coin of all the things he could have said or done. Here's where there is like a little bit of a kind of a parable feel to this. He asked for the physical object, the thing that they're talking about.
He asks, and interestingly, he doesn't have one. He's the guest of Pilgrim, the one without a Roman Denarius in his pocket. But, and here's what's interesting. Loved ones, they produce one immediately for him, which means the people who are asking whether it's lawful to use Roman currency are already using Roman currency.
Jesus hasn't even answered yet, and hypocrisy is already self-evident. I think that's a considerable fact. The, the instance that they're able to produce the coin promptly, I don't think is a minor detail. It implicates them. They're already participants in the Roman economic system, which. I would say it's not necessarily a bad thing.
Their question about whether it's lawful to pay taxes to Caesar is somewhat undermined though by the fact that they're carrying Caesar's money in the temple precincts. In other words, the whole thing just smells a setup. And even Jesus asking for the coin is showing them and others around them that not is he onto them.
Not only does he see through them, but he is undermining the complete argument that they're making, showing that the question that they need to have answered is actually not about taxes at all. It's about something much deeper he's about to answer or bring forward the question, rather, whose image is on you.
[00:16:29] Jesse Schwamb: And he starts by holding up the coin and saying, whose image is on this? So they bring him a denarius and Jesus says to them, whose likeness and inscription. Is this now the denarius of Tiberius Caesar bore his portrait in the inscription. The inscription, generally historians say, said something like Tiberius Caesar, son of the Divine Augustus, and it was a claim of divinity stamped into everyday commerce.
This is why so much of the Jews found it so offensive to participate because it felt as if in every transaction you were affirming in some way the divine authority of Caesar. It was a claim that was stamped on the coin and therefore represented in every kind of transaction that took place throughout the lamb.
Every time a Roman coin changed hands, Rome's imperial theology was in some ways quietly proclaimed, and Jesus holds it up and he asks this obvious question. Whose face is on this thing, and the Greek word for likeness here, whose likeness is, this is the word for image. This is the word the SubT uses in Genesis one.
When God makes humanity in his image, in the Imago day, Jesus is about to build an argument that depends on this resonance, whether his questioners hear it or not. Whose image is on the coin and whose image is on you. Those are two very different questions with two very different answers. And of course, they lead to this incredibly famous reply, one that's known by most people, but I think not understood by many.
So they said, Caesar's Caesar's image is on this coin.
[00:18:12] Jesse Schwamb: So Jesus says to them, therefore. Render to Caesar, the things that are Caesars and to God, the things that are God. I think of almost all the places in the scriptures. This might be Jesus at his most dazzling. I say that partly. Subjectively, because I'm captivated by this whole encounter.
I'm captivated and drawn in by the son of God and his teaching here. I'm captivated by his ability to see through what's happening here, and I'm captivated by the truth that he delivers. But I think I'm not alone because objectively, when we get to the end of this, we find everybody else marveling.
Notice that Jesus doesn't choose between the two horns of this dilemma. He reframes the entire question. He blows up the entire premise because even here, the choice of language is so incredible. The word render means to give back what is owed, to return, what belongs to someone. Sometimes we hear this as give, give to Caesars.
What is Caesars? Just give it to him. This seems like a, a secular question you're asking me. So keep this secular nonsense out of what is this sacred life? But instead it's not just give it's give back, render as in this was already his to begin with. So give Caesar back. What has Caesar's image on it? The coin bears his image.
The coin belongs to his realm, fine. But when that, but then comes this, this second half, this glorious truth, that's far better, and this is where the weight falls. Give to God, what has God's image on it. And what of course, bears the image of God, you and I, every human being made in the mago de bears the divine image.
Caesar can have his coin, but he cannot have you. Not in any ultimate sense. You and I loved ones. We belong to God. And of course, from a reform perspective, this is the bedrock of what we mean when we speak of the Lordship of Christ over all of life. There's no zone of existence that is only Caesar's.
Caesar operates within a sphere that God ordains and limits. The state has legitimate authority. Paul's gonna argue that in Romans 13, but the authority is derivative. It's not ultimate Caesar's domain is real, but bounded God's domain is total and unbounded. And so that's why. Calvin insists that Jesus never divides life neatly into sacred and secular.
Rather, he is establishing that all of life is lived before God, and within that totality, there are legitimate temporal authorities to whom we owe appropriate submission. The coin goes to Caesar, but the person. The image bearer of God is owed entirely to the Lord.
[00:20:50] Jesse Schwamb: I was thinking, again, reading through Genesis, just how beautiful the CR creation narrative is when it comes to mankind, that God is ex ne hill speaking things into existence.
He's showing his great command over all things. The spirit hovering over the waters from the beginning. And here's God in this Trinitarian act, bringing into the existence, all the things that you and I know, all the things which are familiar to us that we still marvel at, but are part and parcel peace wise of the world in which we live.
And I sometimes forget that when it comes to that day, when God creates man, that he forms him and then he takes a breath and he breathes. The specialty of that type of creation that you and I are derivative and contingent beings, but we're way separate than all of creation because God has breathed his very breath of life into us.
And in that way, it's not just that he set us up and said, let me design mankind to be like me, which he does. Let us make mankind in our own image that Trinity says in the scriptures, but also that consummation of life. Comes from the very breadth of God himself. And in that way we find that human beings are doubly special.
I would say that one, that God has formed us to be like him to exhibit many of his qualities, but two, that life itself didn't come just from merely speaking, but there's an intimacy. More or less loved ones. He put his lips on ours and breathed into us so that we might be alive. And of course, the scripture itself tells us that the second life, the abundant life, salvation itself is very much like that.
In the same way, Jesus didn't come to make bad people good. It came to make dead people alive. And so we need that breath of life again. And when we are surrendered to him, when he comes and arrests our hearts, when he does that incredible surgery of cutting us and removing that heart of stone and replacing it, one with flesh, we are made alive in Christ so that we gain more in Jesus than what we lost in Adam.
[00:22:50] Jesse Schwamb: So what is everybody's response when Jesus explains all of this? Well, I love what the scripture says when they heard it. They marveled and they left him and went away. They marveled the Greek here is, is the word actually for enthusiasm. They were amazed and astonished. It's not actually polite appreciation.
This is like draw drop of people who came to spring a trap and watched it spring BRAC on them. There was no follow up question. I love this, don't you? That this is so complete, so succinct, so confronting, so condemning, so damning that they had nothing, they, they left. Imagine maybe they looked at each other with that look of like, does anybody else have anything else they wanna say?
'cause if not, I just want to get outta here right now and notice what Matthew doesn't say. He doesn't say that they repented, he doesn't say that they believed they were astonished. And they left. They walked away. And this is one of those sobering realities of the gospels. Jesus could silence his opponents without converting them.
Intellectual defeat is not the same thing as spiritual surrender. The Pharisees went away to a pla to a. Construct a plan essentially of crucifixion of how to kill him. And being out argued is not the same as being transformed. I think for us in evangelism and apologetics, it's a good reminder that winning the argument is not the goal.
Clarity is a gift and faithful witness matters, but conversion is the work of the spirit. You can leave someone with nothing to say and still not reach the heart, and this should move us to pray accordingly. So I'm amazed by this teaching because it draws us back to this understanding that what the Pharisees meant to use for entrapment to in the temporal space.
To divide Jesus, to make him basically say something that he did not want to say, to put him in a place he did not want to be. Instead, he uses the convey the greatest message of all, and that is we are God's children. And ironically, the ones who are professing to be God's children had missed the point altogether because what they really needed to ask was, whose image is on you?
And as a result of that, what ought you to render that is to give back to God, and that is ourselves.
[00:25:00] Jesse Schwamb: So here's some things I would say that we can take away from Matthew 22. A few things I think worth holding onto as you and I go about our weeks first, Jesus can't be cornered. And I, I understand that that's like obvious to say, but don't you love that about the God man?
Like every intent to trap him. In this chapter and throughout the gospels now and forevermore results in his opponents looking worse than when they started. And this is how we know that we can trust Jesus, that we can trust his power, that he is for us, that his enemies will ultimately be subdued, that they will be humiliated and made low, that he is the one who cannot be caught in his words because his words are truth.
I love that the scripture just tells us the truth about reality, and so we come back to it time and time again because we find it both. Warm, comfortable blankets in which we might cuddle up as it were and find ourselves comforted by God. But also it does have a sharp edge that like a knife cuts against us sometimes to remind us that we serve a holy God and that we are sinful people.
It never shrinks away from the truth when that hard edge of the law must be brandished against us, and it also at the same time, never ceases to apply the bomb of the gospel to our lives where we need healing and restoration and comfort. Here's the second thing in my mind, this question, this big question, is it lawful?
And what a question by the way, right? Like, you know, you could couch this in lots of different ways. Should we pay taxes? That's kind of how we think about it. But this idea of like, no, no, no. Is it lawful? Which law are we talking about? The law of God or the law of the land Even that is left for this kind of subjective reasoning to entrap.
This was a question though about politics. And Jesus answered with a question about identity. I love that. Whose image is this? That is always the deeper question in my mind. And before you ask what you owe the government, we ought to ask what do we owe God? And remember that you yourself are what you owe him because you bear his image.
So we start from this place where we don't get it twisted like we do in Romans one, when we're outside of God. That is, we don't wanna change the truth of God for Allah here. We need to remember that Presuppositional, all that we are, all that we have, all that we've been given, all of this is God's. And so in that contingent sense, we are merely pouring back to him that which is already due, his name and his praise.
And so that's the place where we start. Third, I think there is a legitimate but bounded role for civil authority in Christian understanding of the world. That's something Tony and I have talked about before. You can go back into the Reform Brotherhood catalog, which by the way exists in reform brotherhood.com.
You can find all of the 400 deficits back there. There's a search function, so you can just type in a word and at this point I'm guaranteed some episode will come up. We've talked about this before. How we're not theocrats, we're we're pilgrims. Who hold our earthly citizenship loosely and our heavenly citizenship with everything that we've got.
So there is a role in our land for civil authority. Paul, again will argue this very cogently in Romans 13. At the same time, we don't wanna get it twisted. We don't want to have too much focus on that. And too little focus on the fact that our heavenly citizenship is what truly defines us because of who we are.
And finally. Amazement is not enough. The Pharisees were amazed and walked away unchanged. We can't just be impressed by Jesus. We must be His. And to remind you, even I think as we engage in the parables that are ahead of us and the teaching that is behind us here in this episode, that it's not just to marvel and say, wow, isn't Jesus.
Good because he is, and he is really great with his teaching. He's really great at perceiving all of this. But more than that, he's Lord and Savior of all. He's guiding us not into just like better rhetoric and how to defeat like Pulic argumentation. He's drawing us into the very heart of God, into love for him and for service for one another.
And it starts with who we are and how much of our society right now. Has gotten all of this confused such that a lot of our problems is because we do not realize who we are. We are trying to change who we are, change the rules of who God has made us to be, and in this way we shipwreck our lives. And so Jesus calls us back with this simple question, whose image is this?
And in that question, our loved ones, I would encourage you all to meditate, to metabolize it, to set yourselves to it. Because the task of answering that question is the task of understanding who God is and who we are in light of who God is. So there you go. Uh, just a little bit of teaching from Jesus that I think is so helpful for us, especially as we move into more parables that he's about to expand.
As we go through, I don't know how many that we have left, but there's a lot of 'em, so you're gonna want to continue to hang out with us, I think, because we're gonna go through these, talk about them, process them together, pull in some exegetical chops at the same time, make sure that we're trying to apply these things, because that's the whole point here.
There's so much here. I think that could be said. But I'm gonna leave the application to you. So take your time meditating and thinking through this lovely teaching.
[00:30:08] Jesse Schwamb: If you wanna come hang out and do some of this together, which, why would you not wanna do that? We are super fun people. That's what everybody says.
Come and join us in the Telegram chat. You've heard me say before, telegram is just a messaging app, and we have a small corner of that app that's a private group of listeners from all around the world who are just hanging out together. We're talking about the episodes, we're talking about life together.
We're sharing prayer requests. We're. Tasting things and recording videos of how delicious or not those things are. So if you're curious now about how you can join, it's super easy. Just go to any browser and type in t me slash reform brotherhood, t me slash reform brotherhood. One more time. Everybody in the back.
It's t. It's in telegram.me back slash reform brotherhood and then you'll find a link which will take you right to the place where we are all conversing together.
[00:31:00] Jesse Schwamb: So that's it on this episode. Come hang out. We're about to jump back into the parables. The band will be back together. It's everything that you wanted and more and, and I hope that you'll come and hang out again.
But until you do, you should definitely honor everyone and love the brotherhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this deeply personal and theologically rich episode, Jesse welcomes his wife Jenn to discuss suffering, steadfastness, and God's sovereign purposes in pain. Jenn shares her ongoing journey with endometriosis—a chronic illness that has led to multiple surgeries, emergency procedures, and ongoing medical challenges. Through candid conversation, they explore how suffering is never condemnation for believers but rather a refining tool in God's hands. This episode moves beyond abstract theological discussion to demonstrate how Reformed doctrine meets real life, offering profound encouragement for anyone walking through prolonged trials. Jenn's testimony reveals how moving from a victim mindset to a steward mindset transforms suffering into an opportunity to comfort others and glorify God, even when answers remain unclear.
One of the most transformative insights Jenn shares is the concept of moving from a victim mindset to a steward mindset in suffering. This shift doesn't minimize the reality or severity of pain—Jenn's experience with emergency surgeries, a temporary colostomy, and now a nephrostomy tube is genuinely difficult. Rather, this perspective acknowledges that God can be trusted even when circumstances feel overwhelming. The concept of stewardship typically applies to blessings—time, talents, resources—but Jenn extends it to suffering itself. If we truly believe Romans 8:28, that all things work together for good for those who love God, then even our most painful experiences become something to steward faithfully. This means asking God not just "why?" but "how can you use this?" It means looking for opportunities to comfort others with the comfort we've received from God (2 Corinthians 1:4). Jenn's ability to help others facing colostomies or endometriosis demonstrates this stewardship in action—her suffering became preparation for ministry to others facing similar trials.
Throughout the conversation, Jenn repeatedly returns to God's character and sovereignty as the foundation for enduring prolonged suffering. When doctors told Jesse that only two resections out of thousands had failed—and his wife's was one of them—the natural response would be to feel victimized by terrible odds. Instead, understanding God's sovereignty reframes even statistical anomalies as part of His purposeful plan. This doesn't mean suffering is easy or that pain doesn't hurt, but it does mean suffering is never meaningless or outside God's control. Jenn's starting point in processing each new medical challenge is not her emotions or even her physical pain, but God's trustworthy character. This theological foundation—that God is good, sovereign, and has purposes we cannot always see—functions as a filter through which every diagnosis, setback, and difficult day must pass. Without this anchor, suffering becomes unbearable randomness. With it, suffering becomes a crucible for sanctification, an opportunity to experience God's sustaining grace, and a platform for displaying His glory to a watching world.
One of the unexpected fruits of Jenn's journey with chronic illness has been the opening of conversations about faith with non-believing friends and coworkers. When people observe someone handling devastating diagnoses and repeated medical setbacks with genuine (though not perfect) peace, they notice. Jenn recounts multiple instances of people saying, "I don't know how you're handling this so well," which creates natural opportunities to point to the source of that peace—not personal strength, but God's sustaining presence. This aligns with 1 Peter 3:15's instruction to always be prepared to give a reason for the hope we have. For believers, suffering is never wasted because it demonstrates to a skeptical world that Christian faith is not merely theoretical or confined to good times. The gospel proves its power most clearly when it enables believers to endure what should be unbearable. Jenn's testimony shows that effective evangelism often flows not from having all the answers but from displaying authentic dependence on God through difficulty, which prompts questions from those who lack that anchor in their own suffering.
"I don't always have to do the fighting. I don't have to fight this stuff. The Lord will do it for me. He'll fight for me. I just have to trust him and be still and he's got it." — Jenn Schwamb
"God never said that this was gonna be easy... I often think, well, why wouldn't it happen to me? Like, why wouldn't it happen to any of us?" — Jenn Schwamb
[00:00:44] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 484 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.
[00:00:52] Jenn Schwamb: I'm Jen.
[00:00:53] Jesse Schwamb: And this is the podcast where two Become one.
Hey sister.
[00:00:57] Jenn Schwamb: Hey brother. That's so weird. Did not like that at all.
[00:01:03] Jesse Schwamb: Well, listen, before we get into it, and we're gonna get into a great conversation on this episode about suffering and steadfastness and encouragement, and we're gonna talk about it like you have never heard it talked about on the Reform Brotherhood podcast before.
And that's in part or in whole because we got a special guest, the most specialist guest in my view, that we have ever had on this podcast. Why don't you tell us who you are?
[00:01:28] Jenn Schwamb: Um, I'm Jen, your wife.
[00:01:30] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, you are. And we figured it was about time after 10 long years, and it took 484 episodes to get Jen to come onto the podcast.
Listen, this is one of the great marriages of all time. That's what people are saying, not me. Other people are saying that about us.
[00:01:51] Jenn Schwamb: I don't think so.
[00:01:51] Jesse Schwamb: And they're absolutely saying it. And it's finally time that we had you on the podcast, and I am super excited. On a scale of like nine to 10, how excited are you to finally do this?
[00:02:01] Jenn Schwamb: I'm terrified. I'm so uncomfortable already. This is so weird. This
[00:02:07] Jesse Schwamb: is fantastic. Everybody we're sitting in now, our makeshift Kitchen studio, two microphones at the kitchen table across from each other, just doing what the Reform Brotherhood Podcast does, talking about God. And that's what we intend to do today.
But of course, before we get to the topic at hand, you know. Or actually maybe you don't know. You know a little bit about affirmations and denials, but even, even before we get there, there's an important thing we gotta talk about, and that is how many podcast episodes of the Reformed Brotherhood would you have said you have listened to?
[00:02:38] Jenn Schwamb: I am pretty sure zero, maybe half. Maybe half of one. Because I do remember, I remember when you and Tony had the idea for the podcast, and I remember you guys starting to record episodes early on, and I feel like I'm certain, I tried to listen to it, but very quickly. So
[00:02:58] Jesse Schwamb: kind
[00:02:58] Jenn Schwamb: very quickly was like, Nope, not for me.
[00:03:00] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we understand we are not everybody else's jammed, so this is why it makes good sense then to start this episode with a quiz about their reformed brotherhood. Oh no. Wow. For you to answer. So I have five questions here for you. And these are all questions about the Reformed Brotherhood, which I think many of these you'll be able to answer just by way of, I don't think
[00:03:19] Jenn Schwamb: so.
[00:03:19] Jesse Schwamb: Osmosis all. Are you ready? It's gonna be great. Get excited. Question one. How did the Reform Brotherhood podcast officially begin? Was it a,
[00:03:30] Jenn Schwamb: oh, that's multiple choice.
Okay.
[00:03:31] Jesse Schwamb: Tony accidentally purchased two microphones instead of one and wanted somebody to talk to.
[00:03:36] Jenn Schwamb: Nope.
[00:03:36] Jesse Schwamb: Was it B? I didn't think there were enough Reform Theological podcasts in the world.
[00:03:42] Jenn Schwamb: No.
[00:03:43] Jesse Schwamb: Was it C You and my sister went shopping and left Tony and I at a brewery, or was it Dee Tony found someone who was wrong on the internet?
[00:03:52] Jenn Schwamb: Well, I mean, it could be Dee as well, but it was C because we were at Trobe's Brewery when Ashley and Tony were visiting us here, and I don't know how it came up, but you and Tony, well, maybe it came up while Ashley and I were shopping.
[00:04:05] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:04:06] Jenn Schwamb: I couldn't remember if you guys talked about it and then we were like, we're outta here. Or if we had already left and then you, when we came back, you guys were like, guess what? We're gonna start a podcast.
[00:04:15] Jesse Schwamb: We need a sound effect. You absolutely got that correct. Okay. And. I think it officially began once you left us.
This is what happens, I'm sure. Okay. When you leave us alone,
[00:04:23] Jenn Schwamb: we all noted,
[00:04:24] Jesse Schwamb: we started a podcast and then at a
[00:04:25] Jenn Schwamb: brewery,
[00:04:26] Jesse Schwamb: 10 years later, here we are sitting across the table from each other recording an episode. Alright, question two. Okay. It's a little bit more difficult.
[00:04:33] Jenn Schwamb: Oh no,
[00:04:34] Jesse Schwamb: but I'm confident in you. Which of the following is not a catchphrase of the Reformed Brotherhood podcast?
Is it A, that makes me want to run through a wall. B, Calvinism has the Riz C God does all the verbs. Or, D, salvation is like a cake. Now remember, you're looking for the one that is not,
[00:04:57] Jenn Schwamb: first of all, the fact that you're telling me that. You guys say multiples, like there's more than one of, there's the one that you don't say don't.
That's concerning to me. I'm hoping. I'm hoping it's the one where you said Riz. 'cause you and Tony shouldn't be saying Riz.
[00:05:12] Jesse Schwamb: It is not your final answer.
[00:05:13] Jenn Schwamb: Yes.
[00:05:13] Jesse Schwamb: B Calvinism has, you are correct.
[00:05:15] Jenn Schwamb: Okay. Yeah. Good. You guys
[00:05:16] Jesse Schwamb: can't be saying that. Said that in my life.
[00:05:17] Jenn Schwamb: You can't be saying that.
[00:05:18] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that you're absolutely right.
Thanks. Phew. Thanks for calling us out in this hypothetical world that I've created. Alright, question three. This is more difficult still. R Scott Clark is a reformed theologian, theologian pastor, professor and writer who is often mentioned on the podcast. What does the R in his name stand for? Is it a Randy b Rufuss?
C Reginald D. Nobody knows. What does the R in R Scar Clark stand for?
[00:05:51] Jenn Schwamb: I've never heard of that person.
[00:05:54] Jesse Schwamb: If you had to guess Randy Rufuss, Regina Reginald, or nobody know
[00:05:57] Jenn Schwamb: I Reginald, but I'm gonna go with nobody knows. 'cause I don't know.
[00:05:59] Jesse Schwamb: You are right on both accounts. Okay. I would've taken both. So the great joke we have is we call him Reginald, but nobody actually knows.
So
[00:06:06] Jenn Schwamb: like, actually nobody knows. Like the internet doesn't know.
[00:06:08] Jesse Schwamb: I don't know. I don't think so.
[00:06:10] Jenn Schwamb: Chachi? Bt doesn't know.
[00:06:11] Jesse Schwamb: I don't think
[00:06:11] Jenn Schwamb: so. Oh, impressive Art. Scott something.
[00:06:14] Jesse Schwamb: Clark.
[00:06:15] Jenn Schwamb: Clark,
[00:06:15] Jesse Schwamb: yeah. So really you just cleaned up on that question by getting both. Is he
[00:06:18] Jenn Schwamb: alive
[00:06:18] Jesse Schwamb: of the potential? Yes, very much so.
[00:06:20] Jenn Schwamb: Oh, I feel like somebody could find out what the art stands for.
[00:06:24] Jesse Schwamb: The whole fun now is the secretive nature of this whole thing. It's a beautiful thing. It's a, it's a lovely mystery like the Trinity, but certainly not as profound. Alright, question four, only two more left. And you are batting a thousand right now. Phew. You're better at this than I think you thought you were gonna be.
I had every confidence. Alright, question four. The podcast was once famously nominated for an award.
[00:06:45] Jenn Schwamb: No,
[00:06:46] Jesse Schwamb: what was that? Thank you for the confidence. What was that award? Was it a top 50? Healthcare Podcasts? B. The top PO 10 podcasts with hosts who look similar. C, top 100 Theo Theology podcasts that won't stop making episodes or D Top 25 podcasts about the weather.
Which of these did the Reform Brotherhood actually receive a nomination for?
[00:07:14] Jenn Schwamb: Oh my God.
[00:07:15] Jesse Schwamb: Was it Healthcare? The one were the
[00:07:17] Jenn Schwamb: same one, like they're still making episodes.
[00:07:19] Jesse Schwamb: Final answer.
[00:07:20] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:07:21] Jesse Schwamb: Oh, so close. So the great joke is, at one point in time we were nominated as a top 50 healthcare podcast, like nominated in quotation marks.
[00:07:29] Jenn Schwamb: That sounds vaguely familiar. Now that. But I don't remember why.
[00:07:32] Jesse Schwamb: Apparently affirmations, denials had put us into a category of healthcare at one point. So,
[00:07:37] Jenn Schwamb: oh, it's like therapy or something.
[00:07:38] Jesse Schwamb: We'll get there. Yeah, something like that. Alright, final question. And at this point, three for four is a really strong showing.
I'm very impressed. Here is the last question. Perhaps the hardest of them all. Question five, who speaks the most on the Reformed Brotherhood podcast? Is it a Tony?
[00:07:59] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah. Or just Tony? Based on what I can hear through the floor of our, of our house. I, I am aware of when you're speaking and I'm guessing it's Tony,
[00:08:10] Jesse Schwamb: we're gonna go with a Tony.
[00:08:11] Jenn Schwamb: Yep.
[00:08:12] Jesse Schwamb: Everybody knows. Everybody knows. We love Tony. We miss him on this episode, but not as much as I enjoy having my wife with us.
[00:08:19] Jesse Schwamb: So let's move in then to affirmations and denials before we get to the topic at hand. You know the drill, and if you're listening for the first time, we do these things called affirmations and denials because we're coming alongside the reformed tradition where it would come and say, I affirm with these principles, or deny against these things.
And we've taken that to use in our own conversations as, here's some things we really, really like, or here's some things that are really not that great. So, Jen, I ask you on this episode, are you affirming with or or denying against something?
[00:08:49] Jenn Schwamb: Affirming.
[00:08:50] Jesse Schwamb: What are you affirming
[00:08:50] Jenn Schwamb: with? Oh, I have to go first.
[00:08:52] Jesse Schwamb: Yes, you're the best.
[00:08:53] Jenn Schwamb: I don't even know how you guys do them. 'cause I've never listened and I don't think you had affirmations and denials when you first started.
[00:08:59] Jesse Schwamb: No. This, that was, who
[00:09:00] Jenn Schwamb: knows when that started. There's one episode that I maybe listened
[00:09:02] Jesse Schwamb: to. Yeah, that's a great question.
[00:09:03] Jenn Schwamb: Um, well welcome. I decided I was gonna affirm because it was the first thing that came to my mind when you told me I was gonna have to do something.
Uh, and I don't know, maybe you've affirmed it before, but it is the brand of clothing re, which I am decked out in right now. Specifically their joggers and their hoodie sweatshirt.
[00:09:20] Jesse Schwamb: Alright. But you gotta tell the people like why you like this. There's so much you call them, they're,
[00:09:24] Jenn Schwamb: oh, well, what I call, and not just me, but my friends and my car.
I've never heard
[00:09:28] Jesse Schwamb: anybody else say this.
[00:09:29] Jenn Schwamb: These, these specific sweatpants, which are the VUI performance joggers. Uh, we call them butter pants because they feel like butter. They're really soft, they're really comfortable. I will say the brand is not particularly cheap. They're a little on the pricey side. I do not normally spend this amount of money on clothing.
I shop at thrift stores, but when it comes to my athleisure, I like to be comfortable. And so these are my favorite. I'm wearing right now, the performance joggers and a hoodie, and I'm never been more comfortable.
[00:10:04] Jesse Schwamb: And we really should be sponsored by Vori at this point.
[00:10:06] Jenn Schwamb: That'd be great.
[00:10:07] Jesse Schwamb: That's a, I mean, that would be great for
[00:10:09] Jenn Schwamb: what if you got a sponsorship for Vori after the one episode that I was on.
[00:10:14] Jesse Schwamb: This is gonna be the definitive Vori episode. I also do, I have a pair of these? Did you get me a pair of pants?
[00:10:20] Jenn Schwamb: Uh, I got you a pair of pants once you tried 'em on. And we were both like, no. Oh, that's a good, that was not a good choice.
[00:10:25] Jesse Schwamb: It was a fit though.
[00:10:26] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah. Not a good choice for you.
[00:10:29] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:10:29] Jenn Schwamb: That particular swim, they were comfortable.
You have. Something
[00:10:34] Jesse Schwamb: nobody knows.
[00:10:36] Jenn Schwamb: Oh, there's, oh, maybe you don't.
[00:10:37] Jesse Schwamb: No,
[00:10:37] Jenn Schwamb: I got your rabbit stuff. That's true. You like to wear the rabbit brand. Also affirming that very good brand
[00:10:42] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Of athleisure. So you're looking for something that's super comfortable and if whatever reason you've ever thought to yourself.
These pants are slightly more rough than I would like. Is there something that would feel like somebody put butter on my legs, then there's good news.
[00:10:56] Jenn Schwamb: Mm-hmm.
[00:10:56] Jesse Schwamb: That's a really strong affirmation.
[00:10:57] Jenn Schwamb: They're out there.
[00:10:58] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. I think that's great. Alright, so I'm gonna also affirm with on this episode, and it's has to do with you 'cause it's something you just brought home and I'm enjoying now.
I did just buy that right before we started coughing. We, we, the background is we've had a little sickness in our household, A little flu, a little cold action, which we were pretty good in convalescing from. And then all of a sudden we decided, why don't we set up some microphones? And both of us had never wanted to cough more in our entire lives.
[00:11:24] Jenn Schwamb: I never wanted to cough more than right this second.
[00:11:26] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. That's how it goes. It's like when something funny happens in church and you've gotta keep it together. Same principle play here. So, but you brought home and I'm enjoying this non-alcoholic beer, which has been my jam recently. I'm really just enjoying.
Having the treat of beer but without the alcohol, which is nice. And this is a brand I haven't had before, Bero, BERO,
[00:11:47] Jenn Schwamb: I think that's how you say it.
[00:11:48] Jesse Schwamb: And I am trying the double tasty West Coast style IPA because it's fun and it's, it's actually delicious. So I think it used to be that when you had non-alcoholic beer, you knew you were having it because it tasted funky.
Just bad.
[00:12:05] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:12:05] Jesse Schwamb: I dunno why I'm asking you, but
[00:12:06] Jenn Schwamb: I know you're looking at me like, you know when you've had all that non-alcoholic beer
[00:12:10] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:12:10] Jenn Schwamb: For so many years.
[00:12:11] Jesse Schwamb: For as much alcoholic beer as you've had as episodes, you've listened to the podcast.
[00:12:14] Jenn Schwamb: Exactly.
[00:12:14] Jesse Schwamb: What did you think? But this is fantastic and I've had a couple recently and they're just so good.
I wouldn't be able to tell. So it's really nice.
[00:12:21] Jenn Schwamb: It looks like a beer.
[00:12:22] Jesse Schwamb: It does. It has like the head of a beer. It has a little bit of that lacing on the side of the glass. But also more than anything, I wanna cough so bad right now, so this is like
[00:12:31] Jenn Schwamb: delicious. Do you wanna tell people why I think that beer to buy or do we not wanna say that?
And by beer, I mean non-alcoholic beer.
[00:12:36] Jesse Schwamb: Is there a secret?
[00:12:37] Jenn Schwamb: Because Tom Holland's affiliated with it somehow and he's Spider-Man that, and I love a Marvel movie. I movie know. That's how I found out about it. He talked about it like on a late night show or something, and he, I don't know if he created it, if he's a partner in it, if he, I don't know, he's sober.
And one, it was looking for good. I remember him talking about looking for good non-alcoholic beer. It didn't feel like there were many out there. So he had some sort of involvement in that
[00:13:00] Jesse Schwamb: and thought so he just made it himself.
[00:13:01] Jenn Schwamb: I don't know. I just knew he's affiliated and I hadn't seen it anywhere. And then this morning I saw it, so I had to get it.
[00:13:07] Jesse Schwamb: It's really good. I feel a little tingly this, these are all kinds of jokes Tony would love right now. Ugh.
[00:13:13] Jenn Schwamb: I can't wait for Tony to listen to this.
[00:13:15] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, neither can.
[00:13:16] Jesse Schwamb: It's gonna be a joy for everybody and I think it really will be because I've, you and I have talked about doing a podcast for quite some time, having it on the podcast, not this type podcast.
That's true. All we have had all kinds of ideas. But when it came time for me to think about people that I would like to talk to in this season of the podcast, honestly, you were the first one that came to my mind. And in part that's because we've got some stuff going on in our lives and you in particular, and for a while you've been on a journey of sorts.
And I think that the one thing that Tony and I try to bring into all our conversations is that. If the, if your theology doesn't work in the course of normal life, then it just doesn't work. So it doesn't matter how much we know and how much we process, what we can even recapitulate or regurgitate in terms of profound theories and philosophies and big words, if it is not the kind of thing that draws us close to our Lord Jesus Christ, that enables us to serve him, to love others more and to have the kind of firm faith that he desires for us in this life as we live it abundantly in the way that he's given it to us, then what does it matter?
And you have a profound amount of theology in your life and in practice, and that's something I very much admire. And so we chose this topic because we thought it'd be super fun for everybody. Let's talk about suffering and let's talk about steadfastness. And we've talked so much in the past, and this is what makes it special.
We talked so much in the past about how suffering exists because of the fall, but it's govern governed by, governed by God's sovereign providence. And for believers, suffering is never a condemnation. You and I've talked about that quite a bit. Because Christ has made a way through all of that. He's paid for that fully on the cross.
The mortgage in our soul has been paid in full. We talked about that actually in the last episode. Instead, though God doesn't remove this suffering, he uses it to sanctify, to harmful, to refine, to preserve his people. And that steadfastness is the grace enabled endurance of faith through trial, sustained by the word, through the prayer, through ordinary means.
All the things that are part and parcel that you hear people say in reform theology. But really only matter when we impound them in our journey and we are anchored in them by the promise that after suffering comes glory. And so in all of that, Julia thought about you. So I think maybe a good place to start is maybe talk a little bit about your journey.
Why? Why you're even one that I want to talk to you about this topic.
[00:15:38] Jenn Schwamb: Well, I don't know why you wanna talk to me about this topic. You've certainly heard enough of it. Um. I guess I don't know where to start. So I guess I'll start with the end, which is I, uh, suffer from a chronic illness called endometriosis.
Um, specifically I deal with, um, an aggressive form called deep infiltrating endometriosis, which means that mine likes to infiltrate all sorts of organs that it does not belong in. Um, it's an illness that affects women, uh, it affects a lot of women. I was actually just telling Jesse that I just discovered this morning, I think on Facebook, that it's Endometriosis Awareness Month.
Who knew? And that it said something on there about, you know, one in 10 women suffer from endometriosis. Wow. Which was shocking to me because, you know, think of 10 women. You know, at least one of them is probably dealing with this. So I have endometriosis, have had it for a long time. Um, it's very painful.
Um, it's very awful. There's a lot that goes into that and I'm not really sure where to start in that story. Um,
[00:16:48] Jesse Schwamb: and this is something that, like you said, you've discovered a little while ago was gonna be part of your life. And we should say that this is why we're one of the top 50 healthcare podcasts or you're about to be
[00:16:59] Jenn Schwamb: now.
[00:17:00] Jesse Schwamb: So on this episode, there is gonna be a little bit of medical talk, I think. So just take that as a fair warning on the conversation. Why don't you explain a little bit like, can we call it Endo? I know that kind of like Yeah, we
[00:17:10] Jenn Schwamb: can call it endo
[00:17:10] Jesse Schwamb: makes it sound cool, but it's not cool. Not cool, but like basically just generally what it is.
[00:17:16] Jenn Schwamb: So what it is essentially is, I was gonna say I don't, dude, I'm guessing most of your audience is dudes.
[00:17:23] Jesse Schwamb: Get ready guys,
[00:17:24] Jenn Schwamb: um, about to say the word uterus a bunch of times. So buckle up. Um, essentially endometriosis is uterine like tissue. That is outside of the uterus. And so it causes all sorts of problems because it gets inflamed, it causes bloating, and it responds, um, in a variety of ways.
That's very frustrating and awful for some women. Um, it's mostly impacts them during their menstrual cycle. For other women, it impacts them every day of their life. All the time. They're in pain constantly. We discovered that I had it, I'm trying to think, probably 16, 17 years ago, um, as a result of, um, Jesse forcing me to go to the emergency room after he found me, I think crying on the floor of our house, um, and telling him, no, it's normal.
It's just cramps. This is just cramps. This is what girls go through. Spoiler alert is not just cramps and that's not normal amount of pain to be in. So we discovered it then, uh, after a trip to the hospital and discovering that I was littered with fibroids, um, and then had surgery for that, which is where we uncovered the endo.
Um, 'cause often endo is diagnosed via like a laparoscopic surgery. It's not, it doesn't show up on MRIs or other imaging, right? So the way to confirm that you have it is via like an exploratory surgery. Uh, so that's when we found out that I had endo, but it made a lot of things make sense because I had been dealing with what I just thought was just really painful cramps for probably most of my, I dunno, teen years into adulthood.
Um, had never heard of Endo before. As far as I know, nobody in my family also experienced it. So it is common if, if it's in your family, like you might also have it, but not for me. Yeah.
[00:19:12] Jesse Schwamb: So let's talk about then, 'cause this is all important in getting to this point of how this has impacted you and how this, how you understand theology and your servanthood in this and you're bearing up underneath this.
But maybe you want to just say briefly, after finding out that that's part of your life, what are some things you've been through because of this?
[00:19:30] Jenn Schwamb: So when we found out about it because of the fibroids, I had had surgery months, I think probably after that to have the fibroids removed and some endo excision, uh, or ablation at the time.
'cause I didn't know the importance of excision then, um, to have it removed and felt a lot better for a little while, maybe for a couple of years. Um, and then have experienced all sorts of things, um, as a result of endo largely besides the pain and all of that stuff. Um, I don't know if Jesse's talked about it on the podcast before, but one of the main things with endometriosis is very common for people to suffer from infertility as a result of endometriosis, which has definitely been our story.
Um, but on top of that, I've had. I don't even know so many surgeries. Yep. Um, I've had some surgeries that didn't go the way that we thought they would go and things that we didn't even know were possible. Right. Um, so probably, I guess it was eight years ago now, nine years ago, in 2018, I had had a surgery to remove more fibroids and to remove endometriosis.
And what I remember about that surgery was that I think it was supposed to be four hours long. So when I woke up, it was supposed to be noon. And I, that was what I remember going to sleep and thinking when I wake up it'll be like lunchtime. And I remember waking up and the surgeon sitting next to me, which was unusual, and I remember her saying, Jennifer, it's five 30 or something like that.
Right. And I just remember thinking, that's not. Right, right. What happened? Um, and a lot of things had happened that I found out within the hours after that. And essentially in that surgery, they had determined, they had come to Jesse and asked if they could move me into open surgery from the laparoscopic to get better access to it.
In the open surgery, discovered that the endo had infiltrated, like I said, uh, my colon, uh, they needed to bring in another surgeon to do a resection of my colon, all with Jesse's permission. So he's just like in the waiting room saying like, I guess, go ahead.
[00:21:29] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:21:30] Jenn Schwamb: Do what you need to do. Right. Um, so when I woke up from that surgery, essentially I found out that it had infiltrated my colon and that they had done a resection.
They had taken about six inches, I think of my colon out, put it back together. So all was well we thought. Um, and then while I was in the hospital recovering from that, I was in the hospital. I think it was like day seven I was being discharged. I remember vividly you tying my shoes. Yes. That's the part I remember.
I had just gotten dressed. Jessie had just tied my shoes. We had just signed the discharge paperwork and I remember saying, I don't feel really good. And Jessie said, get back in the bed. And I said, no, no, no. I'm just nervous about going home. Uh, I think that's why I don't feel good. And then everything after that was a blur because the next thing I remember is that I was in the bed, that there were a lot of people around me.
I remember people covering me with bags of ice.
[00:22:21] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:22:22] Jenn Schwamb: Um, and I don't remember a whole lot after that, but the short version of that long story is that I ended up having another emergency surgery, turned out my resection had not taken. I was leaking, going septic. Um, and so I had to go into emergency surgery and came out of that surgery with a lovely colostomy bag
[00:22:41] Jesse Schwamb: Mm.
[00:22:41] Jenn Schwamb: That Jessie had to tell me about. Mm-hmm. He had to live That's right. To deliver that news. I forgot
[00:22:45] Jesse Schwamb: about that. Um, so that was a whole traumatic and just dramatic situation, wasn't it? I remember when the doctors were putting all that ice on you and you were spiking like an incredible fever. I remember calling everybody I knew just to ask that they would pray and.
That's another example I think that's we'll get to is God being good to us in that journey in very difficult times, always showing up even when everything felt like it was, it was falling apart. And so you went in for a surgery that was supposed to be outpatient, right? As wild as that was supposed to go home.
Remember that home? Yeah. Then it took an extra, like five hours. Then it was possible that, uh, what happened basically is that that resection didn't fuse properly through nobody's fault. In fact, the doctor who did that surgery, who since did my gallbladder surgery Yeah. This past year.
[00:23:35] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah, that's right.
Same guy.
[00:23:35] Jesse Schwamb: He was such a kind doctor. Really? God brought us to him and he was so beside himself with grief over that it didn't work. And I remember when I spoke with him. And he come out after that second surgery and said, I'm so sorry, but, but she's gonna have to have a temporary colostomy. And he was just devastated by having to have done that, even though he, we all knew it was a possibility.
And so I said to him, well, well, how many of these have you done? He said, thou, I've done thousands of these. And the resections, I said, how many of them have had a problem where it didn't take? And he said, including this one. I said, yes. He said two. So, I mean, talk about how, how do you think about something like that when.
Everything around you is like telling you, well, this is just really bad luck, or you've just been really given, you've drawn the really short straw. But instead, you know, our perspective is, is very, very different than that. And, and I wanna get to that, but now you're kind of up against something else, right?
There's more things on the horizon. Yeah.
[00:24:33] Jenn Schwamb: Now we're, now we're back to it. Um, so it had the colostomy, like Jesse said, it was temporary, had it for five months, had another surgery five months later to have it reversed. It all went well. It was great. Um, I had a few years, a number of years there where I was feeling pretty good.
Um, last few years could tell things were ramping up again. Maybe not doing so hot. But to be honest, um, I was really putting off any sort of surgery conversation. 'cause the last one wasn't great. Right. So really didn't, wasn't eager to do it again. Um, but recently, um, I had been having a lot of pain in my back and my like right.
Right hand side of my back, particularly during my cycle. And I just would tell Jesse, oh, it's just normal endo stuff. It just comes with a territory, right? It's what you, what you gotta deal with. Um, and then, um, back in October, that pain that normally I could kind of get to go away with a bunch of medication and some icy hot patches would not go away.
Uh, it just would not relent. And I was texting some of my medical professional friends and they were like, you should just go to the hospital just to make sure that it's not something more serious. Um, so went through that whole process, went to the er. Um, turns out, um, the, my endo that likes to infiltrate things has now infiltrated my ureter and was blocking my ureter, which was causing my kidney to be swollen and angry, which was what was causing the pain.
Um, when I was in the hospital for that, they kept me, did a procedure, I forget what it was called, but essentially tried their best to remove
[00:26:04] Jesse Schwamb: the blockage.
[00:26:04] Jenn Schwamb: The blockage. They didn't know it was endo. I knew it was endo. Right. Um. They removed it, put in a stent. Um, I had the stent for about a month, all while still in a lot of pain, still communicating with the doctor that something doesn't feel right, I think something's wrong.
Um, went back to the ER about a month later. Turns out stent had failed. So now I have this lovely thing called a nephrostomy tube that is in my back. It's a tube that is directly into my kidney. Um, comes outta my kidney, outta my back, and is attached to a bag that is strapped to my leg. And that's, I have basically a, what I call a urine water balloon attached to my leg all over the time.
[00:26:46] Jesse Schwamb: Go. So another catchphrase
[00:26:47] Jenn Schwamb: for the
[00:26:47] Jesse Schwamb: podcast.
[00:26:48] Jenn Schwamb: So, um. It's, I'm, I've gotten to experience, I feel like, uh, the gamut of, I've had the colostomy bag and now I have the nephrostomy bag. Uh, this should be temporary. That's the hope and the plan. I'll have this until I have surgery again, which is scheduled for in May.
Um, at which point I will have a total hysterectomy and a bunch of other things and a repair of my ureter. They'll have to kind of do what they did with my colon. They'll have to do a resection of my ureter, take out that portion where the endo is, reimplant it in my bladder, possibly move my bladder up.
I don't know. It's very whole, they, it's a lot of things. It's
[00:27:26] Jesse Schwamb: be a whole
[00:27:26] Jenn Schwamb: zoning out. When the urology, urologist was telling me, 'cause I just was like, I don't know what you're talking about.
[00:27:31] Jesse Schwamb: It's gonna be a party in that or loved ones. That's, that's what we keep saying.
[00:27:35] Jenn Schwamb: Yep.
[00:27:35] Jesse Schwamb: That's what's ahead. So I should stop there and say, I pray for Jen.
Pray for us if you would, that is coming up in a couple months. If you're listening to this, it's, and it's before may, we definitely cover your prayers. This is the big one.
[00:27:48] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah,
[00:27:49] Jesse Schwamb: right. This is the big one.
[00:27:50] Jenn Schwamb: This is the one.
[00:27:50] Jesse Schwamb: It's a lot
[00:27:51] Jenn Schwamb: we didn't wanna have.
[00:27:52] Jesse Schwamb: It's a lot. Yeah, it's a lot. And it's difficult and it's hard.
And you're probably hearing from us like this is real stuff. And that's why I was so grateful that Jen would be willing to talk about this, because I think there are people that need to hear this, need to hear, there's encouragement in this, that there's others who are experiencing this type of thing.
But I think the best place to start is something that you and I have talked about a little bit before, which is how, how, maybe that's the best place. Just how I think, especially for teens. I
[00:28:19] Jenn Schwamb: don't know.
[00:28:19] Jesse Schwamb: It's difficult to understand, but you've been through a lot of things, and I know that you've experienced the depth of some of those things, especially after that first surgery with the colostomy.
But what has, what has God brought you through? Like what is it that when it is hard that you, you find yourself going to God for?
[00:28:42] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah, so. It's hard. I don't wanna say it's hard to talk about 'cause it's not only, it's hard to talk about. I'm an open book. I'll tell anybody anything. I just don't often talk about this.
I don't bring it up because I also feel like when you get me talking about it, I think it's, I'm very tempted to say it's not a big deal. It's really not that big of a deal, right? When other people are like, no, it isn't a big deal. I'm like, there's really not. 'cause I think about like so many women or men that go through such just way worse things.
And there are a lot of women, particularly with endometriosis, that are in pain every single day. And very, I'm very fortunate that that is not always the case for me. I'm not in pain all of the time.
[00:29:21] Jenn Schwamb: Um, but to your point, when I was dealing with the colostomy in particular, that was a really, really hard time.
It's amazing what time does 'cause over time, I look back at that and go, oh, it wasn't so bad. And you're like, remember it was really bad. It was 10, but you know, as time goes on, you're like, no, it was okay. It was all right. Um, but I do remember. Having a really, really, really hard time with it. I remember journaling a lot.
That's how Jesse knows I'm really going through something is if he sees my journal out, he's like, oh no. Uh oh. Um, because that is often how I'll, like when I'm going through something really tough, I'll journal my prayers. I'll write to God in the journal when I'm thinking. And I just was really struggling with that.
'cause spoiler colostomy is rough. Yes, it was hard to learn. It was a big learning curve. And they just send you home with a bunch of stuff,
[00:30:12] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:30:12] Jenn Schwamb: And a lot of instruction, and you're just reeling and you're like, I don't understand how this works. And I have to eventually go back to work and I have to have this, and what do I do?
And what if something leaks? Like it was just, it was a lot to deal with, even though I knew it was temporary. So I remember in those times just journaling a lot, praying a lot, asking God to. Make it clear why? I just kept asking, I think I was asking why, like why do I have to have the colostomy
[00:30:37] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:30:37] Jenn Schwamb: There has to be a reason. I know there's a reason. Could you tell me the reason? I would like to know the reason. I'm waiting to hear the reason, you know, like I just remember being like, what is it you're, I know you're looking at it. I know you can see right the path ahead. Um, and I remember reading a book at the time.
I wish I could remember the name of the book 'cause I would love to tell you, I don't remember what it was. I do know it wasn't about suffering.
[00:31:03] Jesse Schwamb: Was it by ars Scott Clark?
[00:31:04] Jenn Schwamb: No, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Also, I'm sure Jesse's never talked about this on the podcast, but it is shocking that I was reading a book because not really a big reader.
[00:31:14] Jenn Schwamb: Um, but I was reading something and I remember one of the quotes in the book was something along the lines about, it was about like accepting your circumstances from God, knowing that like God could be trusted and that he knows best and has your, you know. Best in mind and kind of getting to that acceptance of your circumstances and then moving from that acceptance, like, if you can get to the acceptance of your circumstances, you can then ask God to use those circumstances to glorify him.
And if you can get to that point, then you're mo it was something about like moving from victim to steward. Mm-hmm. That's the part that really stuck with me,
[00:31:54] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:31:54] Jenn Schwamb: Was that movement from not no longer being a victim and being a steward. And I just remember asking God to help me be a good steward of the situation.
I don't like feeling like a victim. That's partly why I don't like talking about the stuff, is I don't want people to feel bad for me.
[00:32:10] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:32:10] Jenn Schwamb: Don't feel bad for me. It's fine.
[00:32:13] Jesse Schwamb: I feel great for you.
[00:32:13] Jenn Schwamb: Good. Great. I don't want people to feel bad. Um, and I, I don't wanna feel like a victim. I'm not. I just, I don't, you know.
And so I remember asking God just, could you help me be a good steward? Like, what, what would that look like? And I remember asking God that like he would just gimme opportunities to talk to other people maybe that have to eventually have colostomies. I didn't know if I ever would. Spoiler. I did get to, which was crazy.
Um, and I mean, during those times too, I had a lot of family and friends that would reach out and share passages and verses. I was just thinking, I've had people I remember very distinctly too, during that time, my sister, uh, Stephanie sending me a text. It was like shortly after I was home, and I don't remember the exact reference.
It was somewhere in Exodus and it was the, it was, uh, the Lord will fight for you. You need only remain silent. You need only be silent or still, or something like that.
[00:33:05] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:33:05] Jenn Schwamb: And I remember the time being like, why would she send me that? Like, I don't even know how that fits. What, come on Steph, come, what, what does this mean?
But then I remember really kind of sitting with it and thinking about it. And I've had friends in my recent circumstance send me that same thing. Wow. Out of nowhere. Also named Steph.
[00:33:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:33:22] Jenn Schwamb: A friend named Steph Wow. Has sent me that passage and just kind of, you know, thinking about that, that I don't. I don't always have to do the fighting.
I don't have to, I don't have to do it. I don't have to fight this stuff. I just, the Lord will do it for me. He'll fight for me. I, I just have to trust him and be still and he's got it.
[00:33:41] Jesse Schwamb: So how has, like some of this stuff, maybe everything you've been through, but something in particular changed how you view God or how has going through those things changed your relationship with him because you've been through some stuff together.
'cause I'm, I'm with you. We, we look at the scriptures and we see this amazing example from David who is saying to God all the time, why and how long and what are you doing? So we know like we're standing on, in like the shadow of those who great heroes of the faith have come before us and understand that God can hold up to our questions and our time about suffering.
I feel like it's maybe the most honest thing we can do is to just cry out. And no doubt you were doing a lot of that. I remember that. So having cried out to God, maybe move from victim and steward, how has that changed your relationship with him? How you view him?
[00:34:29] Jenn Schwamb: Um, I'm trying to think of how I wanna like, say that.
I mean, if anything, I think it really, in those hard times, in the continued hard times, it certainly makes me rely on God more, have more conversations with him, have be more candid. I'm a little bit more like candid in my approach to God and how I talk to him, whether that's in my journal or verbally or out loud or while I'm driving.
Um, because he can take it, right? He can. I don't have to be like, pretty please or say things a certain way. I can just say, what is happening? Why are you, why is this happening to me? Um, but again, that's another reason that's hard for me to talk about because I often think, well, why wouldn't it happen to me?
Like, why wouldn't it happen to any of us? Like, God never said that this was gonna be easy.
[00:35:14] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. That. So that's really interesting and I, I've thought about that too, is why, why flip it that way?
[00:35:21] Jenn Schwamb: I don't know. It just, I, it just, I, I think that's why I'm just like, of course, like I'm. I guess maybe I'm just less surprised.
That sounds really terrible to say.
[00:35:32] Jesse Schwamb: I know. Yeah.
[00:35:33] Jenn Schwamb: It sounds really pretentious. Be like, of course it's happening to me.
[00:35:36] Jesse Schwamb: No, no, no, no. I, I think, I think what, as we've talked about it, what we're reflecting on is that the world is broken. Like you and I have often joke that like endo is the most foolproof, that our bodies are totally depraved.
That like sin is in our world because like it cells that should hang out in one part of the body going wherever they want, unruly and unchecked and causing massive pain and disruption to everything else. And I don't think anybody could look at that situation and say, this is not how it's supposed to be.
Like, every doctor we've ever talked to has been like, it shouldn't be like this. And we wanna say, we're always like, yeah, we know.
[00:36:11] Jenn Schwamb: That's true. That's like the overarching phrase I feel like that I've dealt with my, a lot of my adult life is it's not supposed to be this way.
[00:36:17] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:36:18] Jenn Schwamb: Because it's not
[00:36:19] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:36:19] Jenn Schwamb: It isn't supposed to be this way. Um, and I, it has opened up a lot of. Uh, conversations for me with my friends, with loved ones, with coworkers, because I can kind of start at that point and be like, yeah, this sucks. And it's not supposed to be this way. This isn't how our bodies were supposed to be. Um, you know, there's, there is brokenness.
There is suffering. And that, you know, people that know that we are believers, I think often can, sometimes from the outside think that, you know, life is easy and we've got it all together and 'cause, you know, things can look more peaceful. And it's like, no, it doesn't always go that way. And I think you and I often talk about, I don't, I can't imagine going through this without God.
Like, how do, how do people do that?
[00:37:03] Jesse Schwamb: For sure.
[00:37:03] Jenn Schwamb: How's that even possible?
[00:37:04] Jesse Schwamb: For sure.
[00:37:05] Jenn Schwamb: How do you explain anything,
[00:37:08] Jesse Schwamb: right? How, how do you even process it?
[00:37:09] Jenn Schwamb: How do you process it? How do you know where to go? How do you have hope that things will improve or if not improve, that there's a reason for it, that God is doing something.
In your life for you, for others? I don't, I don't know how people do it.
[00:37:25] Jesse Schwamb: I agree. It, it seems hopeless, and in fact it probably is because suffering is such a deeply personal, intense process, and I think it's particularly difficult when it feels like it doesn't go away. Right. When it's like day after day after day, and you've certainly been in a lot of those circumstances, is there something that sticks out for you that helped move you from that victim mindset to the stored mindset?
[00:37:52] Jenn Schwamb: Well, I think probably just God has given me some opportunities to be there for other people in very similar circumstances, which then helps me with that stewardship mindset of like, oh, okay, like I can help other people through this. Um, I remember asking that God would just give me, you know, help me to be a good steward of the situation.
I didn't know what that meant, um, what it meant. Uh, most immediately after the colostomy surgery was that at some point after my reversal, I had met a woman through, I think running through a running group. And then she had joined a bible study that I was leading at the time. And then while in that Bible study, she had discovered that she had, like, I think it was a relatively early stage of colon cancer and that she was gonna have to have surgery and that she was gonna have to have a colostomy.
And, um, this woman who I did not know that well, I was now getting to know really well, right? And was visiting her in the hospital and was, I don't wanna say excited, but I was, I was happy that I was gonna get to like, share what I had learned. 'cause I had learned so much about a colostomy and colostomy bag in my experience.
And I just wanted to be able to make it easier for somebody else and say like, here, this is what you're gonna need. This is how this works. This is what you can expect. This is normal. This is not normal. Here's the best supplies to buy. Here's where you should buy them from. Right? Um, because it was nobody's fault, but I didn't have that.
Nobody was doing that for me. We were just figuring it out. And so I've been able to do that more recently at work. Um, somebody's grandmother was going through some stuff and she needed to have a colostomy bag. And I think this colleague mentioned it to me and I was like, funny you should mention that.
I've also had a colostomy bag. Let me tell you what I know. Um, I was not just going around work talking about Colostomies. It had come up in conversation. Um, and so while I've not interacted with her grandmother, I was able to tell her a lot of information that she was able to pass on to her grandmother and her mom.
Um, and so, um, yeah, just being able to talk to other people that are going through it. I'm in a number of Endo Facebook groups and things like that, um, where girls are often putting, you know, asking for advice. I don't typically give advice, but I might like DM somebody directly and just say, you know, I don't give medical advice, but I might give product advice.
Here's, here's, I went through something similar. Here's the brand I thought was most successful for me. Not a doctor.
[00:40:13] Jesse Schwamb: Right. Yeah, we've said that too though. But again, it's our 50 healthcare podcast. One of the things that I admire about how God has led you in those times is that emphasis on moving into service.
I think you said it best, like the idea, it's a steward, something that God has given us. We generally reserve that kind of words for like the blessings. And I think you and I have talked about this, you kind of said it in some of what you were talking about, where we're not quick to just be like, let's call everything a blessing, because like especially sometimes when it hits us, we don't feel that way and I'm not sure it's, it's helpful to try to run right into that space, but God often lovingly and gently moves us into that space so that we can be a blessing to others.
I wanna read from second Corinthians and uh, the first chapter, this is Paul writing to the church in Corinth. Right off the top he writes, Paul, an Apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God and Timothy, our brother to the Church of God, which is at Corinth. With all the saints who are throughout Achaia grace to you in priests peace from God, our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. And hearing you say that, I immediately, my mind jumps there.
And in fact, like I know, like if we're in any group setting, like we're hanging out with other people and like the colostomy word comes up, I know your ears are gonna be like, I know I'm gonna hear your voicemail. I
[00:41:49] Jenn Schwamb: don't know how that's coming up,
[00:41:50] Jesse Schwamb: but did you say colostomy? And I think it's because like you have, I've seen you taking this theology of comfort, that receiving comfort from God, even if that's comfort in this really tremendously horrible experience.
And it's not like whistling in the dark or trying to turn it around or make it better than it actually is. It's that the joy of going through it is the joy of being able to comfort somebody else. That's, that's what I see. How would you describe it?
[00:42:19] Jenn Schwamb: I don't know how to describe it. I just, I don't know. I have this just overwhelming feeling of, through all of that.
I just, I mean, I just wanna help other people. I just want to make other people's experience better. And I remember seeing a, a tweet when Twitter was a thing somebody had written about, um, you know, if you want, if you want God to use him, or if you want God to use, you don't tell him how.
[00:42:47] Jesse Schwamb: Mm-hmm.
[00:42:48] Jenn Schwamb: And I remember, like, that also often is in my head where I'm just like, you know, asking God, just do whatever you want.
I, I'm not gonna tell you how, I don't get to tell you how.
[00:42:56] Jesse Schwamb: Yes, that's
[00:42:56] Jenn Schwamb: right. But just use me, use my circumstances. Bring up colostomy in conversation so that I can talk about it or now nephrostomy.
[00:43:07] Jesse Schwamb: Right, and that's happened too, right? Since you've had this process, I know there's been others that you've talked to about that.
[00:43:12] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:43:13] Jesse Schwamb: And it's interesting because I do think use this not as like a platform, it's like every conversation you have ends up in this place, the conversation we're having right now. Now, to be
[00:43:22] Jenn Schwamb: clear, it does not.
[00:43:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. However, I have seen powerfully the way in which this example and your testimony has provided an amazing influence on our friends who are not believers.
How, how has this been something that has helped you talk about what it means to be a Christian?
[00:43:51] Jenn Schwamb: Um, it's hard. I'm, I'm trying to think of how to talk about that, because that's often. Uh, not how I think about it. I, you know, I don't, I'm not thinking about it as, you know, this situation gives me a way to talk to these people about,
[00:44:09] Jesse Schwamb: uh, or that gospel proclamation text.
[00:44:10] Jenn Schwamb: It's just, I don't just, I don't know. It just happens. Like, it's just part of
[00:44:13] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I'm with you.
[00:44:14] Jenn Schwamb: You know, the conversation. Um, the people that I know, that I work with, that I'm friends with, uh, know us, know us well, know our feelings, know our relationship with God. Um, and so, you know, I I, it has open conversations where people will ask me or say things to me, which are hard for me to hear because I don't understand it, but they'll say like, I don't know how you're dealing with this.
You're so peaceful. You're, you're handling it so well. Right? And I think you're crazy. I'm not handling this well at all. This is terrible. I hate this. But, and that's why I don't like talking about it because I'm just like, Ugh, this is not. I'm not handling this well. Um, so that will open a door where I'm often like, well, if it seems like I'm handling this well, let me tell you why that is, because there's a reason for the hope that I have.
And there's, you know, I know that, that God has a plan for all of this. Even if I don't understand it or can't see the end, um, I know that he's doing a work in me for me. Um, and, you know, can also share about, you know, just by being a Christian doesn't mean that life will be easy and that it will be without suffering.
[00:45:23] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:45:24] Jenn Schwamb: Um, because that's, I think a lot of people just think that that's the case. Those Christians have it all together, right? Their life is so easy,
[00:45:33] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:45:34] Jenn Schwamb: They don't go through anything hard.
[00:45:35] Jesse Schwamb: Some do come hang out, and the Lord say everybody, yep. You'll see it's, it's the real deal because like you said, God doesn't promise to spare us from these things, and that's what makes this whole conversation about suffering like it turned on its head.
Because as we said at the open, all this stuff doesn't get removed. God is redeeming these things. He's implanted us in these things. He's doing something for us. Like what you said, he's with us. I mean, what great encouragement, again, that is not available to the unbeliever,
[00:46:00] Jenn Schwamb: right?
[00:46:00] Jesse Schwamb: So the person who just thinks the world is a dead and ugly place, without reason, without recourse, but instead, one of the things that really hit me with what you were saying was it sounds like you're starting with not the pain you experienced first.
Not even like the emotions you experienced first, but you're talking about the character and the sovereignty of God first. That everything gets filtered through that. It's like the sve in which you try to pass through everything. Because when it feels helpless, if we not start with the root of character of God first, then everything is gonna be lost.
It's gonna be like suffering's gonna feel like it's, it's random. That it's without purpose, that it's meaningless, that it's for our destruction that's meant to, to. Bring us down instead of to lift us up under the power of God. And I see that in the example. I think that's what people are, are coming to you and saying, because it shouldn't look, can I say it this way?
Like it shouldn't look this easy what you're doing. And I know it's not easy and, and you're not like putting on heirs to somehow make it seem like it's something that's not. However, like when you get up to go to work on a day, that's hard. I know it's because you're receiving power from God to do the things which he's called you to do because you've processed it in this way.
Is that fair?
[00:47:10] Jenn Schwamb: I guess it guys, it makes me even uncomfortable to hear Jesse say that because I'm just like, I don't think that I'm doing anything special or spectacular or amazing because I'm not like, I just am like, I'm just. Doing the thing. Life is hard sometimes and it's a lot harder for a lot of other people, and so
[00:47:34] Jesse Schwamb: that's true.
[00:47:35] Jenn Schwamb: But, but
[00:47:35] Jesse Schwamb: it's one of those things where I'll use the catchphrase, like God does all the verbs. I think that's, that's what I hear you're saying too, is that you have to move forward, but you're doing that because you believe God has called you to Tuesday meetings and to being with your friends and to being at church and to serving in women's ministry and to leading bible studies, and that he will provide a way for you to do that even in the midst of things that seem pretty horrible.
[00:47:59] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:48:00] Jesse Schwamb: In that, in that, in the midst of all that horribleness that God is still doing like a work that's greater than that stuff
[00:48:07] Jenn Schwamb: that bigger. Yeah. He's always given me you, but I can only speak on my, my own behalf. He's always given me the strength to do the thing if I step out to do the thing. Right On.
Um, even on those days that are hard and that I'm feeling really bad physically, uh. I know enough, I've been through enough with God to know if I just, if I just keep going, he's gonna gimme the strength, he will. Mm-hmm. It'll be fine. I'll be okay. And so far, I always have been, you know, and so even as we go into this surgery that neither one of us is looking forward to.
Right. Uh, probably Jesse's dreading it more than I am. Uh, we both also know that, like, on the other side of it, like he's gonna see us through it all. We, there's no doubt in my mind. That's right. That's right. Like, I know that, but I also know it was gonna be hard. It's, it's probably not gonna be easy. It's probably not gonna be pain-free, but it will be good and it will be.
Amen. Better. And that's real faith. We'll get to talk about it with people. Yes. Maybe more than they would like to do about it. You probably all are sick of hearing about it by now. I don't know how long we've been talking about Endo, but it's hours probably too long.
[00:49:21] Jesse Schwamb: Four hours. Longest episode ever. So I think that's a good place to, to kind of wrap up our conversation.
And I wanted to give you the opportunity. You've, you've already mentioned this a couple times, you know, that you, you have a heart that's sensitive to people going through things. I think just like Paul writes to the Corinthians here, if you've been through some stuff, you want to be with the people who are going through that stuff.
You have a heart that gravitates. Mm-hmm. It just moves, it tilts, it goes in that direction. And so for people listening, and I think there're gonna be people listening that are gonna really resonate with this, or they're gonna send it to somebody who's going through exactly what you're talking about.
[00:49:57] Jesse Schwamb: What's like the one thing you'd want them to know?
[00:50:01] Jenn Schwamb: Oh gosh.
[00:50:02] Jesse Schwamb: I know it's tough, but it's my podcast so I get to ask the questions.
[00:50:09] Jenn Schwamb: I mean, oh, that's hard. 'cause there's a lot of things I wanna say. Oh, you
[00:50:12] Jesse Schwamb: can tell. You could say punch. We got
[00:50:14] Jenn Schwamb: all
[00:50:14] Jesse Schwamb: the world. Go ahead.
[00:50:15] Jenn Schwamb: I mean, the one thing that I'd want them to know, which we already talked about is that. God sees them and is with them in this situation. They are not alone. Even if they feel like they are alone or that nobody understands what they're going through, God does.
But the other thing I want them to know specifically, I don't know how many women listen to your podcast.
[00:50:37] Jesse Schwamb: All right sisters, here you go.
[00:50:38] Jenn Schwamb: But, uh, on the just medical side of things, if you are in any amount of pain during your cycle or outside of your cycle connected to your cycle, that is keeping you from going to work or doing your daily activities or just keeping you from living life, that is not normal.
And I thought it was normal for years because doctors just tell us as women is fine. You're fine. Cramps hurt. That's, they shouldn't hurt that much. That's not normal,
[00:51:11] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:51:11] Jenn Schwamb: Um, and you should talk to somebody. You should talk to your doctor and you should keep talking to your doctors until you get. To see the right one that will figure out what's going on.
That's the thing that I like to talk to women particularly about the most because we tend to explain our own symptoms away because we're just used to that. Right. And going, it's fine. I'm fine. Everything's fine when it's not. So I just want people to know that it's okay to say this hurts a lot, and I don't think it's normal.
[00:51:44] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. I remember we've talked a lot about, for both of us, like pain and experience and we sometimes wanna say, well, somebody probably has it worse, and that'll always be true.
[00:51:53] Jenn Schwamb: Yep.
[00:51:54] Jesse Schwamb: But one of the things that you've taught me very well is that God does see our pain, whatever it is, like whatever level it is.
Mm-hmm. That's, that's how big and loving he is. And I remember we used to have, it came in like a placard at some point, like a stock card. It says something like, your pain matters here, or Your pain is relevant here. And I think that that this idea that that's exactly how God sees us, he loves us so deeply and so desperately.
All things he would talk about as we've gone through all these parables that he comes for us to be with us in our greatest hour of need. And not only that, but he already did that in our great hour of need, which is when we needed salvation. So when in Isaiah 53 we, we read that Jesus the Messiah is the one who's well acquainted with suffering, who just knows what it's like, and then it's gonna carry and bear our burdens.
That for me has like made all the difference. Even as you and I kind of walk through some of this together, I was thinking of, of this journey that we've been on when our pastor, well, I'll give him an attribution for this 'cause he said this in the sermon last week, pastor Steve Wiggins, he said something to the effect of your greatest spiritual breakthrough, the one that you desperately want, the one that's ahead of you.
That breakthrough is going to come only when you understand and realize that Jesus has everything for your current and present need. That he is all in all. But he's all in all for you right now in the thing that. Feels like it's so intractable, so difficult, so beyond you. Only when you come to him and submit and surrender yourself to him and say, you are everything that you I need for all in all right now, in this particular instance that really, that breakthrough is beyond that place.
And I guess we just had a lot of breakthroughs. So times like there's, there's been different levels of kind of coming into that realization. Um, we didn't talk about that quote. I did. I don't know how, how it strike
[00:53:49] Jenn Schwamb: you. I don know what you're talking about. The, the card or something that you were talking about.
[00:53:54] Jesse Schwamb: I don't know. It showed up like in the mail or something like maybe as part of like mm-hmm. But how, how does that strike you in terms of has this, has this process brought you spiritual breakthrough in at various times?
[00:54:07] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah, I think so. I think certainly at various times, I mean, yeah. Where again, I feel like I'm just repeating myself and saying the same thing in maybe slightly different ways.
[00:54:18] Jesse Schwamb: That's what Tony and I do. It's about jam.
[00:54:18] Jenn Schwamb: Is that what I'm missing on the podcast most is you guys just saying the same thing over and over again?
[00:54:22] Jesse Schwamb: Sure.
[00:54:22] Jenn Schwamb: Um, you know, it's just taught me that, um,
I guess it's just like, I'm trying to think of how I wanna say it. Just, I've learned, I feel like the same thing over and over again where it's like you, you forget because you start to feel better, right? And then you don't feel good again, and you're like, oh, that's right. You know, and that you just, it's been a good reminder to have that, those conversations with God about, like, he gets it.
I'm not talking to somebody that does not understand what suffering is, what that feels like, how hard things are, um, that he gets it and that he. Only wants what is good for me, even when it, the thing I'm dealing with doesn't feel like it's good for me.
[00:55:06] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:55:07] Jenn Schwamb: But I know that it is because he's allowing it.
[00:55:10] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:55:11] Jenn Schwamb: So it has to be
[00:55:12] Jesse Schwamb: that preaches. Amen. I don't think there's any other better place to stop than there. Thanks for being willing to talk about this. I know it's a strange thing. It's a hard thing, but I, I think there's so many people that we blessed and encouraged by what you've shared, and I think that we're just gonna have to have you as a regular guest on the podcast.
Now we don't talk about that. Don't think people want talk about this stuff.
[00:55:35] Jenn Schwamb: Sorry, everybody, that this was the first, my first appearance. 10 years. Let's talk about endometriosis.
[00:55:42] Jesse Schwamb: So what have we learned on this episode of the Reform Brotherhood? Well, we've learned that Endo is definitely proof that the fall is real and that sin is in the world and in our bodies.
But I think you've also taught us. That there is so much within all of our suffering that God gives to us, to steward, and I really love that idea of picking up our stewardship and not just saving our stewardship for our blessings, but perhaps more so if Romans 8 28 is for real. I mean, if we actually believe that in our places of most profound disappointment and pain and discomfort, that all things, all the things, everything and all the things to repeat myself, work for good, for those who are called according to God's purpose and love him, then why should we not say that we should steward all the things as well.
So thanks, Jen.
[00:56:40] Jenn Schwamb: You're welcome
[00:56:40] Jesse Schwamb: for coming on this podcast,
Jesse.
[00:56:42] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, we're just gonna back up the mics and go about our day as if this ever
[00:56:46] Jenn Schwamb: happens. If nothing happens. This is super weird. Write in about what you want, Jesse and I have talk about next that isn't so serious
[00:56:54] Jesse Schwamb: and he just totally took over the podcast right there.
[00:56:56] Jenn Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:56:57] Jesse Schwamb: That was pretty well done. I love it. You're, you're a professional already, so you heard it from Jen. Loved ones. If you'd like to have her back on, you know how to find us. The best way to find us is to go to T Me slash Reform Brotherhood. That is a link that you can put into any browser, t Me Back slash Reform Brotherhood.
It will take you to a Telegram Link. Telegram is a messaging app. You use Telegram?
[00:57:19] Jenn Schwamb: I do use Telegram.
[00:57:20] Jesse Schwamb: Are you in the Reform Brotherhood Telegram group?
[00:57:22] Jenn Schwamb: No, I'm not. I think I only recently learned that you had one and I was like, why?
[00:57:29] Jesse Schwamb: What?
[00:57:30] Jenn Schwamb: Who's in that?
[00:57:31] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, I'm so glad you asked. It's like you're setting me out.
Why? Because it's an amazing little corner of the internet where people who are listening to the podcast and love the Lord Jesus Christ come together to interact, to hang out. To share information with each other, to share memes, and there's like taste tests happening in there. I mean, you're missing out all kinds of stuff.
[00:57:48] Jenn Schwamb: Oh, well, I do love a taste
[00:57:49] Jesse Schwamb: test. Yes,
[00:57:50] Jenn Schwamb: we do those at work.
[00:57:51] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:57:51] Jenn Schwamb: Often. But I'm not joining your group.
[00:57:54] Jesse Schwamb: Yes, you do need to say that.
[00:57:56] Jenn Schwamb: Sorry,
[00:57:57] Jesse Schwamb: while we're recording,
[00:57:57] Jenn Schwamb: I mean, I'll definitely join it. Just send Jesse your telegram questions.
[00:58:04] Jesse Schwamb: All right. I'm happy to access the go between
[00:58:05] Jenn Schwamb: for me if you want to do. Taste has something
[00:58:08] Jesse Schwamb: in addition.
I want to say thank you. I know Jen does too, for everybody who listens, who gives financial aid to make the podcast possible. That's why this little makeshift kitchen recording studio happened and why we could get Jen on and why her voice sounds so MOUs and so good. It's because people give a little bit to make sure that a lot happens so that it gets posted and published and processed and all that good stuff.
It does cost money to keep it going, and thank you so much for joining us. If you want to join in on that, you can just go to patreon.com/reform brotherhood. So that's it. I'm gonna put you on the spot one last time. Is there any, any famous last words you wanna say? For what? About anything? Oh, this is your chance?
Oh, no. After all this time, is there anything, is there a message you wanna give to Tony?
[00:58:53] Jenn Schwamb: Is there a message I wanna give to
[00:58:54] Jesse Schwamb: Tony? Tony, he's, hes gonna specifically,
[00:58:56] Jenn Schwamb: he's gonna,
[00:58:56] Jesse Schwamb: he's gonna process this.
[00:58:57] Jenn Schwamb: No, I don't have a message that I wanna give to Tony. I'll give a message to your entire audience, which is, you all should give Jesse a hard time about the number of classic movies that he has not seen.
This
[00:59:07] Jesse Schwamb: seems
[00:59:07] Jenn Schwamb: like, 'cause that has been a topic of conversation recently. So why don't you light up his telegram with asking him why he hasn't seen movies like Forrest Gump
[00:59:18] Jesse Schwamb: Never
[00:59:18] Jenn Schwamb: Seen Or The Mighty Ducks.
[00:59:19] Jesse Schwamb: Never
[00:59:20] Jenn Schwamb: Well, or the Ghost. Well, you've seen Mighty Ducks now because I made you watch it.
[00:59:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:59:23] Jenn Schwamb: And can we
[00:59:23] Jesse Schwamb: just talk about how.
I or
[00:59:25] Jenn Schwamb: Ghostbusters
[00:59:26] Jesse Schwamb: didn't realize, I've never seen it. Ha. I did not enjoy the My Ducks as much because the sheer number of penalties that are not called
[00:59:34] Jenn Schwamb: by the rest during That's true. Jesse. The entire movie while I was making him watch, it was just telling me about why that couldn't happen. That would never happen.
That's not allowed. And I was actually waiting for Keenan Thompson to show up because I thought he was in the Mighty Ducks, but he was in D two, which we then also watched. I was just waiting for Keenan.
[00:59:51] Jesse Schwamb: Not to mention it's just nonsensical. I don't understand how it went from like it's such a
[00:59:55] Jenn Schwamb: good movie.
[00:59:55] Jesse Schwamb: No, but it went from Peewee hockey to like the national, like you teen battling
[01:00:00] Jenn Schwamb: Iceland.
[01:00:00] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. And then I, I didn't see the third one. Did you watch it? One?
[01:00:04] Jenn Schwamb: We didn't watch it yet. Should we watch that after this it yet? Yeah. I have to watch that. It's on the Disney Plus watch list. And you haven't seen Sandlot?
No. It's a baseball movie.
[01:00:15] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. But
[01:00:15] Jenn Schwamb: there's a whole list of movies listeners that Jazzy Hass not seen. And I don't know why
[01:00:19] Jesse Schwamb: I've seen all the Star Wars movies. Do we need to, we
[01:00:22] Jenn Schwamb: haven't seen all those
[01:00:22] Jesse Schwamb: Explore the Rings.
[01:00:23] Jenn Schwamb: Yep. Nobody cares about
[01:00:24] Jesse Schwamb: about those. Do you need, see, have you seen Lord of the Rings
[01:00:26] Jenn Schwamb: a long time ago?
[01:00:27] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Now this is just turning into a conversation.
[01:00:30] Jenn Schwamb: This is just, we don't need, is this the podcast you all want? Is this what you're waiting for? I'm just saying write into Telegram about the movies that Jesse should definitely see and he'll let you know whether he's seen them and I'll make 'em watch them.
[01:00:44] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Well, you'd have to join the Telegram to know.
[01:00:46] Jenn Schwamb: No, well, all Tony will tell me.
[01:00:49] Jesse Schwamb: That is, that is true. Well, I'm so glad we finally got to this point because after, this is the encouragement, apparently everybody was looking forward. At least I was. So, I'm so glad you finally joined us. Let's not go another 10 years though, without, well,
[01:01:05] Jenn Schwamb: we'll see.
[01:01:05] Jesse Schwamb: Without having gone the really,
[01:01:07] Jenn Schwamb: oh, we'll see what I don't, I think people are gonna listen to this and be like, please don't have her back ever again.
[01:01:12] Jesse Schwamb: Well, on that note, honor everyone
[01:01:15] Jenn Schwamb: love the brotherhood or sisterhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this powerful solo episode, Jesse Schwamb brings Matthew 18 to a close by unpacking Jesus's parable of the unforgiving servant. As Tony Arsenal begins a well-deserved sabbatical after a decade of faithful podcasting, Jesse explores the radical nature of kingdom forgiveness and its role as evidence—not grounds—of our justification. Drawing on Reformed theology and Puritan wisdom, he demonstrates how the immeasurable debt we owed God should revolutionize how we forgive others. This episode challenges listeners to examine their hearts for harbored bitterness and calls them to embrace forgiveness as the family likeness of those adopted by grace. A must-listen for anyone wrestling with the difficult work of forgiving from the heart.
The Reformed tradition carefully distinguishes between the grounds of our justification (Christ's righteousness alone) and the evidence of genuine faith (good works, including forgiveness). Jesse emphasizes that Matthew 18 does not teach that we earn God's forgiveness by forgiving others—that would be works-righteousness. Instead, a forgiving spirit is the inevitable fruit of having truly received mercy. As Westminster Larger Catechism 194 teaches, we cannot satisfy our sin debt; forgiveness comes through Christ's satisfaction applied by faith. When the Holy Spirit regenerates a heart and opens our eyes to the magnitude of what we've been forgiven, that heart naturally extends forgiveness to others. The warning at the end of the parable isn't threatening to unjustify the justified, but revealing that persistent, unrepentant unforgiveness indicates a heart that never truly embraced mercy in the first place.
The numbers in Jesus's parable aren't arbitrary—they're shocking. Ten thousand talents was an astronomical sum, roughly equivalent to 200,000 years of wages for a common laborer. It was literally unpayable. By contrast, 100 denarii was about four months' wages—significant but manageable. This jarring disproportion forces us to see our sin debt to God versus others' debts to us in proper perspective. Jesse notes that this is "the logic of grace"—grace received creates a new "ought." The servant's wickedness isn't just in being ungrateful; it's in fundamentally misunderstanding what happened to him. He treated his forgiveness as a transaction cleared rather than as a display of astonishing, undeserved mercy. When we truly grasp the immeasurable nature of our forgiveness in Christ, human offenses shrink. Nothing softens resentment like fresh astonishment at mercy.
Jesse makes the important observation that the fellow servants in the parable grieve and report the unforgiving servant's actions to the king. This isn't tattling—it's recognizing that unforgiveness damages the entire fellowship. Sin between believers is never purely private in its effects. It bleeds into relationships, worship, witness, and unity. The Reformed understanding of the church as a covenant community means we're interconnected; one member's unrepentant sin affects the whole body. This is why church discipline exists and why Matthew 18 begins with instructions for confronting sin. The community of faith should be marked by astonished mercy, and when one member harbors bitterness or refuses reconciliation, it introduces toxicity that grieves the Spirit and hinders the church's mission. Forgiveness, then, isn't just personal virtue—it's essential to the health and witness of Christ's body.
"The Kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. It's not even one thing, it's this whole process... it's about this whole process of a king who wished to settle these accounts with his slaves."
"Forgiveness from the heart is a spirit-wrought mark of those who are truly pardoned. This is exactly the kind of evidence, not ground—it's evidence of reasoning that the Reformed tradition uses."
"The King's free pardon creates a people who forgive from the heart. We don't have to manufacture it. We don't have to pull ourselves up by our spiritual bootstraps and try to be the kind of forgiving people that we think we ought to be. We are the beneficiaries of a King who has pardoned us."
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this theologically rich episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb continue their journey through Matthew 18 by examining the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant. Building on their previous discussion of church discipline and reconciliation, the hosts explore how this parable reveals the shocking nature of divine forgiveness and what it means to live as forgiven people in the kingdom of God. Through careful exegesis and systematic theological reflection, they unpack the staggering contrast between the infinite debt we owe God and our comparatively minor grievances against one another. This conversation challenges listeners to examine whether their approach to forgiveness reflects genuine heart transformation or merely external compliance, ultimately pointing to the free justification that comes through Christ alone.
The servant's request for "more time" to repay his debt exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of both the magnitude of his obligation and the nature of salvation. When the servant says "I will pay you everything," he demonstrates a staggering level of self-delusion—he genuinely believes he can somehow accumulate 200,000 years worth of wages. This mirrors the natural human tendency toward works-righteousness, where we imagine that with the right formula, enough time, or sufficient effort, we can restore ourselves to God's favor. Like Martin Luther's desperate bargaining on the road to Erfurt ("Save me and I'll become a monk"), fallen humanity consistently underestimates the severity of sin and overestimates our capacity for moral restoration. The parable exposes this thinking as not merely mistaken but absurd—revealing that our spiritual insolvency is so complete that only divine intervention through free justification can address it.
A critical theological insight from this parable concerns God's capacity to forgive without being diminished. The king's ability to casually dismiss such an enormous debt reveals his extraordinary wealth—he possesses resources so abundant that forgiving this impossible sum doesn't threaten his solvency. This maps directly onto the doctrine of divine impassibility and God's self-sufficiency. When we sin against God, we don't injure Him or reduce His glory; therefore, His forgiveness doesn't require Him to recover something He's lost. This stands in stark contrast to Roman Catholic theology, which requires meritorious exchange and suggests God somehow benefits from our good works. The Reformed understanding, illustrated perfectly in this parable, is that God forgives from a position of infinite sufficiency—His mercy flows from abundance, not need. As Isaiah 55 teaches, His thoughts and ways are higher than ours precisely because this kind of lavish, free forgiveness is so otherworldly that we can barely comprehend it.
The shocking reversal at the parable's conclusion—where the forgiven servant brutally demands repayment of a tiny debt—reveals that his initial pleading was not genuine repentance but self-preservation. His actions expose that he never truly received or understood the king's mercy, making him a picture of the unregenerate heart. This serves as a sobering warning that external religious behavior can mask an unchanged heart. The parable teaches that forgiven people naturally become forgiving people—not perfectly, but characteristically. This reflects the Reformed doctrine of the "practical syllogism," where we increase our assurance of salvation by examining the fruit of sanctification in our lives. Habitual unwillingness to extend forgiveness, especially when we claim to have received divine forgiveness, calls into question whether we've genuinely experienced God's transforming grace. The kingdom of heaven creates a community built on "astonished mercy"—people so overwhelmed by what they've been forgiven that extending forgiveness to others becomes their settled disposition.
"It is good to waste a little time every day... just appreciate and stop for a second, even if it's in like just this mundane task." - Jesse Schwamb
"Forgiveness and reconciliation are not the same thing... but being a forgiving person is not how you become a forgiven person. It's what it looks like to be a forgiven person." - Tony Arsenal
"The servant asks for time, not mercy... and that's the logic of self-salvation: Give me a little space, let me know what I have to do, give me more time and I'll fix it." - Jesse Schwamb
[00:00:08] Jesse Schwamb: And what I find interesting is something that you just brought up and I think we should tease out, which is there's a flawed plea and this diluted promise, I say that because the servant, asks for time and not mercy. Which I think is a helpful distinction. And then he tries to promise what he cannot perform.
So that's like the logic of self salvation, which is, give me a little space. Let me know what I have to do. Give me more time and I'll fix it. And I think the critical observation is the servant's words expose that. I don't think he understands the nature of his debt. He underestimates what he owes.
He asks for the wrong thing, that's exactly what we do. We wanna know how we can fix it instead of understanding that it's unfixable, that only God himself can again be just and justifier through his son.
[00:01:01] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 482 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.
[00:01:09] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.
[00:01:14] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. So it turns out, not surprisingly, that Jesus is giving us an absolute masterclass in Matthew 18, and I think everybody, if they're just jumping in now, like you gotta go back and listen to some of these other episodes because I think we jumped into Matthew 18 thinking.
We talk a little bit about this community life discourse that Jesus brings to us. He talks about humility in the first six verses. Then he gets into the seriousness of sin, the pursuing, the straying, the church discipline reconciliation. That's where it gets that famous passage about wherever two or three gathered, and we promised we wouldn't go there, and then we exactly went there in that last episode together.
And then. Then I think there's still more left. There's this culmination where Peter asks a question, and it's not random. It's this natural follow up to everything that Jesus has said in this little partition that's Matthew 18, the call to gain your brother through patient pursuit and restoration, and it all comes to a head.
So I say all of that. It is true pro gamina because. I think we've gotta appreciate that. That's where we're going in this conversation, but we're going there for a reason because the path has already been laid out for us. It's not just an isolated parable that we're getting to on this particular episode.
It's really embedded in all of this stuff. Yeah, there's all this drama, there's all this dialogue, there's all this subtext, and Jesus is gonna give us a parallel to round it or parable to round it all out.
[00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:02:42] Tony Arsenal: I think what I'm learning as we work our way through these, um, and I've commented on this before, that I love when we start on these series because it feels like we have, you know, we have like some preliminary conversations when we're figuring out what we wanna do and we have like an idea roughly of where we think we're gonna go.
And then I always end up learning or latching onto something, or a theme kind of organically develops either. Like explicitly on this, on the podcast are just sort of in my mind as, as I'm preparing and what I'm. Impressed by, and I think this is one of those things like I always had in the back of my head when I would think about the parables.
Um, but what's really coming to the forefront, especially in these last couple episodes, is how much these parables exist in context.
[00:03:29] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:03:29] Tony Arsenal: I think a lot of times parables get taught as like these sort of timeless, abstract, allegorical. Teaching truths that stand on their own completely absent from anything else.
And there's obviously, there's certain elements of each parable that is rooted in a timeless truth and can, can stand on its own. But more so these parables are all coming. Christ is teaching the people in front of him something. Through the parable that's related to the context they're in. So I'm excited, um, to keep exploring that through the rest of the parable series.
But then especially, I think it's gonna be great. I think this conversation's gonna be great tonight because it really is gonna open up. I think a lot of what we were seeing in the last one carries on into this, uh, into this parable in ways that I hadn't anticipated. So it's gonna be good.
[00:04:14] Jesse Schwamb: It's gonna.
It's gonna be real good. Yeah.
[00:04:16] Jesse Schwamb: I realized that maybe we missed an opportunity with this whole series. I was recalling that famously, sometimes titles have really focused on, again, like what, what explicitly was going on in a particular like small conversation or episode. So, for instance, I think I liked Sherlock Holmes.
It was always like the adventure of Sherlock Holmes and the Scarlet Thread, or the hundred Oscar bills. Right? And then also maybe equally famously. Not quite with the same prestige that sitcom series friends titled everything. Like the one with the
[00:04:45] Tony Arsenal: one with, yeah.
[00:04:46] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, exactly. So if you're wanna use that as your rubric for today, then this is the one with the unforgiving servant.
So that's what we're gonna be getting to in Matthew 18. Yes. Is 18 starting in verse 21? You can go hang out there just ahead of us, because for a second we gotta talk.
[00:05:02] Jesse Schwamb: Affirmations. Denials, we didn't forget. We never forget.
[00:05:06] Tony Arsenal: We never forget.
[00:05:06] Jesse Schwamb: We never forget. So, Tony, are you affirming or denying against,
[00:05:10] Tony Arsenal: I'm affirming tonight.
It's a, a pretty straightforward, uh, let's do it. Affirmation. Um, I, uh, feel like maybe I'm way behind the, the curve or the timeline. I don't know. Like, I'm way late to the show here. Um, I just recently, uh, like today it arrived from Amazon and I made my first cup. Of like traditional pour over coffee. Oh, nice.
Um, which, you know, I, I was a drip coffee person for a while before like Keurigs were a thing. And then we've had a Keurig for many years and we're trying to save some money and, and cut some costs. Um, and Keurigs are nice. They're super convenient and there was certainly a season in life where that convenience was, was.
I suppose I couldn't say it was a necessary convenience. 'cause then it's not a convenience, but it was a convenience that was worth the financial output that it took. Um, you know, when you've got kids and you're all of a sudden you're up at like three in the morning to not have to stumble around and wash a filter out and all that junk, but.
But we're not in that phase right now. We're trying to save a little bit of money. So we kind of said like, should we do a drip coffee or should we just go pour over? I did my first pour over and I like immediately could tell the difference in the flavor and the way that the, the coffee tasted. Um, takes longer.
But there's kind of a, there's sort of like a,
[00:06:25] Jesse Schwamb: there's a joy in that.
[00:06:26] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, there's like a joy and like a zen moment. I'm looking forward to tomorrow morning when I wake up of like actually like. Starting. One of the things I've heard about Drip, about pour over coffee is there's almost like a ritual element to it.
Yes. Of brewing your coffee and getting it right and taking the time to do it. So I'm just affirming, uh, pour over coffee. Uh, we got like a relatively inexpensive, I think it was like a $30, $35 kit on Amazon that has everything you need. It's got like a metal filter. Um, so you don't have to buy filter paper, I guess the metal filters.
Yes. Have more of the oil makes its way into the coffee. So it has like a, a richer flavor than when you use the paper. I don't, I'm kind of not a coffee snob. I don't, I wouldn't be able to tell a difference probably, but, um, but yeah, so I'm affirming pour over coffee. It was delicious. Uh, I made way too much of it.
Uh, it's gonna take a little while to figure out like what the proportions are and stuff, but that's kind of the fun of him, right? Yes. Like you have to figure out your own particular kit.
[00:07:22] Jesse Schwamb: It is, it seems to me like, and we have pour for coffee as well. Actually, I just made something the other day and was thinking about how bespoke a process it is and how if you go online or use the AI as super fun for this and you ask it like the best recipe, everybody's got their high conviction.
Yeah. On how much coffee. The proportions of coffee and water, the temperature, the swirling, I dunno if you have a gooseneck kettle for this whole purpose. It is a super fun process, but it was striking me that I think like what's Samsung and Google phones are to the mobile world. So also is Pourer coffee because it's like this pilot, customized, do what you want.
Kind of process. And I have an iPhone and I love it. There's nothing wrong with that, and that's maybe like the Curee or the Nespresso or whatever you have, but there is something fun about being able to customize the entire process. Yeah. And basically do whatever you want. I also, it's funny you bring this up because I was just reading something about Japanese, it ceremonies, I don't know.
The internet happened to me and I got in this rabbit hole and. They were talking about how it's a process and how like Americans struggle with that because they sense that they're like, I, I want the drink. I don't care about the ritual. And this person was saying it is good to waste a little time every day.
[00:08:37] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:08:38] Jesse Schwamb: And I think what they meant by that is exactly what you're saying is like just do appreciate and stop for a second, even if it's in like just this mundane task. To appreciate that it takes a little time. It's okay to wait and to let there be a kind of meditation and for us, like a more productive one while you're doing this thing.
Yeah. Pour of a coffee is a great way to do that. I mean, it takes like, what, like maybe three when I do it, like three minutes. 'cause I have a timer. I said and we, I tried. I try to let it bloom. There's also, blooming is fun. Like how many things do you get to let bloom?
[00:09:05] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:09:05] Jesse Schwamb: Like there's a whole process.
It's, but it's fun. You're right.
[00:09:08] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Well, and you know, like. You buy a pour over coffee kit and like you, when you look on Amazon, like there are some that are very utilitarian looking. Yes. Like they're very almost industrial. Um, most of them look like you're brewing a magic potion. Like it's a, it's like a glass, like beaker and it has, the one we have has like a cork collar, so you can grab it and not burn your hands.
It's like tied with a leather strip and it's like. It's kind of fun to have this and like you do, like you have to pour it a certain way and Right. I'm sure the coffee would taste fine if I just dumped the water in and didn't care about it. But, um, there is a whole process and I, I think, I think you're right.
I like that phrase, like it's, it's a good thing to waste a little bit of time, and whether that's on like this or whether it's on a hobby that you're doing or even just like. Even if you have a Keurig, right? Even if you have a Keurig, just stand there and wait for it. Right? Like it's hard to do that, especially with as busy as our lives are.
And I know for me it's often at like four 30 in the morning and I'm like, I've got, if on a good day, I have an hour and a half before the kids get up and I gotta make every minute count. But I think there's something in that idea that like. The, the minutes of waiting and just being peaceful and, and just sort of stopping those minutes count too.
Like we agreed. We need to get away from thinking about those minutes as though they don't count. So yes. Um, affirming pour over coffee. It was delicious. The process is fun. Um, again, I feel like. I mean, I'm 43 years old. I feel like I, I probably should have done this at some point earlier in my life. Um, I texted my wife with a picture of it.
She was out, um, she was out doing some shopping while I was brewing the first cup, and I texted her, I think, I think we're hipsters now. I'm not sure.
[00:10:53] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Oh yeah, definitely. That's like classic on the hipster card. You gotta, and it's not just that, it's, you show it and it's like you, then you have the debate about how you make yours.
Yeah. Like once you do the ratio of gram's water to coffee.
[00:11:06] Tony Arsenal: I don't, I just, I just did whatever Google Gemini told me to do. I think it was like seven and a half
[00:11:11] Jesse Schwamb: if you want. Have a fun, fun time. And again, we're speaking about time and it's lack of our lack of ability to really harness it really, because there's so much going on.
But please. Next time we have a second go on YouTube and search for this because there's so many amazing, some of them are really good, uh, but everybody has their own recipe and I keep trying different ones and seeing what they taste like. And my palate is probably not refined enough to differentiate between most of them.
[00:11:37] Tony Arsenal: I feel like, uh, if you think theology fights are wild, that this is probably a whole different frontier. Yes. Of, of not that, Theo, this is gonna sound weird, but like, of just dumb things to fight over. Right? Theology is not a dumb thing to fight over. Like it's important for us to sometimes even do a little bit of combat over a, a theological error or something like that.
But this is probably a whole different level of like, yeah, it's fine. However you want your copy to taste. It's totally fine. Yeah. There's no moral element involved in how you brew your, your pour over coffee, but I bet you there are people out there who would say, I'm wrong, so.
[00:12:09] Jesse Schwamb: That's, and that's why this is the food equivalent of genealogies.
[00:12:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. There you go. That's, that's great.
[00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: Well, Jesse, what are you affirming or denying tonight?
[00:12:18] Jesse Schwamb: I'm gonna keep it positive. Go affirmation as well and keep it light. I hope. Let me explain the situation briefly and then you'll just know the affirmation at the end 'cause it's more fun that way. Uh, I was at a practice for.
Worship music this past week and blessed again just by our church and the number of lovely musicians that we have. And actually, one of the things I do appreciate is that we're always trying to work ourselves out of a job, and that is we're trying to, especially recruit younger people into playing. We have people of all skill sets and abilities who are.
Like really volitional about setting their hearts right on worship through music. And really the instrumentation comes alongside of that. And oftentimes it's secondary to that, of course. And so we have a couple of college students that are joining us while they're studying locally. And one of them in particular is, is playing guitar.
And she plays quite well, but she's growing into that role of playing and it's a whole different challenge to play in this capacity. And so we, because we have a lot of people with a lot of instruments and experience, one of the other guitarists who is an older gentleman who is very experienced, he took on, he, this is also fantastic by the way.
He took up playing the bass because we just need a bass. I mean, he was a guy who was like, I play guitar exceptionally well. I see there's a need. I don't know how to play bass. I could probably learn. I don't own a bass, but I'm gonna make all that happen. And he is just fantastic. And so it turns out that because this young woman, she had a nice guitar or reasonable guitar, beginner guitar.
It was having some problems with our sound system, so. On Thursday, he brought another guitar for her to play and she didn't know he was gonna do that. And so he brought this very nice guitar, like multiple. I don't wanna get into exactly pricing, at least from what I discerned, but if you know, you know, it's a breed love guitar.
So this is, this is a very nice guitar. So he said, I just want you to be able to play it like, and have something to play here that, and see what you think and how it sounds in the system. So she played it. And I know he was just taking such great joy in seeing that, um, you know, we mixed it properly. It has EQ on it.
So we set the whole thing up and she's like, wow, it feels very nice. Like, I really appreciate playing it. So at the end of course, he turns to her and says like, how, what do you think? How does it sound? How do you, how does it feel? And she said, it feels really nice. And he says to her, take it home. It's yours.
[00:14:28] Tony Arsenal: Wow.
[00:14:29] Jesse Schwamb: And you know, he says to her, I know that you love to worship the Lord in music. Use this to do that and to lead yourself in others. And so the affirmation is. I don't know how often we get to just be witnesses to some kind of great private generosity. And the only reason I was, I was witness to it is because I, in the arrangement, on the stage we were practicing, I was just between the two of them.
So I felt like a little awkward, like this whole moment was happening and I was like just trying to awkwardly like moonwalk my way back out of that. So like they could just have this moment, but instead I got to witness it. So I. I don't know what it would look like for each of us to do something like that.
Not that necessarily the size of the gift in this case, but the thoughtfulness of it was exceptional. It was just a beauty to behold the family of God supporting and loving one another in a way, and this was no doubt. A sacrifice for him. I just couldn't, I said to him afterwards, I was like, that was incredible.
And uh, you know, he of course is very humble about the whole thing and was wanting to support musicians, but it's more than that. Of course, this was about gifting someone a tool to help them lead and to worship God more passionately. And I just have been thinking about that ever since. Like, well, how can I do that for others?
What, what are some spaces where I can do that, where it doesn't necessarily cost maybe even anything except my. Unwillingness to seek that out. So
[00:15:49] Tony Arsenal: yeah,
[00:15:50] Jesse Schwamb: if you see it, acknowledge it and hopefully we get to see it from time to time, but maybe we can be also the people that do it.
[00:15:55] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, that, that kind of gift, the value, like the monetary value is almost not relevant.
[00:16:01] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.
[00:16:01] Tony Arsenal: And like a guitar, this is gonna be super like woo woo, but like. Anyone who plays guitar and has owned a guitar knows that like a guitar is kind of like a personal thing. Yes. You can have the most generic beater, like hundred dollar Epiphone acoustic guitar, and that's still your guitar. And to just give that away to someone is actually kind of like a, it's sort of like a weird, intimate feeling.
Um, and I think there are probably lots of things like that where we have a tool that is part of our craft, part of our trade, whatever it might be. Um, you know, like maybe you're a carpenter and you've just got your favorite. Here's, here's a dumb example. I, I started working at the hospital as a scheduling secretary in February of 2015, so I'm, I'm just past 11 years now, and there was this stapler at my desk when I first started.
And, uh, I've kept that stapler with me through, through 11 years in like several different job transitions in several different departments. It's the only thing that I've brought with me, and it's funny because I used to share an office with a nurse. And I went on vacation. When I came back, um, she had swapped my stapler for another stapler of the exact same model stapler, like it was an identical stapler.
And I could tell the difference in the waiting and the feel of the stapler. Um, like that, that kind of thing. Although, like I struggled to think how I might gift that stapler to someone in, in the same meaningful fashion, but like right. There are trade, there are tools of your trade and tools of your craft that you use to serve the Lord in particular ways.
And I think a musical instrument is like an obvious example, but maybe you're a carpenter and you have a favorite hammer that just, it feels right in your hand, it's the right weight, it's the right size, um, and someone else needs a good hammer. Like I think there are ways. Similar kinds of things that could happen.
And that's a really lovely, thoughtful gift. And it's a way that you can honor the Lord. Yes. Like it's not, it's not just being nice. It's a way that you can sort of pass on that blessing that God has given you in that, in that physical implement to someone else to make use of it. Um, and I can tell you I've been the recipient of similar kinds of gifts.
[00:18:09] Jesse Schwamb: Me too.
[00:18:10] Tony Arsenal: I don't have anyone that's given me like a guitar. But, um, there's been times where I've, I've, uh, like I have a set of commentaries that was gifted to me by someone who, they were well loved, well used commentaries, and they were just at a point in their, their academic career that they just weren't using them anymore.
And they gifted them to me. And I'll tell you like. I have never read through those in, in their entirety, but every time that I go to reference them, there's a warm spot in my heart when I think about what these commentaries have contributed to the kingdom in terms of that person's ministry. And then now my ministry, my my preaching Pul supply ministry, this podcast.
Um, so that's a special gift. That's a cool story. And I think. Your exhortation is great for us to think about ways we can, we can do that. I suppose there's some ways we've done that as a podcast. Like we've helped other podcast start. True. We've, I mean there's been equipment that we've grown out of, that we've passed on to other people who are getting started.
Um, you know, so I think there's lots of ways we can think about how that works and how we do.
[00:19:09] Jesse Schwamb: And we ourselves, of course, are ongoing beneficiaries of that kind of love.
[00:19:13] Jesse Schwamb: And this sounds like it's a plug that I intended, but I didn't when I started the whole affirmation. And that is we have people that give to the podcast through patreon.com.
[00:19:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:19:22] Jesse Schwamb: So after they've satisfied all of their other responsibilities, they have decided, you know what? The podcast, the conversations have blessed me in some way, and I wanna make sure that they keep going. And so. There's a place where people are giving even just little gifts, either one time or regularly.
And it does keep things going, like, uh, this is all practical. Now. For instance, many of our listeners noticed that somehow you developed a lisp over like the last Yeah. Two episodes, which it turns out Tony is healthy and well, his like. Speech is fantastic. I I hear it. I've always heard it in this clear, crisp mo voice kind of way.
And it turns out we tried to go with a cheaper solution that will remain unnamed.
[00:20:01] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:20:01] Jesse Schwamb: Um, and it turns out, for whatever reason, it, it
[00:20:06] Tony Arsenal: just wasn't gonna cut it. It
[00:20:07] Jesse Schwamb: just didn't work. And so we were trying to save a little bit there. But I'm so grateful for those who, who along with us, help us to cover these costs so that we could return to a solution that costs money.
[00:20:18] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:20:18] Jesse Schwamb: But is actually better for sound quality and less distracting for people that want to listen to us talk. So that all happens because many have gone to patreon.com, back slash reform brotherhood and said, I'd like to contribute. So I see that generosity and I wanna say thank you.
[00:20:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, for sure.
[00:20:35] Tony Arsenal: Well, Jesse, we should probably get into the parable tonight.
[00:20:37] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, let's get into it.
[00:20:39] Tony Arsenal: So we are gonna camp out tonight. Uh, we're we last, not last week because, uh, last week I was, uh, preaching and so, uh, you were, uh, the sermon from the, the church I was preaching, I was put into the feed, but the week before that.
We were camping out in the first half of Matthew 18. We were talking about the parable of the lost sheep and how it is positioned differently in Matthew than it is in its parallel in Luke, and that that positioning in that context sort of shades the meaning and and changes how we think about what the parable means.
We're gonna finish out the second half of chapter 18 here with the Parable of the Unforgiving Servants. And what I, what I think we're gonna find is actually like, in, in a similar way to how the Parable of the lost sheep and the Parable of the Lost Coin and the Parable of the Lost Sun all sort of stack up to be sort of like a mega parable.
This parable continues the same themes, um, and in many ways is, is like an. A next level question on the theme that Christ is teaching regarding, uh, people, you know, coming to the faith, people who sin against each other, and how we should think about church discipline. This parable really kind of continues that line of thought, so I'll go ahead and start reading here in verse 21.
We will go ahead and just read out to the very end of the, uh, end of the chapter here. So starting in verse 21, it says, then Peter came up and said to him, Lord, how often will my brother sin against me? And I forgive him as many as seven times. Jesus said to him, I do not say to you seven times, but 77 times.
Therefore, the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wishes to settle accounts with his servants. When he began to settle, one was brought to him who owed him 10,000 talents. Since he could not pay his master, ordered him to be sold with his wife and children and all that he had and payment to be made.
So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him half patience with me, and I'll pay you everything out of pity for him. The master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. But when the same servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him and hundreds inari and seizing him.
He began to choke him, saying, pay what you owe. So his fellow servant fell down and pleaded with him, have patience with me and I will pay you. He refused and went and put him in prison until he should pay the debt. When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their master all that had taken place.
Then his master summoned him and said to him, you wicked servant. I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me and should not. You have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you. It is anger. His master delivered him to the jailer until he should pay all his debt. So also my Heavenly Father will do to every one of you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.
[00:23:34] Jesse Schwamb: Maybe I'm the only one, but Peter is my spirit animal. He just is because like, it's not just that the question he starts with is like brutally honest, but I find out brutally practical. Yeah, I know there's a lot been said about Peter. He, he gets a lot of shade about this idea of him trying to set like, what's this generous limit?
How often should I forgive? But in some ways isn't the this, like the thing, if I were there, I'd be like, I'm thinking this too, which is, yeah, about how far, Lord, you know, how much, where, where do I be? When do I become the doormat? And so I have a sense, I think even in my own life, still don't want to quantify mercy.
Actually, I know this to be the case. I could think of a situation in particular. Where I was just talking about with my wife, where I was essentially doing this same thing. And in reform terms, I think like this is of course like the sinful heart's instinct to convert obedience into some kind of manageable policy, and that's where I'm like, yeah, I hear this.
Because if. Even quote unquote, like advanced disciples often want righteousness by measurement. Yeah. It's easier. It appeals to our human nature rather than righteousness by likeness to the father. And so it makes sense to me that after all this talk about discipline and about going after your brother, that I think honestly the logical thing is to say yes, but how far right?
And that's like the whole setup for this thing.
[00:24:52] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And I think there is a certain logic to. Peter's question, right? Yes. I I think you're right. Like we, we sort of bag on Peter to be like, what a dummy. Like, and, and I, I don't love, um, I don't love sort of the extrapolation that people make where they like, sort of like add that crisis, like exasperated by the apostles, right?
There are certainly places in the scripture where it, it just straight out says like, crisis. It, it basically says like, crisis frustrated with his apostles and, and he expresses like. I was reading the other day where they're like, who brought him, who brought him bread to eat? Like, and, and or the one where they're like, beware the ye the yeast of the, uh, of the Pharisees.
And they're like, oh, we forgot the bread. And he's like, I wasn't talking about bread you guys. Like, I don't, I don't actually get the sense that that's what's going on here. Like, I think this is a rational, logical question that Peter asks, right. Um, in many ways.
[00:25:50] Tony Arsenal: He's actually like catching the drift of what Christ is getting at because the, the prevailing thought in, in sort of like the ancient world, forgiveness was not really something you offered, like there was offense and then the offense had to be repaid and Christ is presenting this sort of radical new way where like all that needs to happen for the offense to be resolved is actually just repentance.
Like, it, it was not the norm. Peter isn't quite getting as far as Christ is pushing him yet, but he's not asking a dumb, selfish, stupid question. And I think we, we tend to sort of position Peter here as though he is, and I think the radical nature of this is that Christ answer is as many times it's, it's, he puts a number on it, but it's this number that has this symbolic value of like as many times as he repents.
And I think when you go back to the church discipline passage that we just came out of. The, the question basically is like, how many times am I gonna get to step one before I can just skip to step two? And the answer is, as long as there is genuine repentance, reconciliation should move forward. Right? Um, now again, like.
There are a lot of situations where rec, and I know the prevailing way of talking about this is like forgiveness and reconciliation are not the same thing, and they're, they're not. Um, but I also don't think reconciliation always means full restoration of a relationship as though nothing happened. And, and so I think this, this teaching that Christ is going into here.
Is not only designed to sort of like answer Peter's question, but providentially, it actually continues to extend the lesson of the last parable that you continue to seek your brother and you continue to forgive them and rejoice over that forgiveness and over that rest restoration as long as repentance continues to occur.
Um, now we don't need to get into it. But there are certainly times where a person might outwardly say like they're repentant of their sins and their behavior demonstrates they're not. That's not the scenario that Christ is addressing here when he is encouraging Peter to forgive 77 times. Right? He's not saying, just like you said, he's not saying you become a doormat and you just accept.
For, and you accept repentance on face value despite evidence. To the contrary, he's saying that when there is genuine repentance, there is no limit to the number of times that you should forgive a person.
[00:28:17] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's right on. It's not like Jesus is mouthing forgiveness here. Yeah, it's more of this emphasis, like you've said already, that gospel is creating a people who forgive habitually, not sporadically.
And so forgiveness becomes, I think we said this before, like a settled posture because the believers live from this kind of idea. Settle the mercy. And so Jesus ties, and this is wild again, incredible, limitless. Forgiveness to the nature of the kingdom,
[00:28:43] Tony Arsenal: right?
[00:28:44] Jesse Schwamb: So the parable is not mainly about some kind of interpersonal etiquette here.
It's about what it means to live under God's reign and in God's household. And that should be a demonstrative focus and emphasis in how we go about our lives because. What's practically applicable to all of us is that people are gonna hurt us. The same people will continue to hurt us, and we'll come back and seek some kinda reparation.
We'll seek forgiveness. And Jesus says, like you said, extend it. There's this idea that there's this. Kind of almost in this like a comment upon the Lord's Prayer in that fifth petition. Like we ask forgiveness as we forgive, right? So then there's not like behavioral or modification here.
[00:29:21] Jesse Schwamb: We're trying to perform in such a way, well, if we forgive, then we will be forgiven, and we get that twist.
It's all the other way around in reverse, which is because of course we've been forgiven, therefore we ought to forgive freely, liberally, unreservedly, not sporadically, but all the time, every way, any way you can, right? So that's what leads then to this, all this hyperbole about. Debt, which again I love as an expression of what it means to incur sin, to be under the weight of sin, to be in, you know, rebellion against God.
And so I love that that's where Jesus moves because like presumably there could have this, could have gone lots of different ways. There are lots of different metaphors. This is just one of several places where debt comes in the picture. And I know, I know it's your jam as well. Like I know that you love this in terms of how this like drama unfolds next.
[00:30:11] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And you know, this is a, this is a, um, I kind of alluded it to a last time, I won't get into specifics, but there's been a, a number of situations in my life, um, and Jesse knows which situation I'm, I'm thinking of most specifically, but a number of times that I've been in situations where, um, e either I see another person who is refusing, who, who claims the name of Christ, but is absolutely refusing to.
To extend forgiveness except on sort of like really specific elaborate conditions.
[00:30:43] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:30:43] Tony Arsenal: Um, I, I am not entirely set on the fact that forgiveness can't have any sort of condition in terms of what, what is expected to demonstrate that repentance is genuine. I think there are times where, um, especially if sin is an ongoing, you know, a person's sins against you in the same way, many times I think it's fine to say like, well, repentance in this situation looks like a right.
If a person is constantly talking about you behind your back and is gossiping about you, then repentance at a minimum is stopping that sin, right? For sure. At, at i, I would say in that situation, it might even look like that person needs to go. Take some steps to restore your good name in the, you know, in the people that they've slandered you against or slandered you with.
[00:31:30] Tony Arsenal: Um, but the, the main point of this, and the reason I bring it up, is that this parable is, um, uh. It's connected to the previous parable with this church discipline passage in the middle. In that what we see here is a picture of, of the unforgiving servant is not just the unforgiving servant, he's the unforgiving servant.
[00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:31:55] Tony Arsenal: And I think that's really key is that this. This parable, right? We always want to pay attention to what the parable is compared to. And so this is the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wishes to settle accounts with a sermon. So yes, it's true that this tells us about what a.
Forgiveness and reconciliation and what being forgiven and what that does if all of that's true and it's presented here, but this parable is really telling us what life in the kingdom of God looks like.
[00:32:26] Jesse Schwamb: Right on.
[00:32:27] Tony Arsenal: And what it looks like is not holding, not holding debts against someone in light of the fact that God has not held our debts against us and.
I think you have to be careful when you teach this passage because it can very quickly become you earning forgiveness by being forgiving. Um, and it's actually like the, the exact opposite. Forgive being a forgiving person is not how you become a forgiven person. It's what it looks like to be a forgiven person.
This is the classic Protestant kind of like, um, what's it called? The my brain is losing me. Uh, the practical syllogism, right?
[00:33:09] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:33:09] Tony Arsenal: You, you know, you're forgiven by the fact that you live, you're living a life of holiness. But it's not that, that life of holiness is somehow generating your forgiveness or causing it.
It's, it's the opposite. The life of forgiveness, the life of being forgiven is driving this gracious disposition that should mark every Christian. So I think as we unpack this a little bit, we get through this. That's what we have to remember. Yes, there are practical on the street concrete things that we should do in light of this teaching, but ultimately this is teaching us about what it looks like to live as a forgiven person in the kingdom of heaven, not just some general principle of what it means to understand forgiveness or something like that.
[00:33:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right? Yeah. It's bearing that fruit. Again, this is all about the community hermeneutic, the community of the family of God, represented in the kingdom of God, and that's what.
[00:34:01] Jesse Schwamb: Propels us into this idea in verse 24, these 10,000 talents, this incredible debt, which is of course really hyperbole. Just pick the number that is impossible for repayment in your mind.
It's meant to feel infinite, and it's a picture of our guilt before God's justice. And I mentioned this before, but I think this bears repeating. It's a real liability. Right. What we have here in this picture is not sin merely as mistake. We we're quick to talk about sin as missing the mark, and this is true of course.
Sometimes though, with that, we can get the sense that the missing of the mark is kind of innocuous. It happens and it's suboptimal, and your life would be better otherwise, and it does wrong and hurt God, and we can embrace all those things without realizing that all of this missing the mark is creating a real liability.
God has a claim over and above us for restitution of that because that's what his justice demands. And so here we have this explicit identification of sin as debt. It highlights this inevitable reckoning like you can debt, you have to deal with, you have to deal with it in some way or another. And
[00:35:04] Tony Arsenal: yeah,
[00:35:05] Jesse Schwamb: so too, here we have these two different servants and they both have this irreconcilable debt, this real liability that's represented in the form of this king having a claim over them.
[00:35:17] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I think, um, you know, we've commented in the rest of the parables that there, the, one of the beauties, the beautiful things about a lot of these parables is there's so much systematic theology actually baked into them.
[00:35:30] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.
[00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: And one of the things, I don't think, um, because of the way translations work and because the translations are not, um, they're translating the words and not necessarily the concepts in direct ways, in, in this context, in this situation.
Um. This is a picture of the, the sin debt that we have, but we lose the sight of the magnitude of it, right? So a talent was 20 years worth of wages for a worker in, in this era. Now that's 10,000 of those. So like the idea that you could spend 10,000 times 20 years worth of wages. Like, that's unreal. Like that's crazy.
That's unreal. Um, I can't even imagine what that would look like to spend and to, to somehow go into debt 10,000 times, 20 years worth of wages. Um, and that's the point is that it's, it's painting this picture. I think sometimes we, this parable is taught and the comparison is primarily between the 10,000 talents, which is this, uh, like.
Unimaginable vast quantity of money versus a hundred denari, which is not a small debt, but it's an imaginable debt. It's an understandable debt. That's the contrast most people, most people make when they're teaching this passage, but before you even get there. We've talked about how the parables sometimes have this element of like shock where like the, the, the people listening would be listening and be like, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And then all of a sudden there's something in the parable that's like, whoa, wait, a, like, slow down a second here. Like the idea that the younger son could ask for his inheritance and then the father would just give it to him. That's a shock element that would make the, the audience sit up and go.
Something is a little different here. The shock element here is 20, it's, it's 20 times. 10,000 years worth of wages,
[00:37:27] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:37:27] Tony Arsenal: So there's so many elements of that. Like, first of all, how do you spend that much money? Second of all, who lets you go that far into debt? Right? And how did you even do it? Third, how did this king have, even a king ha wouldn't have that vast quantity of wealth.
Um, this would be like all of a sudden, uh, like. Elon Musk has let me spend his entire, his entire net worth, and I've gone into debt in that. Um, it's this unimaginable situation, and this is a picture of the sin debt that we incur when we have sinned against God. And so the gravity of our sin. Is on full display here.
The debt that we've incurred against the Holy God is not just, uh, it's not just a debt that we can't repay. It's a debt that is un repayable. This is supposed to be a picture of an infinite death. Yes. Or infinite debt. Right. There's, there's no real way, like the, the, the ancient world didn't really talk about infinite or infinity in the same way that we do.
Like mathematically, that wasn't a common concept. This is supposed to be a picture of a debt that is so vast and so large that it is, it is beyond. Like beyond rational numbering.
[00:38:42] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:38:43] Tony Arsenal: That is the picture of the debt that we owe God when we are still in the midst of our sin. And so this, this person comes.
There's a certain kind of like audacity that would, should actually be offensive to the king when he says like, I will pay everything. You're gonna pay everything. You're gonna pay 10,000 times, 20 years worth of wages.
[00:39:02] Jesse Schwamb: Right,
[00:39:03] Tony Arsenal: right. Like, yeah. Right,
[00:39:04] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:39:04] Tony Arsenal: That's, that's the audacity of this servant. Um, he wouldn't have been able to believe he was gonna do that.
He's coming, throwing himself, hopefully, throwing himself on the mercy of this. Uh, king that something could be done to allow him to, to change his estate. It's not all that different than what we talked about with the son. In the parable of the, uh, lost son, where he is coming back to his father, he's expecting his request to be made.
One of the servants is going to be granted with a positive, favorable answer. Right? But his concept of what he even. Could imagine to ask for is like too small. It's too, too narrow in scope, and it, it's not presuming on his, on God's mercy or the father's mercy, it's actually like undercutting what the, the father or in this case, the king is capable of in terms of mercy, which I think is something we miss a lot of times with this par.
[00:39:59] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, we certainly see that the servant's inabilities is total, or at least we're meant to see that. And of course that aligns with all the things you and I regularly talk about, the human inability to satisfy divine justice by works. That's what's on display here in this idea of the kingdom. And the scene, to me at least, is like courtroom economic.
There's justice, which requires satisfaction. There's insolvency and judgment, and it happens beautifully in the context of this relationship where there's, there's debt, there's money, there's a claim over one. That must be satisfied. And while you were speaking, what really struck me is it's the king's right to claim it.
And he does. Right? Right. He, he brings it forward and says like, here's the debt. I'm just reporting back to you the real liability that is before you. So how are we gonna settle this bad boy?
[00:40:42] Jesse Schwamb: And what I find interesting is something that you just brought up and I think we should tease out, which is there's a, a flawed plea and this diluted promise, well, maybe I'm being right.
Not very generous. You tell me. I say that because the servant, and I think this is what like test this loved ones. I think this is what the natural man does. What the servant does, he asks for time and not mercy. Yeah, which I think is a helpful distinction. And then he tries to promise what he cannot perform.
So that's like the logic I think, of self salvation, which is, give me a little space. Let me know what I have to do. Give me more time and I'll fix it. And I think the critical observation is the servant's words expose that. I don't think he understands the nature of his debt. He underestimates what he owes.
He asks for the wrong thing, right. That's exactly what we do. We wanna know how we can fix it instead of understanding that it's unfixable, that only God himself can again be just and justifier through his son. And so we have this amazingly, like off the reservation, missing the whole point adventures in Romans one, where instead the natural man is prone to like, well, give me the legalism that I need to make restitution on my own.
And it's just impossible. So we're gonna see that that moves us, like you said, into compassion, into Mercy. But it absolutely floors me that this person says instead like, well, if you could just give me a little bit more time. I mean, I think there's like panic in that response. I think there's self-promotion in that response.
I think there's wanting to, if this can be true in some way, well intentionally wanting to make it right, but to do so on their own. And it's just an adventure in missing the point.
[00:42:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And I, I think, um. What we learn, you know, spoiler alert. I guess what we learn by the end of this, uh, parable is that this unforgiving servant, uh, represents the un unregenerate person.
Yes. Right. It's, it's, it's the person who never actually received the forgiveness that was extended to them. And I think we. We think that that punchline only comes at the end where the king throws him back into prison at the end and, and forces him to, to pay or, or keeps him in prison until the debt is paid, which of course, the, the underlying text is that the debt is never paid.
Um, but really this is actually the beginning of that, of that implication.
[00:43:01] Jesse Schwamb: For sure.
[00:43:01] Tony Arsenal: Right? He, he doesn't ask for forgiveness. He doesn't believe that the king is going to forgive him entirely. Um, he, he comes and he thinks he's going to pay off this unimaginable debt. Um, and again, there's a certain absurdity to these parables that is intentional.
It's part of the teaching mechanism. Um, but he comes and he says, exactly as you're saying, gimme some time to pay this off. He doesn't, he doesn't think he's not gonna be able to do it. Right. I don't think he, um. I don't think he comes thinking he's gonna somehow trick the king by asking for time and then he's gonna like flee to another land, right?
Like there's no implication of that. He thinks. By all indications, he thinks with a little bit more time, he's actually gonna scrape together 10,000 times, 20 years worth of labor. Right. He thinks that's gonna happen. And that is like when we come to the way that this is like the kingdom of heaven is when we, when we come to God saying like, just gimme a little time.
Or gimme a little space or tell me what I need to do and I'll make it right. Um, you know, you think of like Luther on the road to, to wherever he was going. Like, um, you know, if, if, if you save me, I'll become a monk. Right. You know, Saint Anne's save me. I'll become a monk. Like we, we think that if we can just.
Get the formula right, that somehow we're gonna be able to, to restore ourselves into God's graces. And so this is a picture of the Unregenerate man trying to flee the wrath of God somehow out coming out from underneath it by their own labor. And I. Again, like the absurdity of the, the, the servant's thought process here is exactly, uh, the absurdity of the person who thinks they're gonna somehow make up for their sin, debt against the holy God.
It just is, it's just not real. And it's, it's a level of delusion that can only come, you know? Yes. Sin and our fallen estate comes with a certain kind of insanity that comes with it. Yes,
[00:44:55] Jesse Schwamb: that's right.
[00:44:55] Tony Arsenal: That we, we are. We're not human, but we're sort of corrupted subhuman. And our rationality, our ability to understand spiritual things is totally just, it's totally damaged.
Um, so we couldn't even get to the right answer even if we wanted to.
[00:45:10] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, so I think maybe one of the first.
[00:45:14] Jesse Schwamb: Several of the gasps from those listening would be in verse 27, where the king has this compassion on them. He exacts a pardon, but not a payment plan.
[00:45:23] Tony Arsenal: Right?
[00:45:24] Jesse Schwamb: And it really is an act of sheer mercy.
Of course, it's rooted in the king's compassion. And I would say like in the categories again that we talk about, it resembles this concept of free justification. God's acquitting, the guilty by grace and not by installments. And again, I, I had to look it up because I knew it was somewhere, but I couldn't find it off the top of my head.
But this connects to like the Westminster Larger catechism, which was the fifth petition. And I love this language. We're confessing that we cannot satisfy the dead and we ask God to acquit us through the obedience and satisfaction of Christ applied by faith. Right. That is phenomenally good news. In some ways, this is, I don't wanna say this is a problem for God, it's not, this is what he delights to do, but I hope people can hear me on this in that it's a problem in the sense that.
If God is a compassionate God, if this king is truly compassionate, then he has to take care of this in some way, right? Like it is, it is a concern. It is legitimate quantity. If this is a real liability that must be dealt with. It's a bit like saying, there is this old saying in banking where something like if you owe the bank a hundred thousand dollars, that's your problem.
If you own the bank, a hundred million problems, that's the bank's problem.
Yeah.
[00:46:30] Jesse Schwamb: And so here there's this massive weight. That must be dealt with. It can't just be like swept under the rug. So even behind this compassion, we know that the rest of scripture enumerates how that compassion takes place. It is free justification at the cost of God's one and only son applied to us again by faith as the confession gives us that language.
And so this is. Shocking. Even that is shocking. And I think to your point, Tony, it's shocking because I do believe, like you're saying, that the audience would've picked up on this guy being off the mark and is saying, well, he's somehow getting granted. He asked for more time. That's ridiculous. Yeah. And he is gonna be given forgiveness instead.
And so what's, what's going on? And I wanna point out, this led me to think about. Isaiah 55, and I'm embarrassed that I often read Isaiah 55 completely divorced from the context in which these very famous words appear, which is, this is the whole, my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways. My ways declares Yahweh, whereas the heavens are higher, higher than the earth.
So are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts? And for somebody like me, I was like, I always appreciated like, listen, God is of course abundantly my intellectual superior in every conceivable way. I mean. Talk about an understatement, but he's just so brilliant. He works all things out for his glory, that the, the majesty and the creativeness of the world in which he spoke into existence proves that he's genius.
And here's maybe everybody, you're ahead of me on this, but here's where that passage. Here's like the antecedent verses right before that. This is Isaiah 55, beginning verse six. Seek Yahweh. While he may be found, call upon him while he's near. Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts and let him return to Yahweh and he will have compassion on him.
And to our God, he will abundantly pardon for my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways. My ways declares Yahweh, for as the heavens are higher than the earth. So are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts? The higher than your thoughts. So in other words. How do we know that God is like this, that his thoughts are heart?
Because the sheer act of this kind of forgiveness is so otherworldly that we cannot comprehend it, that God is saying the proof of the pudding is in the eating here. Here's how you know I'm so different than you, and the way I think, and the way I act and the way that I know things is because this kind of forgiveness, which I offer to my people is so extraordinary and unbelievable.
That you will not even be able to comprehend the essential first principle of what they mean, which is why we have to receive the instruction as it's set forth before us in this parable.
[00:49:07] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:49:08] Tony Arsenal: And, you know, we'll, um, we'll have to come back. We're not anywhere near finished with this. We're at the end of the time here, but talking one of, one of the things, um, that I think, you know, that, that passage in Isaiah, but this passage too, um.
You cannot forgive a debt unless you have the. Capital to have that not sink you. Right.
[00:49:31] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So if, if, you know, like that's part of why like banks and, you know, like the hospital like that I work at anywhere that is collecting fees and bills. Like they, they can't allow someone to go so far into debt that they will never recuperate.
That. That's like, that's where it's like bad debt comes in like at some point. You just let it go and you just stop giving them money. But you don't, you can't get the money back, but you can't forgive a debt if you don't have the resources to survive forgiving that debt. Right. And I think where this plays into in term, again, this is like another systematic theology point that comes outta this parable.
This king is apparently so fabulously wealthy and so fabulously, uh, rich in resources that he can just say, yeah. 10,000 times, 20 years worth of an, of an average labor. Like, don't worry about it. It's no big deal like that is, that has to be a king who is so fabulously wealthy, unimaginably so that that is not gonna hurt him.
And this is where the, like the omnipotence and the, uh, the impassability of God becomes so important is that we have a God who is, is able to forgive us. Right? I don't have the passage right in front of me, but. There's a passage in job where it's basically like, if, if I was to, to do something righteous, what benefits is that to God?
And if I was to sin against God, what does that hurt him? Right? Right. And like when we sin against God, it angers him. Um, there's not a change in his disposition. Uh, there, there, there might be a, a change in our experience of God. Um, because, you know, God in the presence of wrath is ex, I guess, is experienced differently than God.
Or God in the presence of sin is experienced differently than God, absent sin. Um, so when we're forgiven, we're experiencing, we're still experiencing God. Um, God is still oriented towards us, but he's oriented towards us graciously versus oriented towards us, non graciously. That's not a change in God.
That's a change in our status, a change that God renders in us. By applying Christ to us and Christ's benefits to us, but when we sin against God, it doesn't hurt him. It doesn't change him. It doesn't somehow make him less and, and that's a glorious thing. Because if it did somehow make him less right. Um, I'm a big fan of Anselm and I'm a big fan of ran of um, uh, satisfaction theory, right?
'cause that led into penal substitution theory. And I think there's a lot of truth to satisfaction atonement theory. Um, one thing that I think we have to be really cautious of with that is this idea that somehow God's. Honor, like is impugned and that he has to respond in a particular way, otherwise it somehow degrades his character and some wouldn't go that far.
But I think it's an implication of his, his theology is that's really a problem, right? That can be problematic because if God is somehow changed or harmed or injured by our sin, then then forgiving us. Becomes a problem because there has to be some sort of restoration to his being. And that would now put, you know, put a weird dynamic on the, the atonement that isn't, isn't biblical.
So just like in this parable, the, the king can forgive the servant, sort of almost like. Almost casually, right? Like right. The servant doesn't even ask him to forgive the debt. And he is like, oh, don't worry about it. Like, I don't mean to be flippant about it, but like there is this element of like, it's almost a non-issue for this king to just say like, your debt is erased.
I'm not, I'm not concerned about that. Um, he sees the. Outward disposition of this servant of Des apparently desiring to be able to pay this debt off and, and committing to what it takes. And he takes that step of mercy that wasn't even being asked of, but that's not possible if the king is somehow, uh, in a position of injury because of this debt.
Right. Um, he, he really doesn't seem to care about the debt. He, he just lets it go. And we have to, we have to then map that up to what God is like and what the kingdom of heaven is like. The kingdom of heaven. Um, it doesn't hurt God to forgive us. It doesn't hurt God or change the kingdom of heaven. It doesn't cause a diminishment in the kingdom of heaven for him to freely forgive our sins.
I mean, we could get into it, but like that, that's like totally flies in the face of Roman Catholic theology entirely,
[00:53:57] Jesse Schwamb: right?
[00:53:57] Tony Arsenal: Where like there has to be this, this exchange between the sinner and God, a meritorious exchange on some level in order for forgiveness to happen well. That only works if God is somehow benefiting or gaining from your, your, um, your good works.
He's accepting it in some way that actually benefits him. Now, that may be like a, a relational benefit or something like that, but it's still benefiting him. This parable seems to just fly in the face of that.
[00:54:25] Jesse Schwamb: It does, and we see justice is still at play here because we get at least some sense of what, like the equality of this debt, what it equals, what it costs.
Because we're told that when he comes before the king, the king says that he's commanded to be sold along with his wife and children and all that he had. So we know at least like that that would've been, in other words, this debt equals enslavement. That would be the only other way to even hope. To have some kind of restitution for, right.
Even that would be woefully insufficient. You're right. And so we still get a sense here, but that, that we're talking about livelihood, belongings, the persons themselves not being worth enough to really repay, but that is what would be required. Even just to begin that it's true that the minimum wages of sin is death and that's what the least of which our payment should be.
And so you're right that here we have one coming with all of the solvency that's required is not, not hurt by having to expend this, but must do. So I think that's like the subtext is behind there. It's not explicitly said, but it's clear like you're saying, Tony, that that's what's required of the one forgiving the debt.
It isn't just like, oh well. Well, maybe you'll do better next time.
[00:55:37] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:55:37] Jesse Schwamb: But instead says, no, this again, if it's a real liability that stands, it doesn't just go away in its own. You can't just snap it out of existence. I think that was a Thanos reference that I didn't Look at me. Look at me. He
[00:55:49] Tony Arsenal: only gets rid of half of your debt.
[00:55:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, look at me. Yeah. I guess that's a joke. Jokes on you. Um, yeah. Uh, only half by the way. I know what you saying. That reminded me one time of somebody ribbing me after I'd run a half marathon. I was like, oh yeah, I ran the half marathon. And they're like, well, that's great. What other things do you only do halfway?
Um, and so, you know, like I, you're right with this, like at most this would kind of get you like maybe halfway and that's like being generous. And so here the greatest is generosity.
[00:56:17] Jesse Schwamb: And the shock that we're gonna see next is, first there's the gasp at, you know, maybe even Peter asking out loud, how many times do I have to forgive him?
And then there's this gasp at here's this incredible sized debt. And like you said, how did one accrue that? Yeah. How did that go on for so long? It's just impossible. And then the gasp of maybe him saying like, just gimme more time and I'm gonna make it happen. And then the gasp of this forgiveness, and there's a bigger gasp that's coming, I think next, which is, yeah.
Just from one shocked expression to the next, but I think we gotta call it there.
[00:56:50] Tony Arsenal: We do. Yeah. I, I'm, I'm looking forward to this too, because this is basically, uh, this parable is the parable of the lost son. In a different register. Like it's, it's the same basic dynamic, but the characters are flipped around a little bit, which is really, I think is really interesting and fascinating and, and fun to tease out.
So we'll, uh, we'll put a pin in that now. Uh, I'm super, super stoked to continue this. Like I said, this is a, this chapter, um, chapter 18 of Matthew has been really sort of. Out Sizely formative in my life and my thought process about the nature of the church. So it's, it's fun for me and meaningful for me to kind of tease out some of these specifics and come to it and learn some new things.
I think this is the beauty of the scriptures, right? When we sit down and we're serious and we take time to think through these things. God is faithful to always. That's right. Continue teaching us, right? Every day is a school day, but when you sit down and study the scriptures, if you let the scripture study you, you're gonna come away with it with, at a minimum, a deeper understanding of what you already had.
But I think most of the time when we're serious, we actually come away having learned something, maybe not entirely new, but something different than what we expected.
[00:58:05] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. So since every day's a school day, what have we learned on this episode? Well, I think we've learned that this parable is teaching us that the Kingdom of Heaven is a community built on astonished mercy.
And the king's free parting creates a people who forgive from the hearts. And like you said, that means that that is the fruit of righteousness in our life. By the blood of Christ applied to us through the Holy Spirit, and that means we don't forgive to be forgiven. We are forgiving people because we have already been forgiven in the best and the greatest of all possible ways.
Getting rid of that debt that was so large, we couldn't hope to get out from underneath it. I think we've also learned, Tony, that you finally have become a hipster, and I'm so happy that you've arrived with the rest of us. And I hope we've inspired other people to go out and pour water over their own coffee.
It's delicious.
[00:58:55] Tony Arsenal: That might be the only actual hipster thing. Right now I'm wearing a, a zip up sweater that is, uh, is from when I was in seminary like 15 years ago. I still, I still own and wear clothes. Uh, that are like decades old. Uh, this is gonna like fall off my body at some point, but I am never getting rid of it, so, yeah.
Yeah. I'm stoked to keep going. Uh, please come back and join us next week. We'll be finishing out the parable. Uh, we'll, we'll talk through, you know. The difference between 20,000 years worth of debt or 200,000 years worth of debt, I'm not even good enough at math to figure that on the fly versus like a hundred days of debt.
Uh, it's, it's a totally different register, uh, and it just continues to add to the absurdity of this thing. So until we do that, until next time, Jesse, honor everyone.
[00:59:46] Jesse Schwamb: Love the brotherhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this profound exploration of Philippians 1:27–2:11, Tony Arsenal unpacks Paul's urgent call to gospel-centered unity in the face of both external persecution and internal division. Preaching to Christ Community Church in Plainfield, NH, Arsenal demonstrates how the Philippian church's brewing conflict between two prominent women threatened their witness and weakened their defensive posture against genuine opposition. The sermon's theological centerpiece—the Christ hymn of Philippians 2:5-11—is presented not primarily as a doctrinal treatise on the incarnation, but as the supreme pattern for Christian humility and sacrificial service. Arsenal challenges believers to assess their own conflicts, embrace sober self-esteem that esteems others higher, and embody the mind of Christ who emptied himself, becoming obedient even to death on a cross for our sake.
Paul's instruction to "strive side by side" (Philippians 1:27) deliberately evokes the image of ancient military formations, particularly the phalanx used by Greek and Roman soldiers. In this formation, soldiers would stand shoulder to shoulder with large shields overlapping, creating an nearly impenetrable defensive wall. The strength of the phalanx wasn't in individual prowess but in unified cohesion—when soldiers stood together, pressure from enemies actually reinforced rather than weakened their defense. Paul applies this tactical reality to the church: Christians facing opposition must present such a united front that external pressure only strengthens rather than fractures their fellowship. This requires not just agreement in principle but actual coordination of thought, spirit, and action. When believers are divided—bickering over personal preferences, nursing interpersonal grievances, or pursuing selfish ambition—they break formation, leaving gaps through which spiritual enemies can attack. The Philippian church, facing real persecution in a Roman colony, needed to grasp that their internal conflicts were tactical vulnerabilities that could prove fatal to their witness.
The traditional Reformed understanding of Christ's "humiliation" encompasses his entire earthly existence from conception to burial, not merely his passion and crucifixion. Arsenal emphasizes that when Philippians 2:6-8 describes Christ "emptying himself" and "humbling himself," Paul has the whole trajectory of incarnate life in view. From the moment the eternal Son took on human nature in Mary's womb—experiencing the compression of birth, the skinned knees of childhood, the weariness of labor, the sting of rejection from family and friends, and ultimately the agony of crucifixion—every moment constituted an act of voluntary humiliation. This was not playacting; Christ genuinely experienced human weakness, limitation, suffering, and mortality. He "learned obedience through what he suffered" (Hebrews 5:8), meaning the incarnate Son actually underwent a process of human development and moral formation, though without sin. This comprehensive view of Christ's humiliation serves Paul's ethical argument: if the eternal Son of God willingly embraced such comprehensive lowliness for the sake of others, how much more should believers embrace inconvenience, discomfort, and self-sacrifice for the good of fellow Christians and the advancement of the gospel?
Arsenal challenges a common misunderstanding of Christian humility—the notion that godliness requires constant self-deprecation and denial of one's gifts and abilities. He argues that such "worm theology" actually dishonors God by refusing to acknowledge the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification and the gifts distributed by the Spirit for the body's edification. True humility, as Paul describes it in Philippians 2:3-4, consists of having an honest, accurate assessment of yourself—recognizing your genuine gifts, calling, training, and spiritual progress—while simultaneously making the deliberate choice to recognize and celebrate others' gifts as more significant than your own. This is not a zero-sum calculation where acknowledging others requires diminishing yourself. Rather, it's an abundance mentality: "I'm genuinely good at X because God has gifted me, and I thank him for that; but when I see someone else gifted in Y, I'm even more excited about their contribution than my own." This perspective prevents both false humility (which can mask pride) and competitive jealousy (which destroys unity). It creates the conditions for genuine collaboration where believers work "side by side" without jockeying for position or recognition.
"We certainly face real pressures to conform to the patterns of this world rather than to the pattern of Christ—that is the real enemy that Paul is encouraging and commanding the Philippians and therefore us to stand against. And we cannot do that if we don't have a united front."
"Our salvation, both as individual Christians and also as the church as a whole, corporately, it actually brings about the destruction of our enemies. In the last day, when Christ makes all things right, he's not just taking the saints to heaven and then putting all of the wicked off in some other place. He descends with the voice of an archangel, he slaughters all of his enemies, and through that destruction of his enemies, he saves those who are his."
"God is not calling us to think of ourselves as trash. He made us in his image. He's called us for his glory. He's empowered us by His Holy Spirit and we insult him when we don't acknowledge the gifts that he's given us. But what he is commanding us to do is to see the giftings in other people and to esteem those as higher than our own."
[The complete, unedited transcript of the episode is provided above in the source material.]
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this episode, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb explore one of Scripture's most fascinating puzzles: the parable of the lost sheep appears in both Luke 15 and Matthew 18, yet teaches dramatically different lessons depending on its context. In Luke, it defends Christ's mission to seek the lost and exposes Pharisaic self-righteousness. In Matthew, it becomes a pastoral manual for church discipline, humility, and restoration. This conversation challenges the common assumption that parables have only one meaning and demonstrates how the same story can illuminate multiple theological truths. The hosts unpack the scandalous grace woven throughout both accounts while wrestling with practical implications for church life, confrontation, and the celebration of repentance within the covenant community.
One of the most significant insights from this episode is the recognition that the parable of the lost sheep serves distinct theological purposes in Luke 15 and Matthew 18. In Luke, Jesus tells the parable to Pharisees and scribes who criticize Him for welcoming sinners—the lost sheep represents those outside the covenant community whom Christ seeks. In Matthew, however, Jesus addresses His disciples within the context of kingdom life, and the lost sheep represents a believer who has wandered from the fold. This contextual shift demonstrates that parables are not rigid allegories with single meanings but flexible teaching tools that illuminate different facets of divine truth. The hosts argue that this reality should free interpreters from overly narrow readings and encourage careful attention to literary setting, audience, and surrounding discourse when seeking to understand Jesus' teaching.
In Matthew 18, the parable of the lost sheep (vv. 12-14) is not an isolated story but a theological foundation for the church discipline instructions that immediately follow (vv. 15-20). By emphasizing the shepherd's joy in recovering the one lost sheep and stating that it is not God's will for any "little one" to perish, Jesus prepares His disciples to approach confrontation with a restorative rather than punitive mindset. The language of "gaining your brother" (v. 15) echoes the recovery theme of the parable—confrontation is rescue, not victory. This connection is often missed because English Bible headings create visual breaks between verses 14 and 15, obscuring their flow. When read together without interruption, the passage reveals that every step of church discipline—from private conversation to final excommunication—must be undertaken with the Father's heart, which longs for the wanderer's return rather than their expulsion.
The promise in Matthew 18:20—"where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them"—is frequently misapplied as a general encouragement for small prayer groups or house churches. While Christ's omnipresence certainly validates such gatherings, the primary context of this verse is judicial and ecclesiastical. The "two or three" echoes the Old Testament requirement for multiple witnesses in matters requiring serious judgment (Deuteronomy 19:15), and the phrase appears at the climax of Jesus' teaching on church discipline. Christ is promising His authorizing presence specifically during the church's most difficult and painful work: confronting sin, evaluating repentance, and when necessary, declaring someone outside the visible church. This is both sobering and comforting—sobering because it reminds us that church discipline carries divine weight, and comforting because Christ does not leave His church alone in this weighty task but stands in the midst of the assembly, confirming its righteous judgments and sustaining its members through heartbreak.
"This almost proves the idea that parables have one meaning just isn't really real...a single parable with the same words can have multiple, at the very least, can have multiple gradations of meaning." — Tony Arsenal
"The scandal here is that it's not God's will that any one of these little ones should be lost. And that sometimes, I think, in the midst of great conflict feels scandalous." — Jesse Schwamb
"Gaining your brother frames confrontation as rescue...discipline begins maybe actually all the way through as pastoral care. It's not public shaming." — Jesse Schwamb
[The complete, unedited transcript of the episode would be included here for reference and accessibility.]
[iframe style="border:none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/40149375/height/100/width//thumbnail/no/render-playlist/no/theme/custom/tdest_id/2657462/custom-color/87A93A" height="100" width="100%" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen]
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In a theological landscape that often softens sin into "brokenness," Episode 480 re-establishes the biblical category of sin as debt. Jesse Schwamb takes us into the house of Simon the Pharisee to analyze the Parable of the Two Debtors. The central argument is forensic: sin creates an objective liability against God’s justice that no amount of human currency—tears, works, or religious heritage—can satisfy. We explore the critical distinction between the cause of justification (God’s free grace) and the evidence of justification (love and repentance). This episode dismantles the self-righteous math of the Pharisee and points us to the only currency God accepts: the finished work of Christ.
To understand Luke 7, we must understand money. Money is a system of credit accounts and their clearing. When we apply this to theology, we realize that "religious effort" is a currency that God does not accept. We are like travelers trying to pay a US debt with Zimbabwean dollars. The Gospel is the news that Christ has entered the market with the only currency that satisfies the Father—His own righteousness—and has cleared the accounts of those who are spiritually bankrupt.
Simon the Pharisee wasn't condemned because he wasn't a sinner; he was condemned because he thought his debt was manageable. He believed he had "surplus righteousness." This is the deadly error of legalism. By assuming he owed little, he loved little. He treated Jesus as a guest to be evaluated rather than a Savior to be worshipped. A low view of our own sin inevitably leads to a low view of Christ’s glory.
The woman in the passage demonstrates what Reformed theologians call "evangelical obedience"—obedience that flows from faith and gratitude, not from a desire to earn merit. Her tears did not wash away her sins; the blood of Christ did that. Her tears were the overflow of a heart that realized the mortgage had been burned. We must never confuse the fruit of salvation with the root of salvation.
Tears don't cancel the ledger. Christ does that. Tears are what debtors do when Mercy lands.
Grace received produces love expressed.
A creditor doesn't need to be convinced you did harm. The ledger already stands.
[00:01:10] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 480 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse, and this is the podcast for those with ears to hear. Hey, brothers and sisters, how great is it that we have these incredible teachings of Jesus? Can we talk about that for a second? Tony and I have loved hanging out in these parables with you all, and Tony will be back next week.
Don't you worry. But in the meantime, I've got another parable for us to consider, and I figured we would just get. Straight to the points, but I have to let you in in a little secret first, and that is not even Tony knows until he hears this, which parable I've selected for us to chat about. And I knew that there might come a time where I would be able to sneak in with this parable because I love.
This parable, and I love it because it's so beautiful in communicating the full breadth and scope of the gospel of God's grace and his mercy for all of his children. And it just makes sense to me, and part of the reason why it makes so much sense to me is. The topic which is embedded in this is something that more or less I've kind of built my career around, and so it just resonates with me.
It makes complete sense. I understand it inside and out. I feel a connection to what Jesus is saying here very predominantly because the topic at hand means so much to me, and I've seen it play out in the world over and over and over again. So if that wasn't enough buildup and you're not ready, I have no idea what will get you prepared, but we're going to go hang out in Luke chapter seven, and before I even give you a hint as to what this amazing, the really brief parable is, it does take a little bit of setup, but rather than me doing the setup.
What do you say if we just go to the scriptures? Let's just let God's word set up the environment in which this parable is gonna unfold. And like a good movie or a good narrative, even as you hear this, you might be pulled in the direction of the topic that you know is coming. And so I say to you, wait for it.
Wait for it is coming.
[00:03:20] Jesse Schwamb: So this is Luke's book, his gospel chapter seven, beginning in verse 36. Now one of the Pharisees was asking Jesus to eat with him, and Jesus entered the Pharisees house and reclined at the table. And behold, there was a woman in the city who was a sinner, and when she learned that he was reclining at the table in the Pharisees house, she brought an alabaster jar of perfume.
And standing behind him at his feet crying. She began to wet his feet with her tears, and she kept wiping them with her hair over her head and kissing his feet and anointing them with perfume. Now, in the Pharisee, who had invited him, saw this, he said to himself saying, if this man were, he would know who and what sort of person this woman is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.
Let's stop there for a second. So this incredible dinner party that Jesus attends and here is this woman. Well, all we're told is that she's a woman who's identified as a sinner. Clearly moved by the presence of Jesus clearly wanting to worship him in a very particular way. By the way, loved ones. Can we address the fact that this goes back to something Tony and I have been talking about, I dunno, for like seven episodes now, which is coming outta Luke chapter 15.
This idea that sinners, the marginalized, the outcasts, the down and out, they were drawn to Jesus. Something about him, his presence, the power of his teaching drew them in, but in a way that invited vulnerability, this kind of overwhelming response to who he was. And what his mission was. And so here maybe is like any other occurrence that happened in Jesus' day, maybe like a million other accounts that are not recorded in the scriptures.
But here's one for us to appreciate that. Here's this woman coming, and her response is to weep before him, and then with these tears, to use them to wash his feet and to anoint him with this precious perfume. Now, there's a lot of people at this dinner party. At least we're led to believe. There's many, and there's one Pharisee in particular whose home this was.
It was Simon. And so out of this particular little vignette, there's so much we could probably talk about. But of course what we see here is that the Pharisee who invited him, Simon, he sees this going on. He does not address it verbally, but he has his own opinions, he's got thoughts and he's thinking them.
And so out of all of that, then there's a pause. And I, I would imagine that if we were to find ourselves in that situation, maybe we'd be feeling the tension of this. It would be awkward, I think. And so here we have Jesus coming in and giving them this account, this parable, and I wanna read the parable in its entirety.
It's very, very short, but it gives us a full sense of both. Like what's happening here? It's both what's happening, what's not happening, what's being. Presented plain for us to see what's below the surface that Jesus is going to reveal, which is both a reflection on Simon and a reflection on us as well.
[00:06:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picking up in, in verse 40, and Jesus answered and said to him, Simon, I owe something to say to you. And he replied, say it, teacher a money lender had two debtors, one owned 500 in RI and the other 50. When they were unable to repay, he graciously forgave them both. So which of them will love him more?
Simon answered and said, I suppose the one who he graciously forgave more, and he said to him, you have judged correctly and turning toward the woman. He said to Simon, do you see this woman? I entered your house? You gave me no water from my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair.
You gave me no kiss, but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss my feet. You did not anoint my head with oil, but she anointed my feet with perfume. For this reason, I say to you her sins, which are many have been forgiven for. She loved much, but he who is forgiven, little loves little. Then he said to her, your sins have been forgiven, and those were reclining at the table.
With him began to say to themselves, who is this man who even forgives sins? And he said to the woman, your faith has saved you. Go in peace.
[00:07:42] Jesse Schwamb: What a beautiful, tiny, deep, amazing instruction from our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So in this just short 10 verses here, it's we're sitting inside. This dinner at Simon, the Pharisees house, and a woman known publicly only as a sinner, has shown some striking love toward Jesus, and Jesus explains her actions.
Then through this mini parable of debt, two debtors, one creditor, neither can pay. Both are freely forgiven. Love flows. Then from that forgiveness. And so there's a lot within the reform theological spectrum here that helps us to really understand. I think the essential principles of what's going on here, and I just wanna hit on some of those and chat with you about those and hopefully encourage you in those as I'm trying to encourage myself.
First, we get some sense about what sin really is like. We get a sense of the inability to cope with sin. We get the free forgiveness that's grounded in Christ, in Christ alone, and we get this idea of love and repentance as the fruit or the evidence, not the cause of justification. Now to set this whole thing up.
[00:08:50] Jesse Schwamb: I do think it's so important for us to talk about money for a second, not money, like we're gonna have a budget talk, not what you spend on groceries or your vacation, not even what you do in terms of planning for your retirement or what you give to the church in way of tithe than offering none of that.
I'm actually more interested to talk to you about money itself. One of the things I love to ask people. Especially when I was teaching students in money and finance is the question, what is money? And I bet you if you and I were hanging out across the kitchen table and I asked you, what is money? I'm guessing you would go in one or two directions.
Either you would gimme examples of money, types of money. You might talk about the US dollar or the Zimbabwean dollar, or the Euro or the Yuan. That would be correct in a way, but really that's just symptomatic of money because that's just an example or a type of some money that you might use. And of course those definitions are not ubiquitous because if I take my US dollars and I go travel to see our Scott brothers and sisters, more than likely that money.
That currency, those dollars will not be accepted in kind. There'd have to be some kind of translation because they're not acceptable in that parts of the world. That's true of most types of money. Or you might go to talking about precious metals and the price of gold or silver and how somehow these seem to be above and beyond the different types of currency or paper, currency in our communities and around our world.
And of course, you'd be right as an example of a type of money, but. Gold itself, if you press on it, is not just money, it's describing as some kind of definition of what money is. The second direction you might take is you might describe for me all the things that money is like its attributes. Well, it must be accepted generally as a form of currency.
It might must be used to discharge debt or to pay taxes, or it must have a store of value and be able to be used as a medium of exchange. And you would be correct about all of those things as well because. Probably, whether you know it or not, you're an expert in money because you have to use it in some way to transact in this lifetime.
But even those are again, just attributes. It's not what money is in its essential first principle. So this is not like an economics lecture, I promise, but I think it is something that Jesus is actually truly drawing us to, and that is the best definition of money I can give, is money is a system of credit accounts and their clearing.
It's a whole system of credit accounts and their clearing. So think of it like this, every time you need something from somebody else. Anytime you wanna buy something or you wanna sell something, what's happening there is somebody is creating a claim. So let's say that I go to the grocery store and I fill up the cart with all kinds of fruits and vegetables and meats, and I'm at the counter to check out.
What I've just done is said that I have all of these things I would like to take from the grocery store, and now the grocery store has some kind of claim because they're handing them over to me and I need a way to settle that claim. And the way that I settle that claim is using money. It is the method that allows us to settle those transactions.
And in my particular instance, it's going to be the US dollar, or maybe it's just ones and zeros electronically, of course representing US dollars. But in this case, the way I settle it is with money and a particular type of money. But, and I want you to keep this in mind 'cause we're gonna come back to it.
This is my whole setup for this whole thing. The reason why this is important is because you have to have the type of money. That will settle the debt or settle the creditor. You have to have the thing itself that the creditor demands so that you can be a hundred percent released from the claim that they have on you.
If you do not have exactly a. The type of money that they desire, then the debt will not be released. The creditor will not be satisfied. You will not go free, and that it's so critically important.
[00:12:52] Jesse Schwamb: I think it's just like this really plain backdrop to what's happening here When Jesus addresses Simon with this whole parable.
So he starts this whole idea by saying to Simon that he is something to say to him, which I think in a way is profound anyway, because Simon invites him to speak. But Jesus here is taking the initiative. Simon is the host. He socially, as it were, above this sinful woman. But Jesus becomes the true examiner of the heart in this parable.
What we have is. Christ's word interrupts self-justifying narratives, and clearly there was a self-justifying narrative going on in Simon's head. We know this because we're privy to his thoughts in the text here. The gospel does not wait here for the Pharisee to figure it out, the gospel lovingly correct.
Always goes in, always initiates, always intervenes as Christ intercedes. And here, before any accounting happens, Jesus sets the terms. God is the one who names the debt, not the debtor. And this really is probably the beating hearts, the center of gravity of this whole exchange. I love that Jesus goes to this parable.
Of a money lender, a money lender who had two debtors, one owned, 500, one owned 50. Now of course, I would argue that really, you can put this in any currency, you can translate into modern terms, you can adjust it for inflation. It doesn't really matter. What we have here is one relatively small debt, another debt 10 times the size.
So one small, one large, and that's the juxtaposition. That's the whole setup here. And I would submit to you something super important that Jesus does here, which flies in the face of a lot of kind of just general wishy-washy evangelicalism that teaches us somehow that sin is just not doing it quite right, or is just a little brokenness, or is just in some way just slightly suboptimal or missing the mark.
It is those things, but it is not the entirety of those things because what's clear here is that Jesus frames sin as debt. In other words, it's an objective liability. A liability is just simply something of value that you owe to somebody else. And I am going to presume that almost everybody within an earshot of my voice here all over the world has at some point incurred debt.
And I think there's, there's lots of great and productive reasons to incur debt. Debt itself is not pejorative. That would be a whole nother podcast. We could talk about. Maybe Tony and I sometime, but. What is true is that debt is an objective liability. The amounts differ, but both are genuinely in the red here.
And what's critical about this is that because debt is this objective reality, whenever you enter into an arrangement of debt, let's say that you borrow some money to purchase a car or home or simply to make some kind of purchase in your life, that's unsecured debt. In all of those cases, the. The one lending you the money, the creditor now has a claim on you.
What's important to understand here is that this kind of thing changes it. It provides way more color and contrast to really the effects of what sin is and what sin does in its natural accountability. And so in this way we have this nuance that there are differences in outward sin and its social consequences.
That is for sure that's how life works, but all sin is ultimately against God and makes us debtors to divine justice. That is now God has a claim against us. And this shouldn't make sense because unless we are able to satisfy that claim, all have that claim against them all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
And as a result of this, it's not just that we somehow have lived a way that is just slightly off the mark and suboptimal, but instead that we've heaped up or accumulated for ourselves an objective liability, which is truly. Owed to God and because it is truly owed him, he's the one who can only truly satisfy it.
This is why the scripture speak of God as being both just and justifier. That is a just creditor ensures that the debt is paid before it is released, and the one who is justifier is the one who pays that debt to ensure it will be released. God does both of these things through Jesus Christ, our Lord.
Praise be to his name. So here we have a really true understanding. Of what sin is. There's no mincing of words here. There's a ubiquity in all of our worlds about money lending and borrowing, and Christ leans into that heavily. We know for a fact that the ancient Mesopotamians learned how to calculate interests before they figured out to put wheels on car.
And so this idea of lending and borrowing and indebtedness, this whole concept has an ancient pedigree, and Jesus leans into this. And so we have this really lovely and timeless example of drawing in the spiritual state into the very physical or financial state to help us understand truly what it means when we incur sin.
Sin is not easily discharged, and just like debt, it stands over us, has a claim on us, and we need somebody to satisfy that claim on our behalf. By the way, this gets me back to this reoccurring theme of we need the right currency, we need the right money, as it were to satisfy this debt only that which is acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
Our Lord, by the power of the Holy Spirit is what will be acceptable in payment in full for this kind of debt. And so that's again, this whole setup, it's the spiritual realm being immediately kind of dragged into this corporal reality of the balance sheet, assets and liabilities, things of value that we owe to someone else.
[00:18:50] Jesse Schwamb: Notice in Luke verse 42, that the reason why it's important to understand the full ferocity, the ferocious of sin and the weight of the debt that it incurs upon us, is that it cannot be repaid no matter what. So look at both of these borrowers. Neither could repay. Neither could repay. So think about that for a second.
It doesn't even matter how much they owed. Both were way beyond their ability. It's not merely they didn't want to, but they didn't have the resources in the spiritual state. In other words, there was no surplus righteousness to pay God back and the creditor's action here is free cancellation grace, not a negotiated settlement, but free cancellation.
So whether it was 50 or 500, it was irrelevant to the fact that these borrowers just like you and I, have nothing within our means, our wherewithal to actually satisfy the this cosmic debt that we have rightfully incurred against God. And so you should be hearing this align so closely with justification By Grace, God doesn't forgive because we eventually scraped together payment.
He forgives because he's gracious and in the full biblical picture because Christ pays and bears that penalty. So this isn't, we have somehow, as you've heard, sometimes in kinda very again, wishy-washy, evangelical ways that we've somehow come forward at the right time. To receive from God some kind of gift or that we've somehow elevated ourself to the place of the deserving poor, or that we come with our own extended arms, empty, but outstretched so that we might receive something from God, in part because we make ourselves present before him, not loved ones.
It's far better than that. It's not being able to pay and Christ saying, come and buy. Not being able to put food on the table and him saying, come and eat. It's him saying, you who are thirsty, come and drink from the fountain of life freely and unreservedly. Not because you have some way deserved it, because in fact you desperately do not.
And because God has made a way in Christ a way that we could not make for ourselves, he's paid a debt that we just could not repay. It doesn't matter what it is that you think is outstanding against you. The fact of the matter is you cannot repay it. And so of course, that's why Paul writes in Ephesians, it's by grace through faith and not by works that you've been set free in the love of the Kingdom of Christ, that all of these things have been given to you by God because he loves you and because he's made a way for you.
You may remember that when Tony and I spent some time in the Lord's Prayer. That we really settled, we sunk down into what we thought was the best translation of that portion where we come to forgiving debts and forgiving debtors, and we settled on that one because we feel it's the most accurate representation of the actual language there in the text.
But two, because that language also comports with all this other teaching of Jesus, this teaching that. Emphasizes the debt nature of sin, and that when we think about the fact that we in fact have a giant loan or a lease or an outstanding obligation, something that has been that our souls ourselves in a way have been mortgaged.
And we need a freedom that breaks that mortgage, that wants to take that paper and to satisfy the payment and then to throw it into the fire so that it's gone and no more upon us. That because of all of that, it's appropriate for us to pray that we be forgiven our debts, and that, that we, when we understand that there's been a great debt upon us, that we are willing to look at others and forgive our debtors as well.
And so you'll see that in, I'd say it looks like verse 43 here, Simon answers. Jesus question appropriately. Jesus basically pegs him with this very simple, straightforward, and probably really only one answer question, which is, which one do you think loved the creditor more? Which of these borrowers was more ecstatic, which appreciated what had been done more?
And of course he says, well, the one with the larger debt, that that seems absolutely obvious. And Jesus essentially here gets Simon to pronounce judgment and then turns that judgment into a mirror. This is brilliantly what Jesus often does with these parables, and to be honest, loved ones. I think he still is doing that today with us.
Even those of us who are familiar with these parables, they're always being turned into a mirror so that when we look into the, the text we see ourselves, but like maybe whatever the opposite of like the picture of the Dorian Gray is like, well, maybe it's the same as the picture. You know, this idea that we're seeing the ugliness of ourselves in the beauty of Christ as he's presenting the gospel in this passage.
And the issue of course here is not whether you and I or Simon can do math. It's whether Simon will accept the implication and you and I as well, that we are a debtor who cannot repay. That. That's just the reality of the situation.
[00:23:44] Jesse Schwamb: And so Jesus turns then, and this is remarkable, he turns toward the woman and he compares her actions with Simon's lack of hospitality, speaking to Simon while he stares intently at the woman.
I mean, the drama unfolding in this quick small little passage is exceptional. It's extraordinary. And unlike some of the. Other teachings that we've already looked at here, there is something where Jesus is teaching and acting at the same time. That is the scripture is giving us some direct indication of his movements, of his direction, of his attentional focus.
And here there's an attentional focus on the woman while he speaks to Simon the Pharisee. And first what we find is Jesus dignifies the woman by addressing Simon about her while looking at her. He makes the sinner central and the respectable man answerable. That's wild. And there's an angle here that still leads us back to debt, which is Simon behaves like someone who thinks that he is little debt.
So he offers little love and the woman behaves like someone who knows she's been rescued from insolvency, and so she pours out gratitude. And then there's a whole host, a little list here, a litany of things that Jesus essentially accuses Simon of directly and pulls them back into this proper understanding of the outpouring of affection.
That is a fruit of justification exemplified in the woman's behavior. For instance, Simon gave no kiss, and yet here's this woman. She has not stopped kissing Jesus' feet and then wiping her feet, washing his feet with her tears.
[00:25:19] Jesse Schwamb: Of course, in that culture, Simon withheld this ordinary honor and the woman lavish is extraordinary affection.
You know, we would often call this an reformed theology, evangelical obedience. It's the kind that flows from faith and gratitude, not a plan to earn acceptance. And this is tough for us, loved ones because we want to conflate these two. It's easy to conflate these two, and we're well-meaning sometimes when we do that.
But we have to be careful in understanding that there is an appropriate response of loving worship to one who has set you free. While at the same time understanding that that loving worship never should spill over and, and into any kind of self-proclaimed pride or meritorious earning. And this woman apparently does this so exceptionally well that Jesus calls it out, that all of this is flowing from her faith and her gratitude.
Jesus says, Simon didn't anoint his head with oil and she anoints his feet with perfume again. Notice some really interesting juxtaposition in terms of the top and the bottom of the body here. Here's this woman's costly act, underscoring a pattern, grace received, produces love expressed. I love thinking of it that way.
Grace, perceived, excuse me, grace received produces love expressed.
[00:26:39] Jesse Schwamb: That is the point that Jesus is driving to here, that if we understand the gospel and the gospel tells us that there is a law. That we have transgressed and that this law has accumulated in all of this debt that we cannot pay. And so the weight of this means not just that, oh, it's, it's so hard to have debt in our lives.
Oh, it's so annoying and inconvenient. No, instead it's oppressive. This debt itself, this grand burden is over our heads, pushing down on our necks, weighting us down in every way, and especially in the spiritual realm. And because of this, we would be without hope, unless there was one who could come and release us from this debt.
And the releasing of this debt has to be, again, an A currency acceptable to the debtor, and it has to actually be paid. There's no wiping away. There's no just amnesty for the sake of absolve. Instead, it must be satisfied. And the woman here has received this kind of extraordinary grace has acknowledged, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, through opened eyes and unstopped ears and a clean heart, has been able to understand the severity of the situation.
And then this produces in her love expressed, which again is not the means of her justification, but certainly is one of the fruit of it. And Jesus explains then the reason for her response.
[00:27:58] Jesse Schwamb: The reason why Grace received produces love expressed is because she and her many sins have been forgiven. Hence, her love is great, love the one forgiven, little forgives little.
I think sometimes that verse is often misunderstood as if. Her love caused her forgiveness. But again, we want to hear clearly from Jesus on this. The logic he gives is forgiveness, leading to love. Love is evidence or fruits. And so her love is the sign that forgiveness has already been granted and is truly possessed, not the purchase price.
And Simon's Lovelessness exposes a heart still clinging to self-righteousness, acting like a small debtor who doesn't even need mercy, like one who doesn't understand that they will never, ever be able to repay the thing that is over them. You know, I love that John Val is often quoted along the lines of something like this.
Those forgiven much will love much. And in his writing to me, he captures so much of this moral psychology of grace and I think there is a psychology of grace here. There is a reasonable response. That moves us by the power of the Holy Spirit, from deep within this renewal of the man, such that we express our love to God in all kinds of ways.
I think especially in our age, on the Lord's day, in acts of singing through worship and meditation, through worship, and listening through worship and application, through worship, all of these means in particular as our expression of what it means to have been received, having received grace, producing a loving response.
[00:29:36] Jesse Schwamb: I love that all of this ends as it draws to a close. Jesus speaks these incredible words. He tells her that her sins are forgiven. You know, notice here that Christ speaks an authoritative verdict. This is justifying speech. It's God's court declaration. It's not some like mere the therapeutic. Like reassurance here.
It's not like whistling in the dark. It's Jesus himself saying This woman has been forgiven. Blessed is the one whose sins are forgiven. And of course, like so many other times in Jesus' ministry, and I have to imagine by the way, loved ones that this question got asked all the time, and not just on the occasion in which it was a court of us in scripture, but the other guests ask the right question and that question is.
Who is this? Who even forgives sins, and that is the right question. Only God can forgive sins against God. Jesus is implicitly claiming divine authority. Now, we finally arrived. This is God's currency. This is the currency or the money, so to speak, that is desperately needed, the only one acceptable to discharge the debt, the cosmic treason that has been done against God himself.
So because of that, here's Jesus making the claim that the way that you are led out, the way that you are set free is through me. So even here in the course of just this confronting Simon speaking about sin, he's also providing the way he's saying, I am this way, I am this truth. I am this life. Come through me.
[00:31:14] Jesse Schwamb: What I find amazing about this is in the beginning. With Adam and Eve, they transgress God's law. And from that day in all days forth, we have been building this massive sin, debt that we cannot repay. And part of the, the repercussions of that debt were for Adam and Eve to be driven to be Exodus as it were, out of the garden.
And ever since then, the grand narrative of the redemptive history of God's people has been an exodus instead. Not out of what is idyllic, not out of perfection, but instead. Out of sin, out of bondage, out of sin and death and the devil and the deaths that we have incurred. And so here we have Jesus representing.
He is the, the new and better Moses, he is the exodus, so to speak, who comes and grabs us by the hand almost as in the same way that the angelic representations in the story of la. And Sonor grabbed his hand to pull him, maybe even kicking him, screaming. Out of that sinful place, into the glorious light, into safety and security out from underneath this grand debt that we cannot repay.
I think of Jesus's acal meeting with Moses and Elijah on the mounts of transfiguration. That's also in Luke, right? And Luke tells us that they spoke of his deceased, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. And the word deceased there literally means Exodus. In Jesus, God would affect an infinitely greater deliverance than he had under Moses.
And then interestingly, we see that even in all the way back in Psalm 23, you know David, he's writing as a rescue sinner who has been brought out. Brought to the Heavenly Shepherd, into the security and freedom of a sheep hold in love ones I submit to you. That is what Jesus is after here. He's after it in your life and he's after in mind that there is death, and he wants to take us out from underneath that debt by paying it off that he is the rescuer, the one who is just and justifier that he's the greater Moses, and that he leads us into Exodus.
So we are transferred into the kingdom of a light. And that kingdom of light is also a kingdom of lightness in the sense that what was once a burden on our back, like it was for Pilgrim, has now been taken off. And so we are free. In that freedom, in that financial freedom, in that spiritual freedom as it were, to use both of the sides of this metaphor.
What we find is our response is appropriately one of worship, that we weep and we cry for who we were, that we rejoice for who God is, and that we come proudly into His kingdom because of what he has done. And this changes us. It messes us up. You know, I think we've said before that. The joy of the Christian life of Christian lives is that the transformation process that God undertakes in each of us is very different, and some honestly are more dramatic than others.
But what I think is always dramatic is one, the scripture tells us that it is a miracle. That even one would be saved. So hardhearted are we, and again, so great this debt against us that when God intervenes all get what they deserve. But some get mercy. And if we have been the ones who have received mercy, how joyful ought we to be toward the one who has granted it to us?
And so here we have Christ, the the one who delivers, the one who leads out, the one who pays off, the one who pays it all.
[00:34:45] Jesse Schwamb: I think what's clear is that the cross gives us this sense when we look upon it of just how deep and dark and heavy sin is, and that there is no easy way out of it. That what we find is that sin constantly wants to drag us down.
It constantly wants to take us farther than we wanted to go, and it certainly costs us way more than we were willing to pay. So I think if we come and we behold the wood, if we behold the nails, if we look on this crown pressed into the brow that knew no guilt or disobedience, if we, not in our mind's eye, but by faith, behold, the hands that open, the blind eyes now being opened by iron.
If we see the feet. Walked toward the hurting, now fixed in place for the healing of the world. If we look at the thirst of the one who is living water and the hunger of the one who is the bread of life, we ought to see the one who here, even in this passage, is just and justifier, and he invites us to say with him, come witness the death of death in the death of Jesus Christ.
That is the glorious mission, right? As as, um, Horatio Spafford said, my sin, oh, the bliss of this glorious thought. My sin not in part, but the whole is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more. Praise the Lord. Praise the Lord. Oh my soul of ones. This is the beauty of, I think of what Jesus is, is teaching here.
It's the lamb. It's the one promise on the mountain provided in place of Isaac. It's the Passover marked with Crimson death passing over doors that were covered. Here's the suffering. Servant despised and rejected a man of sorrows. Who here is one who is truly well acquainted with grief? When we see Jesus lifted up, lifted up on the cross, lifted up between heaven and earth.
Here the instrument of exalted torment but also unexpected triumph, the perfect God man, lifted up between earth and heaven, lifted up in shame so that we might be lifted up in grace, lifted up in cursing. We might be lifted up in blessing lifted up in Forsakenness so that we might be lifted up in divine communion with God the father lifted up to be stared at as he presents himself here, so that we could finally see what sin costs and what love pays.
That is everything that he's teaching us in this passage, and I hope that you are as encouraged about this as I am because. When I think about the gospel framed in this way with the full severity of its repercussions, thinking about sin as debt objectively as a liability, that must be satisfied. My heart is instantly warmed, and I think the warming of that is not because this manufactured some kind of sentimentality around this, but there is something about this that's so resonant to me that in my professional career, in my business, I'm intimately familiar with, with debt and understanding how to manage it, but also the dangers of it.
And what a liability it truly is. And so when I hear that sin not just is like this, but is this way, it makes complete sense to me and I see that this is really the, the true way that we ought to understand, I think the gospel message.
[00:38:18] Jesse Schwamb: So here's what we should remember. Debt highlights objective guilt. I think I've said that a bunch of times and I just feel like it's, it bears repeating one last time.
Sin is not only damage, it is consequences, but it's also a liability. A creditor doesn't need to be convinced you did harm. The ledger already stands and the ledger against us is not on our side. Loved ones. We are deeply in the red, and it really doesn't matter what the balance is because we just cannot repay.
So it's really about our lack of ability, our inability, the no, we have no capability to pay this, and so it doesn't matter. We find ourselves in a place of hopelessness no matter what, and this debt highlights that inability none of these particular borrowers could repay. It's devastating to moral pride.
We lean on this in our reform theological perspective. Even our best works can't erase guilt or generate merit sufficient to square the accounts. It's impossible. It's impossible with two ways, and this is some, I think really like the beautiful nuance of what Jesus after here in the one way that we are enabled to do this.
Is because we just actually cannot earn enough. So in other words, the debt is too big. So think of the biggest number in your head that you could possibly think of, and that's at least minimally the outstanding debt. But then think about this. You don't even have the right currency. So you might find that you spend your entire lifetime working to the bone.
It's like finding out that you have a million dollar loan or lien against you, and you work hard all your life, 50, 60, 70 years. And finally, on your deathbed, you've assembled enough cash with all of your savings to put toward and finally satisfy. So you might die in peace with this $1 million free and clear from your account, and you turn over the money and the creditor says, what is this currency?
I won't accept this. I can't accept this. How debilitating. So it's not even the size of the debt. It's also that we don't have, we cannot earn the right currency. Only. God. God. I think this debt also highlights grace as cancellation. Forgiveness is not God pretending the debt doesn't exist. It is God releasing the debtor.
This is him in triumph, being the greater Moses who walks us out through the waters outside of the city into the glorious light and the broader New Testament explains how God can do that justly. The charge is dealt with through Christ. You can go check out Colossians two. Read the whole thing of Love it.
It's fantastic. I think lastly, this debt explains love, as shall we say, like a downstream effect. People love a little when they imagine that they have little needs and people love much when they were spiritually bankrupt and then freely pardoned freely in that it didn't cost you and I anything, but of course it cost our Lord and Savior everything, and so.
In this way, our hopes to frame the fact that our love should be an outpouring of gratitude, uh, for the grace that God has given us through Jesus Christ.
[00:41:28] Jesse Schwamb: Here's some things I would say that we should all walk away with to help us then both process what we've talked about here, and also put some of this into action.
First thing would be, don't measure your need by comparing debts horizontally. That's a fool's errand, whether 50 or 500. The point is we cannot pay. And this levels the Pharisee and the prostitute alike. That is like Tony talked about elsewhere in the previous Luke 15, where we're talking about the PR prodigal of the father, the prodigal of the two lost sons.
How there's like a great insult against the Pharisee there. And here's the insult, it's also a little bit cutting to us, and again, that the Pharisee and the prostitute are alike. Can't repay. It Doesn't matter what debt you think you have in the corporal sense, or again in this horizontal means, but you cannot repay it.
And so therefore, guess what? We're all like, we need to let forgiveness lead and we need to let love follow. If you reverse that order like I'll love so I can be forgiven. You crush assurance and you turn the gospel into wages and that's again exactly I think what Jesus is against in this. He's making that very clear.
The, the beauty of the gospel is this receiving that Christ has done all these things that we, uh, find ourselves by his arresting, by again, his intervening by his coming forward. He does all this on our behalf. You've heard me say before, I always like take that old phrase, what would Jesus do? That question that was on everybody's bracelets and everybody's minds and what, two decades ago?
And turn that answer into what would Jesus do? Everything And it's already done. We need to watch for Simon symptoms. That's my clever way of saying this, like low love, high judgment. A chilly heart toward Christ often signals a warm heart towards self justification. And so we wanna be about the kind of people that are closely king, clinging to Jesus Christ as all of our hope and stay that the strength for today and hope for tomorrow comes from what Christ has already accomplished on our behalf.
And therefore, there is a dutiful and meaningful and appropriate response for us. But that response again, is not obedience for merit. It is obedience out of warm heartedness for our savior. And for a sincere repentance because a sincere repentance is not payment. It's agreement with God about the debt.
Tears, don't cancel the ledger. Christ does that. Tears are what debtors do when Mercy lands, and I think in some way the challenge here is that have we really meditated on the life of this woman and then more personally on our own experiences on what it means to be saved? Well, I'm not asking you to get yourself worked up into an emotional state, but what I am asking all of us to do is.
Have we spent enough time recently meditating on what it means that Christ has set us free, that we are incredible debtors, and that Christ in our own ledger in this way hasn't just wiped out the debt, but he's filled up the account with righteousness. And so we can exchange these horrible soiled garments for garments of praise.
Now, have we thought about that recently? The call here is to be reminded. That sincere repentance is an agreement with God about the debt, and in that agreement we're sensing that weight. There should be a response.
[00:44:42] Jesse Schwamb: So I leave it to you loved ones, you've heard it here, or at least you've heard me talk for a little while about this parable.
And maybe one day, maybe there'll be an episode one day about Tony's perspective on this, which I can't imagine will be too much different. But again, I saw my opportunity, loved ones. I said, oh, I'm gonna sneak in hard on this one because this one is particularly meaningful and special to me, and I hope that even though it involved a little bit of economics and maybe a lot of finance, that it didn't lose its resonance with you.
I think this is the great weight of the way in which Jesus teaches that he's not just using practical means. But he's using these things to give greater weight and flesh, as it were, to these concepts of a spiritual nature that sometimes feel ephemeral. Instead, he wants them to sink in heaviness upon us.
And I wanna be clear that. This whole parable is both law and gospel. It is the weightiness and the sharp edge knife of the law which cuts against us. And Jesus throwing his weight around literally at this dinner party and in this parable, and you and I should feel that weight. It should knock us around a little bit.
And then. And then comes the reminder that there is good news and that good news, which is the gospel of Jesus Christ, is that he has made a way that the debt that was incurred against us, that we ourselves added to, that we continue to want to try to borrow against, that Jesus has, in fact paid that debt in full and that he's done so in the currency of his own flesh and blood and his own passive and active obedience so that it may be paid in full.
It's true what the hymn says. Jesus paid it all, all to him. I owe. So I hope loved ones that you'll be encouraged with that message that it is both law and gospel, but it ends in this high and elevated state, which is we have been made together alive with Christ for his own sake, for his glory, and for our good.
So now that you know that go out into the world and live that way, meditate on that, enjoy that. Talk about it with a family member or a brother and sister, or you can talk about it with us. You didn't think that we'd get this far without me even a plug for telegram, did you? So if you. Haven't listened to us before, or if this is your 480th time, I say welcome and also come hang, hang out with us online.
You can do that by going to your browser and putting in there. T me slash reformed brotherhood. T. Dummy slash reformed brotherhood, and that will take you to a little app called Telegram, which is just a messaging app. And we have a closed community in there, which you can preview and then become a part of.
And there's lots of lovely brothers, sisters from all over the world interacting, talking about the conversations we're having here, sharing prayer requests, sharing memes, talking about life tasting foods on video. It's really. Absolutely delightful, and I know you want to be a part of it, so come hang out.
It's one other thing you can do. If at any point you felt like this podcast, the conversations have been a blessing to you, may I ask a favor, something at least for you to consider, and that is there are all kinds of expenses to make sure that this thing keeps going on. Keeps going strong. And there are brothers and sisters who after they've satisfied their financial obligations, have said, I want to give a little bit to that.
So if you've been blessed, I'm what I can I boldly ask that you might consider that it's so many people giving so many tiny little gifts because all of these things compound for God's glory in the kingdom. And if you're interested in giving to us one time or reoccurring, here's a website for you to check out.
It's patreon.com. Reform Brotherhood, P-A-T-R-E-O n.com, reform slash reform brotherhood. Go check that out. Alright, that's it. Loved ones, you know what to do. Until next time, honor everyone. Love the brotherhood.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
In this profound exploration of Luke 15, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb complete their examination of the Parable of the Prodigal Son by focusing on the often-overlooked central figure: the father. Rather than a sentimental character, the father serves as a revelatory figure who demonstrates God's nature toward returning prodigals and resentful religious people alike. This episode challenges common misinterpretations of the parable, particularly regarding the father's running to meet his son, and explores how the parable simultaneously confronts both antinomianism and legalism. The hosts demonstrate how the father's love—not the son's repentance—is the driving force of redemption, offering vital insights into God's character and the nature of grace that should transform how we understand salvation and our relationship with the Heavenly Father.
The parable reveals that the father's compassion is active before any condition is met by the returning son. When the text says "while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion," we witness divine initiative in action. This sequence matters tremendously for our understanding of grace. The son had prepared a speech—a negotiation for hired servant status—but the father's embrace interrupts the transaction. Grace is not extracted from God by human improvement or the quality of our repentance; it flows from God's own character and will.
This theological reality guards against both presumption and despair. We cannot presume upon grace as though sin doesn't matter—the father clearly identifies the son's condition as "death" and "lostness." Yet neither can we despair that our repentance might be insufficient to move God—his love precedes and enables our return. As Ephesians 1:4-6 declares, God chose us "before the foundation of the world...according to the pleasure of His goodwill." The father's running illustrates what was true before time began: God's saving disposition originates in himself, not in us.
Much scholarship has emphasized the supposed shame of a patriarch running, suggesting this represents God's willingness to be embarrassed for our sake. However, this interpretation may miss the mark. The running should be understood as condescension—God stooping to save—rather than a violation of decorum. Throughout Scripture, God is described as "bearing Israel up as a man carries his son" (Deuteronomy 1:31) and having compassion that "grows warm" (Hosea 11:8). These are images of condescension: the infinite God making himself accessible to finite creatures.
The distinction matters because it shapes how we understand God's character. If the father's running is primarily about embarrassment, the focus remains on cost to dignity. But if it's about condescension, the focus shifts to the nature of love that bridges distance. Any parent who has seen a long-lost child return understands this instinct—you don't calculate dignity; you simply run. The father's action isn't surprising or unusual given the circumstances; what's shocking is the older brother's refusal to share in the joy. This interpretation better fits the parable's context and Jesus's purpose in telling it to the Pharisees.
Perhaps the most crucial theological correction this parable offers concerns the relationship between the Father and the Son in the economy of salvation. Some theological circles wrongly pit "the wrathful Father" against "the loving Son," as though Jesus came to change the Father's mind about sinners. This parable demolishes that error. The father's love is the initiating force of the entire narrative. Before the son returns, the father is disposed to welcome him. Before the older son rejects the celebration, the father goes out to plead with him.
This reflects the biblical pattern consistently: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (John 3:16)—the Father's love gives the Son. The covenant of redemption originates in the Father's love for the elect. The incarnation, atonement, and application of redemption all flow from the Father's initiative. Wrath, while real and righteous, is God's "alien work"—not foreign to him, but not his primary disposition either. The father in the parable displays nothing but gracious intention toward both sons, never manipulated into love, never coerced into mercy, but freely extending restoration because it flows from who he is.
The love of God the Father is the motivating factor that drives the whole plan of redemption...So it's God the Father's love that drives the whole plan of salvation. The whole covenant of redemption is initiated in light of the Father's love. - Tony Arsenal
The father in this archway is the keystone. He's the load-bearing character in this whole parable. He's not just a sentimental figure, he's a revelatory figure. He shows us what God is like toward returning prodigals and toward resentful older brothers. - Jesse Schwamb
The point that the parable is making is that the love of this father drives him to exert himself and close that distance...There is never a point in the parable where there's anything shown by the father except for love for his people. - Tony Arsenal
[00:00:08] Tony Arsenal: In a lot of theological circles, this takes the form of pitting the son against the father, like God, the Son against God, the Father
the son placated the father. Because the father was wrathful and angry, so Jesus had to come down and die and now the Father can love us. The reality is the love of God the father, is the motivating factor that drives the plan of redemption,
and that's the same love of the Son and the same love of the spirit. In the most famous verse in the Bible, for God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that's God the Father
So it's God the Father's love that drives the whole plan of salvation. The whole covenant of redemption is initiated in light of the Father's love
[00:00:53] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 479 of The Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.
[00:01:00] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear.
Hey brother.
[00:01:05] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.
[00:01:06] Jesse Schwamb: We've been famously in the parable of the Lost Son or The Lost Sons. Or the father. Everybody knows this. And today on this episode, we're at least gonna close out our conversation about Luke Chapter 15. And I think everybody should just imagine that this parable is like a grand stone archway that's being constructed in such a way that it has to bear its own weight.
And the father in this archway is the keystone. He's the load-bearing character in this whole parable. He's not just like a sentimental figure, he's a revelatory figure. He shows us what God is like toward returning prodigals and toward resentful older brothers. And Jesus uses this to fire up our understanding of the kingdom and the gospel, and also to fire up the scribes and the Sadducees.
So we're talking about the Father on this episode, and he's rightfully the culminating character here. He's the keystone. So we're gonna get to arch building, keytones load bearing stuff, all the engineering that you wanted us to talk about in this parable. First we, we gotta do that thing. We just gotta do it, Tony.
[00:02:16] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, we do.
[00:02:17] Jesse Schwamb: It's affirmations and denial. So are you, and your excitement is palpable. Are you affirming or are you denying against,
[00:02:24] Tony Arsenal: I'm denying something tonight? It's a little bit heavy.
[00:02:26] Tony Arsenal: Um, we haven't, and, and we don't typically wade into political discourse or what's going on in politics. Um, that's just not really our, our lane.
And that's not that there's anything wrong with shows that do, or that there's anything wrong with Christians who want to be involved in political discourse. It's just not really our thing. But, um, you know, I, I grew up in Minneapolis and I have family still in Minneapolis and I was texting with my sister the other day who, um, lives and works right in downtown Minneapolis.
And so I think, I think what I'm denying is not necessarily anything related directly to ICE or to the political positions. Um, what I see online. Is that there is a. Bifurcation. There are, there seems to be, and I think this is probably just the, like the nature of online discourse. So I don't think this is necessarily the way it is in the real world, but what I see online is there seems to be sort of progressive leaning Christians who are totally anti-ice.
This is the worst thing ever. Um, you know, nobody who's being arrested and deported deserves it and all of the ice people here, but that's one perspective. And then what I tend to see on the other side is ice is like God's righteous warriors and everyone who they scoop up it deserves it no matter what.
And they can do no wrong. And, uh. I am not making a commentary. Um, if you want to ask me directly in, in privately what I think about it, I, I'm happy to have a conversation. I'm not doing that right now. Um, I have no commentary on the legality of the, the deportations or the legality of the way they're conducting arrests.
That's just, I'm just not interested in talking about that on, on a podcast. But what I do think is challenging and what I think we need to think about as Christians is there is a real.
[00:04:24] Tony Arsenal: Human cost associated with what's going on, and there are lives, um, that are affected and there are people who are scared.
I, I think where this really hit me is I just texted my sister to, you know, to tell her that I was praying for her and, and get sort of a general check-in. And she shared with me, and I'm sure that this is not unique to her context. She shared with me that she has, uh, colleagues at, uh, her place of employment, um, who are, are American citizens born in the us, born to citizens.
Like there's no question about their citizenship. Um, and they are afraid to leave their home and afraid to go to work. Again, I'm not making any commentary on whether there's illegal things going on. I'm not even making any commentary on whether or not, um, I think it's reasonable for them to be afraid.
Um, the fact of the matter is they are afraid to to leave their homes, and some of those people are probably afraid to leave their homes because they feel like ice is going to harass them. Other people are probably afraid to leave their homes because there's a lot of violence and a lot of, uh, unrest going on.
But in, in either case, uh, I think we as Christians should look at this and see that there are a lot of hurting people who need Jesus. And there are a lot of people who are scared and there's a lot of people who are suffering real concrete arm all across the whole spectrum of this situations. So as Christians, I think we should be praying that God's will would be done and God does not delight in suffering for, you know, for suffering sake.
He doesn't delight in people being hurt or harmed or even emotionally scarred. Um. You know, we have sometimes this picture of God who's so abstract that those things he, that they don't bother him. And that's true from like a strictly theological sense, but we also have to reconcile what the scripture says and what it, what the picture it paints.
Um, at the very least, God, uh, reveals himself under the language of grieving, uh, injustice and grieving misery and grieving sorrow and suffering. So we should be a people that reflects that. Uh, although there are times when those things are necessary, both in the life of a Christian and then also as a result of sin in, we, we shouldn't be reveling in it and, and being excited about the fact that this is happening.
So I, I might get some heat for this and I guess I don't really care all that much. Um, but I think this polarized like. Every person who's scooped up by ice is, is a terrible, awful criminal. And it doesn't really matter what their story is. And then anyone who's scooped up by ice is just a total victim.
And it doesn't really matter what their story is like neither of those polls are true for most of the situations, um, to, you know, the story probably drift towards one side or another, and they're not all like right in the middle. But, um, the, the truth is that the world and life is complex and we shouldn't treat it as though it's, it's simple.
It really is not, in most cases,
[00:07:30] Jesse Schwamb: it's a good reminder that there are places that are not here. That there are people, as you said, that are experiencing a different kind of suffering and your rights. Of course, if we're to be the kind of people that even ourselves are taking on our lips that we want to follow our Lord Jesus Christ, then the example that he gives for us is to think about, to identify with.
To come alongside in prayer for those that are suffering. I think also for prayer for Christians in those communities to be strong and to exemplify the love of Christ in ways that they can. And so of course, I immediately go to Isaiah 53, and that's also about really the ubiquity of suffering in our world, but this massive desire on the part of God in an unreserved way to identify with that kind of suffering.
So in verse four, the famous verses, surely our griefs, he himself bore what? A statement, right? Yeah. Like the grief that we're talking about now, that we're not alone. The grief of those who in the midst of this kind of traumatic, uh, sorrow and our sorrows, he carried. We ourselves steamed him, stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.
But he was pierced through for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastising for our peace fell upon him, and by his wounds, we are healed. All of us, like sheep have gone astray. Each of us has turned to his own way, but Yahweh has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on him. And who doesn't have iniquity?
All of us do. So this reminder that we serve a God who can parse out and understand the suffering the best, who is both just and justifier, and what is left to us then is to submit to him, to worship him, to pray that in that great grief, that our world experiences, that he himself would draw close as he has already promised to do, and that his spirit would come with both comforts and conviction to bring all his children onto himself, even in difficult situations like this.
[00:09:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, yeah.
[00:09:25] Tony Arsenal: Well, on that note, Jesse, are you affirming or denying something? There's no good transition there.
[00:09:30] Jesse Schwamb: No, it, it's heavy. I hear you. And the problem is partly in our culture right now is you can't, I understand your all, all, both of our desires right now to be measured in what we say because maybe we have opinions, maybe we don't.
But the bottom line is I'm not sure that opinions even help that much in this type of situation because the complexities involved here. And all I think that's left to say is just that it's hard. And I wish there was more I could do. I, I wish this kind of thing wasn't happening. And I, I understand too.
I'm not naive enough to think that's not just happening here, but all over the world, these kind of things take place at any given day. And if, if we are so fortunate not to have to contend with them, then we are just very fortunate and we all take that as blessing. It doesn't mean that we don't have a responsibility to pray and to, I think in some ways try to identify with that suffering if only through our prayers, reminding ourselves that, like you said, we all need to save, we all do.
All of us, you and me and all those involved in this, it's absolutely necessary. It's part of what we're talking about tonight, right? We're saying like, Lord God as father, come. Come in your mercy, come quickly, come and heal. Come and restore. Come and make right. Come and judge, come in comfort. That's what we're asking the father to do.
So it's, it's heavy, but we need those kind of affirmations and denials from time to time. So I,
[00:10:43] Tony Arsenal: yeah,
[00:10:44] Jesse Schwamb: I appreciate you being willing to bring that into the chat.
[00:10:47] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:10:49] Jesse Schwamb: You want my affirmation into Yeah.
[00:10:51] Tony Arsenal: I feel like I can't, I, I mean, I'll be honest, like I, I think people might be surprised at my overall perspective on this.
And again, I'm not gonna get into it here, and, and I really am being honest when I say, like, if you wanna reach out to me privately, I'm, I'm not shy about my perspective on this. I'm happy to share it, but I think it's just heavy. And I felt the same way about this during the George Floyd riots. You know, like I grew up in Minneapolis and.
It's been a long time since I've been super familiar with Minneapolis, but, and I, like, I grew up on, on the east side of the cities, which is the St. Paul side. So even, even saying I grew up in Minneapolis is not super accurate, but there are times when I look at the news coverage and I can see I, I recognize the landmarks, I recognize, um, the street layout, and I go, I know what street that is.
And there's something, there's something heavier about watching this kind of news coverage and this kind of event when this is the place you grew up. And when, when there are people there that you know, that aren't just names, that they're people with a history, that you're part of their history and they're part of your history, right?
There's something heavy about that. And I think what's been impressed on me and maybe why I am, why I am reflective on this is. Even if those people are not a part of our history, they're part of someone's history. Right. They're, they're of
course,
that that person you saw, and, and I'll just say it like again, I'm not making commentary on the rightness or the wrongness or the justified ness or not justified of, uh, the most recent ice involved shooting.
Um, but that person had a family like that, that person that was killed was an image bearer and had a family, and he had perspectives and he had opinions, and he was a person who, um. Death is terrible. Like all of those things are true regardless of whether he made a good decision to go out that day or a foolish decision to go out that day, whether he was antagonizing ice or whether he wasn't like whatever the situation was, it's still true that he had a family who is mourning him, um, and he was an image bearer, and now that's done.
Like he's, I mean, he's still an image bearer, but like now he's gone and his, his life on earth and his history here is over. And that's a tragedy, like no matter how we slice it, that's a tragedy. And I guess I'm just really sick of people acting as though, and, and I think most people are doing this for.
Political posturing reasons. I think people who wanna paint this as though it's good versus evil and that there's only simple answers in this, they're doing it because it suits a political narrative. And I'm not even making a commentary on whether or not that's good or, or wise or bad. Like I, that that's not even the point.
But that's a lot of what's driving this. And I, I think as Christians we can be and should be political. I think we should be involved in politics in so far that God calls us to. There's nothing wrong with that. But we, we don't have the liberty to do politics the way the world does politics. If we're gonna be involved in political action, whether that's formally by seeking office or whether that's informally by.
Making commentary. We still have to be Christians while we do it. We still have to, we still have to follow God's law while we do it. And that includes both the sixth Commandment and the ninth commandment. All of those things are true. And I guess I'm just really frustrated seeing some Christians or some people who call themselves Christians.
I, the only reason I say that is not to necessarily call their salvation into question. It's people who are identifying as Christians. I just have no knowledge of, it's just random screen names on Twitter. Some of them are probably bots, right? But there are people who identify, who are identifying themselves as Christians who are.
Acting as though the death of an image bearer is not a tragedy. And, and I, I can't think of a situation even when a hardened criminal is, is executed, even when justice is served by the death of an individual, it's still a tragedy and like a cosmic sense. That's not how it was supposed to be. It's not God's design for humans to perish and to, to, you know, to cease to be like, that's, that's just not the way it's supposed to be.
So it's heavy. I do want you to save me and get us out of this. Hopefully you've got some light, fun affirmation to get us back on track, but I've just, just been weighing on me and, and I feel like, I feel like sometimes we do have a platform and we have a responsibility to use it to, to make some statements to, to force us to grapple with these things.
I mean, I not like, it's a huge platform. We have like four or 500 regular listeners. It's not like we have a big reach, but we have a reach and we think, I think that has means we have a responsibility too.
[00:15:52] Jesse Schwamb: Also, this is how you and I talk, isn't it?
[00:15:54] Tony Arsenal: It's true. That's also true.
[00:15:56] Jesse Schwamb: This, and we're being true to the fact that we talk about the things that come up, that grieve us, that hurt us, that help us to process our faith and also our struggles in the midst of that faith.
[00:16:08] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:16:08] Jesse Schwamb: To make sure that we're honoring the Lord Jesus Christ in like difficult times and difficult circumstances of which again, by some, in almost all relative comparison, it's not that difficult for us, for you and I except that we have to contend with these things. Everybody should. So I think when you bring it forward, you remind us of that.
And I, for one, I'm grateful. So in that spirit, I don't know how my. Affirmation or denial could be heavier than that. Like we would, this would take a really weird turn. If I had one that was like, well, hold on, because I wade into so, and part of maybe its lightness is I'm gonna just break the rules. I'm gonna do an affirmation in denial, which used to be the old school method, but the affirmation is like, dry by, you rarely notice it happens.
So I'm just gonna drop it real quickly. So I've spoken before about two great series by author Brandon Sanderson, who writes amazing fictions in the fantasy genre. Uh, those two are miss Born in Stormlight Archive. So in case you know him as an author and you've been living under a rock, I just wanna say in passing that Apple TV just picked up, uh, some rights to those two series and they're gonna be making movies and, uh, television series.
And I high host because it's Apple and apparently Sanderson is also going to write, produce, and consult and approve and all this stuff. So it's gonna be good. So if you're not into reading. But you've heard me talk about them before. You can just wait and if you are into reading, get super stoked. 'cause you're gonna see people like, you know, VIN and Ellen in person.
Apparently it's gonna be great. So that's news in passing. Nothing else. Say
[00:17:36] Tony Arsenal: Vin and Ellen. Like Vin Diesel and Ellen DeGeneres are starring in
[00:17:40] Jesse Schwamb: this show? No, no. Being the character in Ellen. Ellen,
[00:17:45] Tony Arsenal: you're on like a first name basis with Vin and Ellen.
[00:17:48] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. I mean, if you read, I mean, if you know, you know, if you know, you know, so you have time to read, read, miss, board, read Storm, like archive.
It's actually, there's a lot of books, but, but I'm super stoked that this is gonna happen. So that was just a, that's the drive by I, I gotta leave it there. We're gonna, I've already drawn like just sped past the house, so here's the real denial. I'm also going denial. It is lighter than yours, Tony, but I think that you'll agree with me, but I'm not entirely sure.
So we're gonna find out.
[00:18:13] Jesse Schwamb: So I think the best way I can summarize this denial is like the dislike or vitriol, that's too strong a word, but I'm denying against the, what I think is too much dislike against. The cold weather. So, so hear me out on this in lots of places of the world right now, it's cold, it's super cold, it's colder than average for many people.
And I get that that can be uncomfortable. But there's something for me where I've always found the cold to be kind of life giving. It makes you feel alive. Like you go outside, uh, to take out the trash on a cold night, you breathe in that air and yeah, maybe it burns your lungs a little bit. You look up at the clear sky.
There's something about a beauty of the cold that I don't find the same in winter. Also, you can't get comfy in the, or in the summer, rather, you can't get comfy in the summer. It just doesn't happen. So like even now in my makeshift bedroom studio, it's a nice 61 degrees. I got a sweatshirt on, like I, and I know what the temperature is in the room you're at.
It's definitely
[00:19:13] Tony Arsenal: older than 61 degrees probably.
[00:19:15] Jesse Schwamb: It's, it's around that temp probably. So I, I know that it's like easy. I think it's just like easy to pick on the cold. But I think they, you know, of course there's something that people say about like, the fire is purifying. I don't know. I always kind of think that way about the cold.
It's, it's special. And I think there's something about leaning in and appreciating it, both like the joy then and, uh, appreciating the blessing of having someplace warm to be, but also this amazing juxtaposition of just being out in temperatures that cuts you a little bit, ah, I don't know. There's something about that.
I don't get that with the, the heat, but What's that? You, have I gone too far? Am I not?
[00:19:52] Tony Arsenal: Mm-hmm. No, I think there's a sweet spot. Like, I think, I think there's a such thing as too cold. Um, you know, I think, uh,
[00:20:01] Jesse Schwamb: what, what's too cold? Fahrenheit style. Sorry. We, we can, we'll, we'll do the conversion of Celsius.
[00:20:06] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
I'm not gonna do the conversion of Celsius. This is a America. Um, I think probably like. 15 to 20 degrees is the sweet spot. I think if you get much colder than that for me. Oh, that's, I
[00:20:19] Jesse Schwamb: thought you'd say
[00:20:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. I think if you get much colder than that, for me it, it becomes, and maybe this is 'cause I have kids and so like, it, it becomes a whole different game to try to get kids into the car when it's, it's colder than 15 degrees.
Um, you can get a, you know, you can get away with like rushing the kid out to the car and just wrapping the jacket around them. Something people who don't have toddlers don't realize is you can't put your toddler in the car seat in a winter jacket. So like, it gets to be cumbersome.
[00:20:49] Jesse Schwamb: Gotta do costume change.
[00:20:51] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I feel like, I feel like if it gets much colder than that, then the joy of being outside, I guess my, my threshold and maybe. It probably isn't a, like an a specific temperature, but when I take the dog out at night, if I feel like I have to put a jacket on to do that, that's when it's too cold. And, but I agree with you in principle that there's something refreshing about standing outside when it's crisp and cold.
Not just cool, but cold. Something about the, the, uh, the alertness of your nerves and like there's something that just like wakes you up in a really nice way, um, that you don't get in the heat. I feel like in. Converse heat. So like, I think maybe the equivalent of 15 degrees, if I was talking about when it's too hot, would be like 90, 95 degrees would feel the same, like, would be on the same end, end of the spectrum.
You don't walk out and go, ah, it's 95. Like, you walk out and you feel oppressed. You feel like it's heavy on your shoulders. It drains you of your life. Um, I feel like it's cold. There's a sweet spot. There is no sweet spot where like, it, it gets so hot that you feel great about it. So I think, I feel you in pr in principle.
I'm, I'm not sure, I guess maybe you have a, maybe there's a sweet spot for you two. Like I don't think you're, we're not talking like negative 60 degrees air temperature or something like that, but yeah, I think I'm with you.
[00:22:16] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, but I, but I am, I think talking about a little bit of like cold face slapping, if you know what I mean.
Yeah. I mean there's, there's something famously about the heats. Where you, once you get out in it, there's not much you can do if it is oppressive. Right. So, you know, if you're going out, you're exercising or just out and about. It's not like you can like strip down entirely and even then you might not be comfortable.
Right. Obviously where the cold is a little bit different. Hopefully you can prepare yourself. You can put a more clothes. I, I'm with you. I don't know what that temperature would be for me, but it's just funny around here. It's every, every kind of interaction ends with a stay warm out there. Will you? Yeah.
Like, I guess we do that in the heat as well, but I'm, sometimes I'm like, no, it's, it's okay to feel what you feel and it's nice to have, uh, the seasons of cold. I don't know if I would like living in a place where it didn't get at least a little bit once in a while, shockingly cold because there's so beautiful about that shock.
So I think 15 is fine. I'm with you. That's maybe the right for all of our like continental listeners, those out in the rest of the world that's negative nine degrees Celsius. So, you know, take that for what you will. But it's, it's okay. I guess I'm saying it's okay. We can, we can just be like, you know what, it's cold, but it might be good for us.
Does that make sense? Yeah.
[00:23:24] Tony Arsenal: I think on a, a totally different temperature related bit here, I think we should stop saying, uh, that it is 20 degrees and instead we should be, we should say, every time it's 12 degrees below the temperature at which saline freezes at sea level or whatever the, whatever the weird calculation is that makes 32 degrees freezing instead of zero degrees.
I joke about like this being America, but like the Fahrenheit scale is cr is whacked out and it's wild, crazy. It makes no sense. It's wild. It, it makes sense in the laboratory setting that it was created in, but like, it just doesn't make any sense from like a, just a logical human beings think this way.
Um, perspective. Um, but I think I'm with you. I think, I guess maybe where I'm, where my head is at is like. When it's like negative 10 degrees, and I'm not talking about windchill actually, I think negative 10 degrees air temperature when there's no wind is probably not all that uncomfortable. Like, really?
Right. Like I
agree.
I feel like I would not feel totally uncomfortable just walking out to the mail. Like I wouldn't put a jacket on to run out to the mailbox and grab the mail if it was 10 degrees below zero and there was no wind. Um, but whatever it is, like when you're at a low temperature and then you come back up a little bit, your body's like, ah, like you can tolerate that.
I feel like when it's 105 degrees and then it drops to 95 degrees, there's not that same effect where you're like,
[00:24:48] Jesse Schwamb: yes.
[00:24:49] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, yeah. Like,
[00:24:50] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:24:50] Tony Arsenal: That, that, my favorite part of the season, this is like super nerdy total, like Northerner Yankee talk. My favorite part of the season is that first like. We had it in January this year, but like that first period of time where it pops back up into the mid twenties mm-hmm.
And everybody is like wearing shorts and a t-shirt for like two days. Yeah.
Right.
Um, or like people are driving all with their windows rolled down on their car because it like, or that's like when you open your house to get all the like winter stale air out. Um, that's my favorite part of the season.
Maybe that's what, maybe that's what I'm talking about with you, but I think I'm with you. I think the cold is refreshing in a really kind of organic way. It wakes you up in a good way.
[00:25:30] Jesse Schwamb: I agree. I think maybe it's okay and maybe we need it. And I've thought about that a lot. Isn't it strange, but also endearing that the way that we feel, the temperature, the way that we actually experience it, is relative to the season.
Yeah. Because you know, you might have, like, if it was like 61, 62 in your house and like the dead of August, you'd be like, man. So refreshing. But in winter you're prone to say, Ooh, there's a little nip in the air, you know? And it's like, what? Same temperature. It's just that like you're oriented, all of your experience is oriented right now to your seasonal reality and circumstances.
So I think I love temperature change. So I'm, I, and I also would say maybe it's just growing up in New England, I much prefer the cold than the heat. I mean,
[00:26:10] Tony Arsenal: yeah,
[00:26:10] Jesse Schwamb: oppressive heat where it feels like you're inside a dog's mouth to me is in no way preferable or has hegemony over going outside in the the minus 10.
So,
[00:26:21] Tony Arsenal: yeah, I
[00:26:22] Jesse Schwamb: agree. Enjoy it. Loved ones. Wherever you're at it, just enjoy it.
[00:26:26] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. I, I also think, um, it's funny how you talk about temperature being relative or exp experience of temperature being relative because, you know, we're, it's winter we're trying to save money. Like fuel oils is crazy expensive in New England and
Right.
Um, all of the fuel oil in this area comes from Canada. So there's all the tariff stuff going on. And so I'm trying to keep my, you know, trying to keep our thermostat down. And so I have it set to like 63 at night, which is lower than I, I think I would've set it in the past. And I remember like the other day, I was up in the middle of the night with one of the kids and I was like, oh man, it's so cold in here.
And I looked at the, the thermostat and I was like, wait a second. Like, I set my air conditioner to 63 in the summer,
right.
And I keep my room that, like, I keep our bedroom that cool, right? It's a small bedroom. We have a nice air conditioner, so we keep that a room that cool. But in the winter that feels cold and I'm trying to turn up the heat.
There's, there's something theological there too. Something about not being satisfied. Maybe there's like a, there's a, an argument. For dissatisfaction, like CS Lewis style, there's an argument that because we can never be comfortable with the temperature, there must therefore be a heaven where temperatures is perfect or something like that.
[00:27:35] Jesse Schwamb: I actually that's, that's pretty good. That's better than I always could come up with. I was gonna go the direction of like the rare jewel cont contentment, like, there
[00:27:42] Tony Arsenal: you go.
[00:27:42] Jesse Schwamb: Puritan style. Obviously that's the best segment We're gonna get into our conclusion of yes, chapter 15 and this rice baked parable of lostness.
[00:27:54] Jesse Schwamb: And we're, we're gonna talk about the father, so I'm just gonna take us right there. Ready? Everybody. We're speeding ahead. We're just gonna go right to verse 18 because I think it's good for us to put in our ears again just the end of this parable so we can see and hear this interaction of the father with his two sons.
And I'm gonna advance us to the point where the first son has gone away. He squandered all his living, he comes to himself and so then he has this little conversation while he's, uh, you know, presumably with the pigs looking at the pods that they eat, that he wishes he could as well. He says, I'll rise up and go to my father and I'll say to him, father, I've sinned against heaven and before you, I'm no longer worthy to be called your son.
Make me as one of your hired. So he rose up and he came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion and ran and embraced him and kissed him. And the son said to him, father, I've sinned against heaven and before you, I'm no longer worthy to be called your son.
But the father said to his slaves, quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet and bring the fat in calf and slaughter it and let us eat and celebrate. For this son of mine was dead and has come to life again. He was lost and he's been found and then began to celebrate.
Now, his older son was in the field and when he came and approached the house, he heard music at dancing and summoning one of the servants. He began inquiring what these things could be, and he said to him, your brother has come and your father has killed the fatten calf because he has received him back safe in sound.
But he became angry and was not wanting to go in, and his father came out and began pleading with him. He answered and said to his father, look, for so many years I've been serving you and never have I neglected a command of yours. And yet never have you given me a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends.
But when this son of yours came who has devoured your wealth with prostitutes, you killed the fat and calf for him. And he said to him, child, you are always with me. And all that is mine is yours. But what we had to celebrate and rejoice for this brother of yours was dead and is alive and was lost and has been found.
[00:29:58] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I think it's important, you know, we're kind of gonna jump in here and really focus on the father and we made, we made the point last week that this. This parable really probably is about the older son. Like the punchline of this parable is about the older son because it's a parable that's told in response to the Pharisees to shame them for acting like the older brother.
So even though the, the rest of the parable exists that the main point of the parable is probably found in. This lack of rejoicing over the lost brother who was, uh, found. And that lines up with the main point of the other two parables in this sort of triplet of parables is the rejoicing element, right?
There's the, there's the, the shepherd who rejoices when he finds his lost sheep, the angels in heaven that rejoice, you know, they're not part of the parable, but it's explained that the angels will rejoice. And then this woman who rejoices over her lost coin and invites all her friends over to do the same.
Um, the flip side of this, yes, the parable has a lot to say about how. The father rejoices how he throws this big feast, but the, the, the punchline of this parable is that the older son refused to come in. And so it's, it's painting this picture of like, there's these two parables where the only logical answer is to rejoice, and then there's this parable where it seems like, yeah, the only logical answer is to rejoice.
And then there's this totally irrational, insane reaction of the, the older brother to not rejoice, but all of that said. That only functions like that. Punchline only works if you also understand the setup. I don't know if you've ever had this, this happen, Jesse, where you're, you're trying to tell a story that has kind of a funny punchline or you're, you're telling a sort of a narrative joke and either you miss something in the setup or the, the person doesn't get something in the setup and so the joke just doesn't land, or the story just doesn't have the, the impact it's supposed to.
And I think like that's kind of where we're at on this is, yes, we've talked about the punchline and that is the punchline, but we can't fully understand the impact. The insanity of the older brother's response.
[00:32:12] Jesse Schwamb: Right.
[00:32:12] Tony Arsenal: Um, if we don't understand the, just the grace that the father shows both to the younger son, which we've talked a lot about, and to the older son, which we've also talked a lot about, but understanding the nature of the father beyond just like his response, I think is, is really vital.
And that's where we're gonna go tonight.
[00:32:29] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. I think that's really good setup. It, there's this posture of the father, this watchful mercy, which is for both of his children, for the son, that's away. Also for the son that's at home, he notices them both, one coming, one missing. And so I find it interesting that, like you said, the father's compassion is described even before the first son finishes his rehearsed confession.
And it's clear that we're seeing that God's mercy is, is not hired by repentance.
[00:32:56] Jesse Schwamb: Repentance is like this appointed pathway by which mercy is received and it's extended to both of the children in a way. And so in the first, the father's seeing and running really portrays clearly for us that divine initiative, not that the son is contributing some kind of merit, but that the father's already disposed to welcome.
The returning sinner, and he is already disposed to welcome his angry older son into the fray. It's almost a warning as if to say, you know, similar maybe to what Cain receives, like sin is crouching at the door, a desires to master over you. Don't go this way. Don't do this thing. Come and enjoy, come and celebrate.
But you're right, the whole setup is in the father's posture. And then of course, like coheres with that wider biblical portrait of God's fatherly compassion, that he's a father that shows compassion to his children, that the ones he loves, he shows, or the ones that love him. Rather, he shows grace and blessing and mercy to a thousand generations while only punishing the next several contiguous generations that he's a loved us with an everlasting kind of lavish love.
So there's this emphasis right from the beginning, which I think is setting up that punchline that the father's compassion is free. It's prior, it's rooted in God's character, not in the sinner's performance here and, and they're both sinners. That's clear. So you're right. It, it's almost like maybe we should see it coming.
Yeah, maybe they should have seen it coming. But that is all necessary to get to the end result where you get the like, you know, big kind of gotcha moment.
[00:34:18] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I think too, um. We rightfully look at the response of the father to the younger son's return, um, as sort of like the locust classicist of the father's character here, right.
The, the, the seminal moment in this, this interaction. But we, we, um, and we're even doing this tonight, right? We started at verse 18, but we start to see glimpses of the father's character earlier in the parable.
[00:34:44] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:34:45] Tony Arsenal: Right? Of course.
[00:34:45] Tony Arsenal: So first of all, the parable is, is, um, the punchline of the parable is about the older son and the older son's response.
But the parable starts out saying there was a man. The man is not one of the sons. There was a man who had two sons.
[00:34:59] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:34:59] Tony Arsenal: So this is a parable that starts by describing this father as one who had two sons.
[00:35:04] Tony Arsenal: And then we see in the response of the father to this, this younger son's request already, there's an act of grace.
Right. And you know, we've kind of made this comment that there's, this is sort of like a, a lesson in systematic theology, um, in soteriology baked into this parable. But like the fact that the father doesn't reject the son's request to divide up the inheritance early. Um, I I, I've read a lot of commentaries on this that would say like the request of the son was so audacious and disrespectful, that like in Israel, it would've been appropriate for this father to bring him up basically on like capital charges and have him executed, right?
Like, like Leviticus style and. I don't know whether that's all true or not. Like there's a lot of speculation that has to happen with those kinds of cultural, um, extrapolations. But in either case, this father would've been well within his rights. Um, and again, like we've, we've made the point, like this isn't necessarily a lesson in great parenting.
Um, but the father would've been well within his rights to laugh the sun out of his room and be like, of course I'm not dividing up your inheritance. Like, I'm still living, I still need this to live on. Uh, but he doesn't, he grants the request and, and this is a little bit of speculation, I think, but what motivation would there be to grant this request other than loving his son and not wanting to have this relational disruption?
Right. This father.
[00:36:36] Tony Arsenal: Starts off this parable by granting this son's request at, at great cost to himself, right? We've, we've mentioned it in the inheritance laws. Um, the older son gets two thirds of the estate, and so the younger son or the older son gets a double portion. So if we assume that there are only two sons, which it says he had two sons, we, we don't have any reason to think there's more in view, then the younger son is leaving with a full third of this, of this man's estate, um, and has to be a third of the estate that he can take with him.
So whatever he's granted in this request to, to give him his property, he's taking all, you know, at least a third of this man's liquid assets, probably more than a third of his liquid assets. Um, with him, that's a huge, huge amount of, uh, of your own personal, uh, assets that go with you that he, and he just does it.
He just does it. And I think this paints a picture for us of.
[00:37:36] Tony Arsenal: Again, we have to be theologically careful. God does not suffer loss when we depart from him. Right? It doesn't affect God in a, in a absolute proper sense when sinners, you know, are, are distant from him. Um, but there is a reality that this father in the parable grants his son's request a foolish request, right?
And I think he probably understood it was a foolish request. He grants him this request at great cost to himself. And how often do we depart from our father at great, great cost? I'm doing air quotes. If you're not watching this on the video, A great cost to our Heavenly Father in that we now breach communion with him.
Or if we're not, if we're not, uh, regener Christians and we persist in our sin, like the, his image is marred. His image is marred in creation. Uh, he, his glory is not proclaimed by an image bearer that still has the same chief end that all the rest of us do, which is to glorify God and, and enjoy him forever.
There's a, there's a, um, an accommodated language analog loss that the father suffers when that happens. That's a picture of what's going on in this parable as well.
[00:38:54] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I think that that's absolutely right on. I mean, there's, there's like, you're, you're drawing us something back to this. Juxtaposition between this kind of open, gratuitous rebellion of the first son without like us appropriate appreciating the more like subtle rebellion that's equally sinful of the second.
[00:39:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And
[00:39:14] Jesse Schwamb: that's a problem. And, and that's really what's God is addressing in here. He c he comes for both. The father comes for both in his own way.
[00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Can we, since we're talking about the father, can we talk about a pet peeve of mine? I have with some interpretation of this? Yeah. And you can tell me whether you agree, disagree.
Okay. So
[00:39:30] Tony Arsenal: it's peeve all the pets.
[00:39:31] Jesse Schwamb: It's, it's so, it's, it's um, it's about the running. Yeah. There's a lot written about the running and I think a lot of it is good. Some of it might be like going too far, but I understand. Let's just put out there, we can all agree that in that culture, a dignified patriarch running is like socially beneath him.
I get all that right. What I find though interesting is I see a difference here in how we describe it. There's some, I think that would describe that as like undignified, right? I, I don't see it this way. It's not like David's style. Like, I'll become even more undignified than this. I will, you know, tie up my robe and I'll go running and I'll embarrass myself or my son.
What I think we ought to understand, or at least is I'm interpreting it, is a difference between like condescension and not decorum. So in this parable, uh, I don't think this is embarrassment. It is a condescending love. It's God's willingness to cross the distance that our sin has created and that that fits.
We know that I think we should pull in all the, all the Old Testament where God is, we're repeatedly describing as kind of like stooping to save. Whether that's he's boring Israel up as a man, carries his son, or God's compassion grows warm like from Hosea. But I don't see this as in decorum. I see it as condescension and I, I think that's worth mentioning.
[00:40:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I'm with you. I think, I think whether it's this or. There are other parables where this happens, where like people extrapolate, and I guess maybe I did this just now just a little bit, so I'm not like bashing on people too much, but I think we can make way too much out of a, out of a, um, somewhat speculative point.
Sure. Like, like I, like I said, like, do we know for sure that this, uh, this request to divide the inheritance would've been a capital offense,
right?
I, I, I don't think so. Do we have a record of a child asking to have their inheritance early and then being put to I, I don't think so. None of the commentaries that I've read point to an actual account of that happening.
And I think this is probably like the same thing. Like, yeah, I guess like the head of a family and like, yes. All of the commentaries that I've read that make this point talk about how like you'd have to gird your loins and like
[00:41:43] Jesse Schwamb: Yep.
[00:41:43] Tony Arsenal: Like you, there's almost like a level of exposure, of course that happens when you have to do that, like,
[00:41:47] Jesse Schwamb: right.
[00:41:48] Tony Arsenal: Okay. But I, I think I'm with you that even if that's in play here, it's not, it's not really a point that the parable is making.
Right.
The point that the parable is making is that the love of this father drives him to exert himself and close that distance. Whether that's a condescension, like we might talk about it theologically, um, or whether it is a sort of like a self self-abasement or a self-effacement.
Um, I don't know, but I also don't know that it matters that much. That's not really the point. And I think, um. When I think about this as a dad, um, this makes so much sense to me too. Like my, um, my kid does something that is obnoxious and is so frustrating and I'm so angry. And then sometimes he looks at me and he goes, daddy, I'm sorry.
And it's all gone. Like, it's all gone in a second. Like, it, it really is most of the time. Like, and there is something about this that I have such, I guess, let me put it this way. I have such a tough time thinking that being a dad has emotionally changed so much in the last 2000 years that the, the, the, um.
Natural instincts of fatherhood that God gives us are so different now that any father would not run to their child who is returning like this man. I think when he says at, when it's said at the end that your brother who was dead is now alive, like I don't think that that is an exaggeration.
[00:43:28] Jesse Schwamb: Right?
[00:43:29] Tony Arsenal: I think the assumption made in this family, in the context of this parable is that when this son left, they were never gonna see him again because this was a foolish decision.
Right. They knew what he was gonna do with the money. They knew he was gonna run out of the money. And in the, in the ancient world, when you're in a far country and you've got no money. You don't have a lot of prospects, even the men in the world, you know, all, all that's made about like the social difficulties of, uh, widowed and orphaned women in the ancient world.
Like yeah. But like a, a single dude out in some far country in the middle of a famine with no family support structure is gonna starve to death.
Right. So
I think, I think when I see this interpretations that make this running movement towards the sun to be somehow unexpected or unusual or something along those lines, um, they don't resonate with me.
[00:44:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, me neither.
[00:44:26] Tony Arsenal: I don't know that they really have ever have resonated with me, but. They just don't resonate with me. And I think this sort of like he com he committed this action. That's sort of semi shameful.
[00:44:38] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.
[00:44:38] Tony Arsenal: Right. That's almost like, right. I just don't, I just don't buy it. That doesn't seem like the shocking part of the parables usually have kind of a shocking element to them.
This does not seem like the shocking element to me.
[00:44:49] Jesse Schwamb: I, I agree. And if we take this and say, well he's done something really embarrassing and that's what shows the love. 'cause he's. He's so degraded himself. Then what are we really saying about God? If he's meant to be even in an emblematic way, a representation of God, like that's problematic.
I think though I'm with you in tracking with what you're saying though I don't have children myself. I'm just considering if you could put yourself in the place of that father, or just imagine yourself, like you're out carrying groceries in one day and at the end of your driveway you see a person you never thought you'd see again, or a friend you haven't seen in so long, or somebody in broken relationship that you really thought you'd never see.
I, I'm guessing what would happen is. You would just turn on your heels, get on your getaway sticks and you would run toward them. You, you went in that moment think like, uh, this is gonna be embarrassing, but the embarrassment is worth it. You would just go, you drop the groceries, you'd let the milk sit there, you would just take off.
[00:45:44] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, and that's what shows this love. It is like a condescension to just move and to go because like you said, to your point, if he anticipated that his son might have been gone from this world, then I'm not sure if he was sitting by the window every day just kind of melancholy looking out, you know, with his hand resting on or his head resting on his, his hand, but still was probably doing something and turned and saw him and just went, and that was it.
And it was a reaction born out of the purest kind of love and condescension that would just go. I think then that's what flows into this whole response of like the kiss and the reconciliation before negotiation. You know, the son expects to bargain. Just make me like one of your Hy servants. But the fathers embrace, like interrupts the whole process.
And of course he just keeps showing us that this reconciliation for both the older and the younger son, it's not a wage for both of them. It's not a wage, it's a gift. And the father, what I find really interesting in both of their cases, he doesn't deny the sin like you're saying. He says, this son of mine was dead, which I think is both literal and figurative.
[00:46:44] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:46:44] Jesse Schwamb: The sense that he was, he was like cast outside. He, he was outside of himself, outside of the family, outside of the kingdom. But what he does deny is the son's proposed status. Downgrade. Yeah. You know, grace always restores sonship and so I, I think the parable here is resisting like two errors at once that you and I have talked about a lot, which would be kind of this like weird, like lukewarm omi and sentimental sentimentality.
Like sin doesn't matter, right. People like do what you want. It's all good. The father calls it death and lostness. Yeah. And
[00:47:15] Tony Arsenal: you
[00:47:15] Jesse Schwamb: kind of compare that against like legalism, like, well you have to earn your way back. It's good enough to, you know, have grace and mercy, but you have to do something to, to accept it.
You have to elevate yourself to the place deserving poor. You have to come forward with empty hands. The father restores before the son can even offer terms.
[00:47:32] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:47:32] Jesse Schwamb: So in both ways, the father is going out in one way. There's damage that's already been done through the youngest son, but in the other way I see it for the oldest son, the father's basically saying, don't do this, please don't do this.
And what I think is the most telling in that way. Is at the very end of this chapter in the we, the last phrase that we have, the father says, but we had to celebrate and rejoice not, but I not, but like me and the family, like he pulls him in inclusively already and says, you ought to be celebrating. Which of course is that?
Like we rock hard, sharp witted, like fiery tongue that's coming against the scribes in the Pharisees. But the father is condescending. He's not embarrassed by any of this.
[00:48:15] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:48:15] Jesse Schwamb: He's, he's condescending and proud, I think, to show his love. And again, I think any of one of us would get on our getaway sticks and run.
And like you're saying, that is just the shadow, that's the argument from the lesser to the greater. So how much more, again, do we see this father pushing us against antinomian behavior and also against legalism? It's all right there for us.
[00:48:34] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.
[00:48:34] Tony Arsenal: And you know what, I think too, maybe to just put a, an exclamation point on this whole little train of thought we have here.
Um, the father is not like. I think these, these interpretations that have this running out and embracing him to be some really unexpected, unusual semis shameful act. Mm-hmm. I think they just miss some of like the immediate context. Right. So the father arises, uh, well, the son was still a long way off. His father saw and felt compassion and ran and embraced him and kissed to him.
The son said, father, I have sinned against you before heaven and earth, and I'm no longer worthy to be called your son. The father said to his servants. Right. They didn't walk back to the village. They didn't walk back to the house. The, the picture is that like the servants ran right after the father, like right.
Everybody recognizes that this son is back and is alive when, when the, the son, the older son is coming in from the field. It's not the father that he asks what happened? The, the servant says, your brothers come home. He's been received back safe and, and sound. Everybody is celebrating. And it's not just that the servants are happy to have a free meal and, and a, you know, a better, some, some dancing and some wine like everybody is celebrating.
And so this idea that like the celebration, the running to the embracing element of this is somehow unusual. That totally contradicts the fact that the, the older son's, um, the older son's response is the only, is like, that's the insane response in the parable,
[00:50:08] Jesse Schwamb: right? Preach.
[00:50:08] Tony Arsenal: Right. The, the, the sane expected response that everybody has is overjoyed.
Um, just, uh, elation that this, this lost son has come home except this boneheaded older brother who refuses to come in and celebrate. So I think that, and, you know, we could even talk about the context of the father, like the fathers created this household with, with also with these servants where they're excited, they're happy, right?
And like, let's not put too fine a point on it. If these are slaves, which we have no reason to think, they're not like slavery was a reality in the ancient world. These are slaves. Their livelihood and their existence depends on the, the livelihood and existence of this, this father of this landowner, he gives away a third of it.
Their, their meals are getting leaner too. So they have every reason to be frustrated and angry with this older son as well, but they're not how, how amazing of a context of a family, of a household has this father created where even the servants who are there. Are rejoicing over the return of this son.
Right? The one person who doesn't rejoice, the one person who we're, we should be surprised is not excited, is the older son. And I think that in itself says a lot about this father and the other. The other point I wanted to make is there is an element, um, of. Almost like the older son's response. You know, I just talked about how that's the insane response.
It's almost like the father is surprised by it, right? And he goes out and he's like, what do you mean you're not exci? Like he's, he is, he's shock, sort of shocked that this son is not willing to come in and, and rejoice. And it, it's almost like it catches him off guard when his, his older son says, you've never even given me a young goat,
right?
Because he's like, what are you talking about? Everything I have is yours. Like, it, like it doesn't even register with him that he had to offer that a, a young goat like you, it's almost like you didn't even even have to ask. Like you didn't even have to ask, it's already yours. You wanted a young goat to have a party with your friends, like, the flock is yours.
Just take the young goat. There's this sense of, of sadness and surprise and. Um, betrayal almost in the words of the father of, I'm always with you. You are always with me, and all that's mine is yours. What do you mean you're not going to celebrate? Because all that's mine is yours, including this son who's come back.
He's also yours, and you're not willing to celebrate. So I think there's so much in this parable about God's nature too. We often, um. We often treat God as though he sort of grudgingly saved us. And I think in a lot of theological circles, this takes, takes the form of kind of like pitting the son against the father, like the, the God, the Son against God, the Father in, in the idea that like.
The son placated the father. And so like, because the father was wrathful and angry, and so Jesus had to come down and die and, and now the Father can love us. The reality is that the, the love of the Father, the love of God the father, um, is the motivating factor that, that drives the plan of redemption, right?
And that's the same love of the Son and the same love of the spirit. But in, in the most famous verse in the Bible, for God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that's God the Father it's talking about,
right?
So it's, it's God the Father's love that drives the whole plan of salvation. The whole covenant of redemption is initiated in light of the Father's love for, for the elect.
Um, it's not as though he was some frustrated, angry deity and his son somehow got the better of him and placated him. And that's exactly what we see in this parable. There is never a point in the parable where there's anything shown by the father except for love for his people. Including the servants. I mean, in a, in a real sense, the celebration is not like, all right, servants, get outta here.
I'm gonna have a fatted calf with my son who's come back.
Right.
The celebration is for the whole household. So this tells us so much about God's nature. Once that old, old quote, the par the puritans say is, you know, wrath is God's alien work. Yes. Right. It's, it's not to say that wrath is somehow outside of God or it, it's, it's contrary to God, but it, it is his alien work.
It's his work, but it's work that is sort of opposed to his natural inclination. I mean, that's a really risky way to talk about it, but it's sort of like. It's alien to God in a sense because it's alien to God's intention for the world, right? God's intention was, and again, it's so hard to even talk about this stuff, so I'm just gonna say people, we got 480 episodes of us, you
know,
us being really precise technical theology of, of impassability and inseparable operations.
Like just right. Hear this in that context, it, it is God's intention. It was God's intention, right? It was not the way it was supposed to be that Adam fell. God knew it was gonna happen. It was part of his decree, it as part of his plan, but it also was not the way it was supposed to be. And I know those two statements are co decree, but I think you guys understand what I'm getting at because humans fell and that was not the way they were intended to be.
God's wrath towards sin, which was never intended, is alien to his. Sort of inclinations. Again, it's really hard to talk about this stuff.
No,
but the father in this parable has no wrath to speak of, right? Like that's the, that's the crazy part about this parable. He has no wrath to speak of. He shows no wrath to the older son.
He shows no wrath to the younger son. He has nothing but gracious disposition and an intention to redeem and rescue his children. And that's amazing,
[00:55:59] Jesse Schwamb: right? It's not like wrath is foreign to God. I agree with you. I think what you said I think was fine because this is something we hold intention it, but we're all saying that it is like alien to his primary disposition.
It's not foreign to him. So like you said, the father is going out everywhere. It's all act of volitional love. He goes out to the younger, goes out to the elder. And in the, you know, former, the father's purpose is not only to just restore the prodigals, but also to unmasks the elder brothers slavery to wages, status, resentment.
And it's a good reminder for all of us that legalism is now obedience. Right? It's a different kind of lostness. But the great encouragement is in both of those lostness, is that Jesus comes running, he comes out, he comes to restore. He comes in mercy first. Just say, come it back into the kingdom. And that lostness of self-righteousness and distance from the father's heart is equally saveable.
Though it might look like it's some kind of respectable rebellion. It's not. And the point here, I, I think again, like when he gets to Jesus telling the story again, we gotta remember He's telling it when he says like, we had to celebrate. I wonder if he's looking in the eyes of the scribes of Pharisees because he basically, like we, all of us had to celebrate.
Are you not celebrating? Now, all I can think of is like gladiator when he is like, are you not entertained? Do you know what I mean? Like, are you, are we not celebrating, you know, what's happening here in the kingdom of God where sinners are being restored, where the down and out, the downtrodden and the marginalized and the priors are coming back in and finding relief and restoration and redemption.
Are we not celebrating? I think that's like the high calling, the exalted finale of this whole part of Luke 15. And there is an emphasis, especially in reform theology, which is right. Everything you just said. God's saving disposition is grounded in God's own will and love. It's not extracted some from kind of like human improvement or point of view or perspective, and that matters for Luke 15 because the parable can always be misread as God loves you once you come back.
Right. The father's running corrects this. He's going out to the elder son corrects us in this. Let me just read from Ephesians chapter one starting at verse four. Just as God chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be wholly and blameless before him in love by predestining us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, to himself according to the pleasure of His goodwill, to the praise and the glory of His grace, which he graciously bestowed on us in the beloved.
That's it.
[00:58:34] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I I I don't think there's anything better to say than that. This is, um. It's funny, we could continue. I mean, we make this joke all the time, but it's not even a joke here. Like, we could continue to talk about this parable for many more weeks.
[00:58:51] Tony Arsenal: We're not going to, I know like some people get a little bit of, uh, fatigue when we're going really deep diving in this, and I get that.
Um, but, but there's so much here to unpack. So we are gonna keep marching through the parables. We're not totally done with this little trio of parables. Because if, if you remember, I don't even remember when it was, if you remember way back, like four months ago, three months ago, we were working our way through Matthew.
We hadn't even got out of the first chapter of parables in Matthew,
right
when we had to jump over to Luke because of the way that it, it worked out. But Matthew uses these parables, not the parable of the, of the, um, father son, you know, whatever. Not this parable, but the parable of the lost sheep and the coins he uses.
For a different reason. So we're gonna come back to those a little bit. We're gonna talk about that a little bit next week. Um, and, and then we're gonna keep plugging along so you're not so far into this series that if you missed, if this is your first episode and you want to go back and catch up, um, you can do that.
There's not a huge, huge, huge amount of episodes, um, you know, set aside a work week worth of hours to, to go and listen to it. Um, you can trim that down if you can listen to a couple, couple times speed. Um, but we got a long way to go, so jump in with us. Grab your commentaries Next week we're gonna be back in Matthew 13, I think it was.
Um, we're gonna be talking about the lost, the lost sheep and the lost coin and why it is that Matthew positions it differently than Luke does. So I'm excited about that. This is actually something that's been bubbling up in my head for a long time, so I'm excited to get it out. Then we're gonna keep plugging along in the parables.
We're gonna keep going primarily in Matthew, but we'll jump in in other places when it's appropriate. Uh, and we're gonna keep going until we finish 'em all. It's like, it's like the Pokemon version of podcasting. You gotta catch 'em all and, and it's the parables instead of, you know, little Pokemon creatures.
[01:00:49] Jesse Schwamb: Catch 'em all. I'm not trying to be that guy honest, but just in case people are attracted with us. 'cause we, we don't want the commentary. It's Matthew 18. This will be. 18, I mean, the eight and the three look pretty close. So I, I think they're right on. Remember everybody's, I, I'm just picturing now like this is a game show.
You know, like game shows sometimes have that like al like there's a question up some point in the game show. I think everybody's gonna remember that. The question like, does it parallel? So we're gonna be going to not just like one version of this, but the different versions and the reason why I think we've been like pretty dutiful trying to set up what we think is like a groundwork by deliberately choosing one of the gospels to like kind of center us.
And then we're gonna be going around that because Matthew 18, while it is the same parallel like you and I were just talking about before we started recording, it does have some different perspective for us to take away from it. Yes. And so this is the beauty. We really can't get to the fun of the parallelism.
Like it's, it's no fun or it's not quite as good or effective to like do them side by side in real time. It's much better I think for us to sink in. A process and then to say like, okay, we just went through a lot of the great beautiful details here. What is this other version of the same thing? Tell us, or what are we picking up that even in, in its like perspective or approach that was slightly different from the first version that we looked at.
Yeah, that's the whole joy. So don't, don't like skip the next one. It's not gonna be the same conversation. It's actually gonna be a remarkably different conversation. And speaking of conversation.
[01:02:12] Jesse Schwamb: Tony people want to get in touch with you or they wanna get in touch with me if they wanna talk about what's going around in the world or converse us about the, the theology that we're speaking of here.
If you're new to reform theology and you think, you know, I might have to talk to somebody about that, uh, that we're not experts and not your pastor, what you should do is what, how can you find us?
[01:02:30] Tony Arsenal: You can join our telegram chat. Uh, we have a little corner of the internet that we've carved out. Uh, there's lots of great Christians in there, reform brothers and sisters, so it's not even just like, come talk to Jesse and Tony.
There's a whole group of people that love the Lord and love reform theology. Uh, you can go to, uh, t.me, the letter t.me/reformed brotherhood, and that will point you either to download a little app to use, or if you already have Telegram, which is the messaging app we use, it'll jump you right in there. Um, there's lots of prayer requests going on.
Um, conversations about books, people are reading. Um, you know, today there was a conversation about whether or not the first, uh, the things leading up to the eating of the forbidden fruit were, were actually thin, or whether they were some other category of, uh, sort of like moral neglect. Um, which was, is an interesting, you know, sort of theological conversation.
Um, but most of all, like it's just a place for us to, to. Fellowship with each other. It's not a replacement for your church. It can never be a replacement for your church, but it is a place where you can have some good, genuine, um, fellowship and some good fun times with other people who love the Lord.
[01:03:41] Jesse Schwamb: I love it.
So come hang out with us and if you don't, you can always come back here because as until the Lord comes, if he tarries another week, we will be back here talking about Matthew 18 and lostness all over again because there's some new stuff in there for us to explore and enjoy. So until next time, if you got it, go out in the cold.
And while you're there, honor everyone,
[01:04:05] Tony Arsenal: love that brotherhood.