How Jesus reframed discussions with respect to Patriarchal Authority, the importance of children, and humor.
Readership: All; Men; The Married; Those interested in Marriage;
Theme: Current Intersexual Dynamics; The Christian Red Pill; Marriage; Wives and Mothers; Level Up!
Author’s Note: Originally drafted on 2021/11/1. This post has some input from Jack.
Length: 1,800 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes
Intro
Matthew chapter 22 is a good one from the standpoint that Jesus is constantly reframing the premise of the argument on the leading religious scholars of the day.
Let’s take a closer look at this chapter and see how Jesus handled controversial issues ranging from one’s duty to authorities, election, Patriarchal Authority, the centrality of love, and the importance of children. (Text is from the NKJV.)
The Parable of the Wedding Feast
The chapter begins with a parable of marriage that describes election.
1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.” ’ 5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. 7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. 12 So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
A point worth noting is that the first parable ending in verse 14 makes the most sense from a Reformed theology standpoint. This is one of those passages that finally made sense to me after years of reading, once I read it from that perspective. If I am right, then Jesus talking in parables is one of the ways He shows His kindness upon His creation. He spares those He knows will not be saved the distress of knowing. I wonder how Peter felt knowing how he would die? He did not know the when, but in his case, knowing the how must have weighed heavily on him. There is hope in NOT knowing the future, just as there is the stress that comes from knowing under weak faith. It is an interesting topic to ponder because God does reveal parts of Himself to us this way.
The Pharisees: Is It Lawful to Pay Taxes to Caesar?
In the next parable in this chapter,
15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how they might entangle Him in His talk. 16 And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men. 17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? 19 Show Me the tax money.”
So they brought Him a denarius.
20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?”
21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”
And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way.
I can easily see Jesus saying the same thing in other contexts, like…
“Wives, render therefore to your husband the things that are his. Your youth, your beauty, your body, your prime reproductive potential. Your submission, honor and respect. Unto others, be chaste and modest with that which belongs to him. Do not not throw your pearls before swine. Therefore, you shall glorify God with your body.”
This is essentially what Paul told wives in Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Timothy 2:8-15, and Titus 2:1-5. It all goes back to recognizing the proper structure of authority.
The Sadducees: What About the Resurrection?
In the next section, Jesus said,
23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24 saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. 31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.
The assumed truth in verse 24, which is the backbone of the Sadducees’ argument, stands out to me.
If we think about this, even for merely a moment, we see the incredible importance that children have. It is to the point that brothers are supposed to take their deceased brother’s widow and give children to her on his brother’s behalf. I believe much of this has to do with a pattern of God working through families, both in the curse of sin and the blessing of salvation. (I don’t know the how or why, but I do see this happening.)
Here’s another one we can add to our list of ways that Feminism attacks men through the destruction of the family. When feminists push career over family or tell women they don’t need a man, it is a shot at the kingdom via an attack on lineage. The women who espouse this are like the ‘useful idiots’ of the political left, who, in being pawns for a larger power struggle, are led down a path to their own unhappiness.
The Scribes: Which Is the First Commandment of All?
There have been several posts written on this blog about the longitudinal unraveling of the Enlightenment in the form of Positivism and Post-Truth Rationalism. Reading on in Matthew 22, we find this is nothing new.
34 But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”
37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
It is interesting that the Scribes, Sadducees, and Pharisees preferred to cling to the letter of the law, rather than fessing up to the point of it all, and doing the hard work of loving one another.
We see the same thing happening today.
People pick, choose, rationalize, and slice scripture passages to justify a doctrinal understanding of Christian morality, but fail to do the least jot or tittle to fulfill the purpose of it all.
Many women would rather blow up their marriages and d@mn their children, instead of extending the least bit of love in the form of respect to their husbands and a sense of duty to their children.
As the Good Book says in another passage concerning the end times,
And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold.
Matthew 24:12; c.f. Mark 13:3-20; Luke 21:1-18 (NKJV)
Jesus: How Can David Call His Descendant ‘Lord’?
On a lighter note, we see Patriarchal Authority alluded to in the next few passages — but with a twist.
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose Son is He?”
They said to Him, “The Son of David.”
43 He said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying:
44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool”’?45 If David then calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his Son?” 46 And no one was able to answer Him a word, nor from that day on did anyone dare question Him anymore.
Mark 12:37 adds a line to the end of this passage:
“And the common people heard Him gladly.”
In modern language, we would say they laughed their @sses off. This passage reveals that Jesus had a lively highbrow sense of humor, and that He was familiar with the incongruencies between profound truths and reality enough to draw up such humorous observations. Jesus also had the wits to use this riddle as a way to rebuff the Pharisee’s foolish inquirys and rationalizations.
Men and fathers would do well to adopt a sense of humor and point out such incongruencies of life for several reasons.
- To play off various tests and challenges to his authority.
- For the joyful edification of their wives, families, and friends.
- To spark interest in the topic and rouse a meaningful discussion.
Closing Statements
Hope you got something out of this. I sure did.
All the best~!
Related
- Σ Frame (Red Pill Apostle): Lessons on Life and Marriage from Matthew 10 (2021/9/20)
- Σ Frame: Politicizing Evangelicalism (2024/8/22)
- Σ Frame: Tells of a W0ke Church (2024/8/23)
