bible.fortt.com

In this episode of Character Study, Jon Fortt and pastor David Tieche take up one of Jesus’ most famous—and most misunderstood—parables: the Good Samaritan. Jon frames the conversation around the word neighbor and why it has such sharp relevance today, especially amid modern debates about law, borders, responsibility, and who deserves care. He’s clear that the goal isn’t political positioning but faithful application: Jesus tells this story not to clarify opinions, but to confront hearts.

David situates the parable historically and theologically, beginning with the “expert in the law” who tests Jesus. He points out that the question “Who is my neighbor?” isn’t innocent curiosity; it’s an attempt to limit obligation. David emphasizes that the lawyer already knows the right answer—love God and love your neighbor—but wants boundaries on how far that love must go. Jesus responds by telling a story that dissolves those boundaries entirely.

As they walk through the parable, Jon highlights Jesus’ storytelling genius. The wounded man is anonymous—no backstory, no explanation, just human need. He’s “a situation,” not a character, stripping listeners of excuses to judge or disengage. David explains why the priest and Levite matter: these are religious professionals whose identities are built around faithfulness, yet they pass by. Their failure isn’t cruelty but avoidance—seeing suffering and choosing distance.

The Samaritan, by contrast, is a shock to Jesus’ original audience. David unpacks the deep religious, ethnic, and historical hostility between Jews and Samaritans, making clear that this is not just an unlikely hero but a despised outsider. Jon draws modern parallels, suggesting that the Samaritan is meant to represent the kind of person religious insiders instinctively exclude.

At the heart of the story is compassion. David lingers on the Greek word often translated “moved with compassion,” describing it as a gut-level response that leads inevitably to action. Jon presses the point: this isn’t pity that feels sad and walks away; it’s compassion that moves. The Samaritan doesn’t do the minimum—he risks himself, spends his money, stays involved, and even promises future care. Jon jokingly calls him the opposite of the “good enough Samaritan”—he goes too far.

David connects this excess to God’s covenant love, which never stops halfway. God doesn’t rescue and abandon; He stays, guides, provides, and bears cost. The Samaritan, shockingly, mirrors God’s own character. Both note how Jesus ends the story with a reversal: the question is no longer “Who counts as my neighbor?” but “Who acted like one?”

The episode closes on a sober challenge. Loving your neighbor isn’t about feelings, proximity, or identity; it’s about action. It requires seeing, moving, and bringing healing—and it will be inconvenient, risky, and costly. As David puts it, Jesus is asking whether the love of God is actually alive in us. And as Jon underscores, every encounter with human need forces the same question: will we pass by, or will we stop?

“Go and do likewise.”

In the Season 1 finale of Character Study, Jon Fortt and David Tieche step back from individual episodes to reflect on what the Genesis story of Abraham and his extended family ultimately reveals about character, faith and human responsibility. Rather than offer tidy moral lessons, the conversation emphasizes complexity: character is revealed not only by personal choices, but by proximity, influence, passivity, and the environments people choose, or refuse, to leave.

The hosts note that one of the surprises of the series was how intertwined the characters are. Abraham’s faith cannot be understood in isolation from Sarah, Hagar, Lot, Isaac, and Lot’s wife. While character is, in theory, independent of circumstances, Scripture shows it being exposed through pressure, contrast and response. Abraham often shines not because he is flawless, but because he acts decisively where others compromise or drift.

Abraham emerges as a deeply flawed but pioneering figure – “caveman Einstein” — operating without Scripture, law, or precedent, yet still daring to trust God. He flies blind, yet repeatedly chooses allegiance to God even when it costs him. Lot, by contrast, is dangerously close to faith without fully choosing it. He benefits from Abraham’s righteousness, recognizes God when confronted by angels, and even escapes destruction. But he remains internally shaped by Sodom. His story becomes a warning: proximity to faith does not equal transformation.

The episode gives extended attention to the women of the narrative. Sarah is presented as Abraham’s “ride-or-die” partner, deeply loyal to the promise. Her failures are real but so is her endurance. Hagar is framed as the most sympathetic figure: marginalized, powerless and desperate, yet the first person in Scripture to name God: “the God who sees me.” Her story highlights God’s attentiveness to the vulnerable and His concern for people history often overlooks. Lot’s wife, by contrast, functions as a moral warning: her backward glance reveals where her heart truly was, and her fate exposes the danger of divided allegiance.

Across all these stories, the hosts stress that environment shapes character for better or worse. Sodom deforms Lot and his family; Abraham’s long obedience shapes his legacy. The most unsettling realization, they argue, is how relatable the failures are. These stories are frightening precisely because they feel possible. Readers can see themselves bargaining with God, looking back, or trying to preserve what God is asking them to release.

The episode closes with four distilled lessons from Abraham’s life: trust God when life makes no sense; remain loyal even when it costs you; seek justice and do what is right; and expect God to be good, even when everything falls apart. Abraham does not live these out perfectly. But he lives them consistently enough to become the prototype of faith. The season ends not with resolution, but with invitation: to examine which character we most resemble, and to choose allegiance deliberately.

In this episode of Character Study, Jon Fortt and David Tieche turn to one of the most unsettling passages in the Bible: Genesis 22 and the binding of Isaac. While Isaac is often treated as a secondary figure in Abraham’s story, the conversation insists he cannot be ignored. This is a narrative that provokes fear, moral revulsion and deep questions about the character of God – and the hosts resist the temptation to sanitize it.

The episode opens by situating Genesis 22 as one of the most depicted biblical scenes in art and literature because of its raw human tension. God’s command to Abraham to sacrifice “your son, your only son, whom you love” is explored not just as a theological puzzle, but as a story meant to produce horror. Drawing on thinkers like Kierkegaard, the hosts emphasize that the text intentionally destabilizes the reader. If misunderstood, it can make God appear monstrous. That reaction, they argue, is part of the text’s power.

Fortt and Tieche carefully walk through the spare, relentless economy of the biblical narrative: Abraham’s silence, Isaac carrying the wood, the climb up the mountain, and the knife raised before divine intervention. They dwell on what the text does not say – especially Isaac’s inner life. How old was he? Did he trust God, or did he simply trust his father? And what does this near-sacrifice do to a son who survives such a betrayal?

A major theme is that this story tests more than Abraham. It tests God in the reader’s eyes. The hosts wrestle openly with the ethical implications, especially in light of real-world tragedies where people claim God told them to harm their children. They also explore Abraham’s earlier willingness to argue with God over Sodom, contrasted with his silence here. It's a silence that deepens the story’s terror.

The discussion then broadens to generational consequences. What if Isaac never told Sarah? What if the trauma lingered, unspoken, shaping future family dysfunction? The hosts suggest that unresolved moral and emotional fractures often echo through generations, even when faith persists.

The episode ultimately turns toward meaning rather than resolution. Abraham’s cryptic words: “we will come back,” and the New Testament reflection in Hebrews suggest Abraham trusted God as one who brings life from death. Still, the hosts stress that this does not make the story emotionally easier.

Finally, the episode frames Genesis 22 as a prophetic reenactment pointing forward. Isaac and Jesus both carry wood up a hill; both are beloved “only sons.” But in the end, Isaac is spared, while God does not spare His own Son. The ram in the thicket becomes the central revelation: the Lord will provide. The story, they conclude, is not only about radical faith, but also about a God who ultimately bears the cost Himself.