Persuaded

It has always seemed so clear that these parables should be interpreted by Jesus' own words, yet it's clear that the happy-happy, feel good reading remains the most prevalent. Even Marilyn's (redacted) post went down the familiar path, but with an Israel-focused view.

One of the great joys of my life came when I was shown, and saw how these seven parables align with the seven letters in Rev 2&3, which are also conspicuous in their use of the "he that hath an ear" phrase of Mat 13:9.

The bottomless pit (Sheol, hades) sounds like the center of the earth- from where else is it "up" in any direction?

But that's different than the lake of fire (gahenna). Indeed, Hades will be cast into gahenna...

The backdrop to Matt 13 is Matt 12 (insightful, right?), where the Jewish leaders reject the works of Jesus and attribute His works to Satan. Matt 13 is a turning point, a change of focus. Through ch12 it has been Israel-focused, but with His rejection, He is now shifting away from Israel and focusing away from those whose hearts have grown dull:

10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?"

11 He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.

12 "For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him.

13 "Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.

14 "And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: 'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive;

15 For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should[fn] heal them.'[fn]

16 "But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear;

17 "for assuredly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.

And:

34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them,

35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: "I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world."

What secret was He now beginning to reveal that was hidden from the prophets? Eph 3 tells us:

1 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles—

2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,

3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already,

4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),

5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:

6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel,

7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power.

8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,

9 and to make all see what is the fellowship[fn] of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;

The kingdom parables relate to the whole kingdom, gentile and Jewsh. The kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of the god of heaven.

We should interpret these parables by Jesus' own intrepation of them. He explains the sower (or four soils):

18 "Therefore hear the parable of the sower:

19 "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside.

20 "But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;

21 "yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles.

22 "Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful.

23 "But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty."

And the tares:

36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field."

37 He answered and said to them: "He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.

38 "The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one.

39 "The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.

40 "Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age.

41 "The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness,

42 "and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43 "Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

If we use Jesus' own interpretation of these two parables as the key to the others, the meaning is different, even opposite the traditional view. To use other than Jesus' own interpretation is folly.

So the mustard seed:

31 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field,

32 "which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches."

The key to this is to know who the birds are, which Jesus told us back in v19: the wicked ones. And the mustard plant that is common in Israel is a bush not a tree. Jesus is describing the church as an organism that grows so abnormally/unnaturally large that it includes within itself the wicked ones, the grievous wolves that Paul describes within the Church. I'd suggest that from about Constantine onwards this has been the case with the Christian church.

Next the leaven:

33 Another parable He spoke to them: "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures[fn] of meal till it was all leavened."

What is leaven, throughout scripture? -a model of sin. From the Levitcal sacrifices (with a couple exceptions, which offer insights in themselves), to Jesus saying "beware the leaven (false doctrine) of the Pharisees" to Paul saying that "a little leaven leavens the whole lump" (in a context that indicates it's a bad thing).

Where else in scripture does three measures of meal show up? What would a Jewish audience perceive in that description? Starting at Gen 18 when The Lord and two angels visited Abraham and he told Sarah to go prepare three measures of meal, and later instituted in the Levitical fellowship offering, which was to be free of leaven. A Jewish audience would gasp in shock at this parable!

Hiding leaven in three measures of meal describes false doctrine introduced into the Church, diffusing throughout the Body. That it was introduced by a woman also seems to tie this parable to Thyatira and Jezebel as a model of the catholic introduction of false doctrine (and inquisition, remember Naboth's field).

Next, the treasure in the field:

44 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

But what is the field? v38 tells us, the field is the world, not salvation, not the gospel. There is nothing I posses that can be redeemed in God's currency. He is the One that paid. "For God so loved the world He gave..." is the parallel to this parable. But who is described as God's peculiar treasure? Israel...

Next, the pearl.

45 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls,

46 "who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had and bought it.

This parable is clearly parallel to the treasure in the field, in that it is Christ giving all. But the pearl is a non-kosher jewel, so this points us away from things Jewish, toward the gentile church. What else in a pearl points to the church? -a pearl grows by accretion, in response to an irritant. It is removed from its place of growth, and used as an object of adornment. It is the only jewel created by a living thing.

The kingdom parables describe the whole kingdom (there are a "complete" seven parables), both in scope and as a historical narrative in parallel to Jesus' seven letters in Rev 2&3. (But that's a topic for a different thread, probably!)

So how popular is the idea that the birds in the mustard tree is a good thing, or that the woman hiding leaven in three measures is a good thing, or that the treasure and pearl is salvation or the gospel? Are these ideas the norm among well taught Christians?

I was hugely disappointed as a local preacher went down this path...

"Six days thou shalt do thy work..."

How many folks that preach Christian sabbath observance work a six day week to comply with the commandment, I wonder? I never hear anybody preach the first half of the commandment, only the 7th day part...

Melchizedek has another parallel in Adonizedek of Joshua 10. Both names mean "lord of (or is) righteousness", both were kings of (Jeru)Salem, both lack recorded genealogical records. Except one is an imposter, a phony, and an adversary.

Indeed, Josh 10 reads like Revelation- a 10 king coalition lead by a false type of Christ, being fought by a guy with Jesus' Hebrew name (Joshua); in defeat the kings hide in caves, and their defeat is accompanied by signs in he sun and moon.

Oh, and if Adonizedek can have this same name and title, and clearly is NOT Christ, it clearly means that the person's name is just a clue to their role, not some kind of absolute proof. The context, and what is written by divinely inspired commentators like Paul (or, "the author of the book of Hebrews") has far more sway in the proper interpretation of these passages.

This is one of those "how big is your God?" kind of questions. In the first verse of Genesis God created (bara, cause to exist) about 10^80 atoms. There are jewish commentaries that describe Him as speaking them into existence, presciently describing John 1:3- ...and without (the Word) was not any thing made that was made.

If you can get your head around that, the rest is trivial.

       If your God is smaller than that, may I suggest an upgrade?

Hi Persuaded, I tried to find evidence for your point but I couldn't find a good English/Ancient Greek translation of the LXX,  the following rendering isn't clear enough to make your point. Please support your point that the ancient Greeks understood the Hebrew to mean that the sacrifices stopped, and not the week stopped.

 

 

Just the first half-dozen online LXX translations I find with google. They all say the same thing:

http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Daniel/index.htm :

"27 And one week shall establish the covenant with many: and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink-offering shall be taken away: and on the temple shall be the abomination of desolations; and at the end of time an end shall be put to the desolation."

and here's two from two different greek sources, from http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/40-daniel-nets.pdf :

"And in half of the week the sacrifice and the libation will cease, and in the temple there will be an abomination of desolations until the consummation of a season, and a consummation will be given for the desolation.” "

"And itd will strengthen a covenant with many, one week, and by half of the week sacrifice and libation will cease, and in the temple there will be an abomination of desolations even until a consummation, and a consummation will be given for the desolation.” (dAntecedent unclear )

Let's be careful to keep the (idolatrous) wife of Jehovah separate from the (virgin) bride of Christ! Not the same gal...

 

 

1) Hi, thanks for your analysis. Regarding "poor form", in my defense I did carefully check the Hebrew and it came as a recent revelation to me that the Hebrew word for "cease" (shabath) can just as easily apply to the preceding verb as to the next verb in the sentence.

 

The Hebrew in the English form of the Interlinear bible goes like this:  http://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/9-27.htm

And he shall confirm week for one and in the middle of the week to cease he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering and for the overspreading of abominations.....

 

Thus context is unclear whether the week is ceasing or the sacrifices are ceasing. All translators have chosen to assume its the sacrifices are ceasing, but a wholesale revision of preconceived notions on Daniel 9:27 is required if in fact its the week that is ceasing in the middle.

 

 

2) I know its traditional to see Hebrew years as 360 days a year, but this notion is in fact incorrect. Approximately every 6th year the Levites introduced a second month of Adar known as Adar II.  They did this to keep Adar as representing Spring and so watched for signs of spring to decide when to introduce a second Adar. Thus over the long term our years of 365 days always match Hebrew years of 360 days and occasional 390 days.  http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Holidays/Rosh_Chodesh/Adar/adar.html

 

Therefore the traditional view of looking at Nehemiah's later decree in 445BC makes no sense from an accurate Hebrew perspective. Neither does it make sense to see the exile as complete in 445BC when in fact Artaxerxes earlier decree in 458BC officially started the rebuilding of Jerusalem.  So in this respect I heartily disagree with you.

 

3) You are incorrect about the first time Christ presented himself as Messiah. This occurred at Nazareth in Luke 4:18-20.  But regardless of this, Jesus was anointed in the river Jordan and publicly was recognised as the Messiah by John the Baptists at that time, so I truly believe this was the "coming of the anointed one". So I heartily disagree with you on when the coming of the anointed one occurred. 

 

4) I believe verse 26 is a parenthesis referring to future events, then reverts back to the last week.  

 

5) I believe the 3.5 years of Daniel 9:27 b is expanded on in Revelation 6-19.

 

Yowza. I'd be pretty careful about re-writing the dozens of translations out there based on a clearly limited understanding of Hebrew syntax. Even the LXX (as translated by pre-Christian jews, presumably without any of our eschatological bias) says the sacrifices are stopped, not the week.

So the Bible says 1260 days is 42 months is 3.5 years, but you'd like to use the civil calendar instead. The Bible says the commandment relates to the rebuilding of the wall and moat (which entails the authority to become a city-state), but you say we should use the one that relates to the temple in Ezra.

As David was anointed king many years before he became king, so Jesus was anointed (thousands of) years before He will sit on His throne. John the Baptist recognized Him as the (pecach) lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. He certainly did nothing to fulfill His role as Messiah the King in Luke 4- indeed they tried to kill Him later in that address. And His "my hour is not yet come" statements after these two events indicate He was reserving the announcement for a particular moment. Indeed, as the Pharisees rebuke Him for the (apparent) blasphemy of the people as He enters the city:

I take this to mean that Jesus held them accountable to have read and understood Dan 9.

 

 

The abomination of desolation does not apply to an end-time Antichrist, it was the Roman army (who was an Abomination to the Jews), who came and desolated the Jews and the temple.

 

 

Let's look at the word "abomination" from Dan 9, 11, 12 that Jesus is referring to. It is shiqquwts, "detestable thing or idol, abominable thing, abomination, idol, detested thing"

shiqquwts shows up 28 times in the OT. Can you find any instance where it is used in a way that remotely includes a foreign army? -it is always used of idolatry or idolatrous worship:

At the end of Gen 3 is:

24 So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

Cherubim or a sort of super angels, always associated with the presence of God (over the ark, the four living creatures of Isa 6 and Rev 4). Lucifer was the anointed cherub that covered (was over). The cherubim at the garden guard the way TO the tree.

In warfare, you often match the enemy's weaponry with your own. Tanks to fight tanks, soldiers against soldiers, planes against planes, etc. It makes no sense to send a super angel(s) to keep man out. One "rank and file" angel would be enough. They are there to keep Lucifer out, and guard the way for man, when he has been finally redeemed, to return to it.

You stop your quote (at least) one verse short:

33 [Ye] serpents, [ye] generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

-and next He describes how they shall (future) murder those He sends, just like their fathers did.

This passages echoes the rather frisky description of parentage in John 8:

39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, [even] God.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.

44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

To call a Pharisee a seed of a serpent or generation of vipers is to refer to Gen 3:

14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou [art] cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

So parentage in these verses is talking about allegiance or spiritual parentage, the master you serve.

Hi Persuaded,

 

To answer your questions. The God of heaven is God. However the term `the kingdom of heaven,` is specifically used in scripture to indicate to Israel their inheritance. Daniel prophesied it & the Lord confirmed it in Matthew`s gospel. 

------

The kingdom of God is over all & the rule of heaven through Israel is a sub part of that.

Here's Dan 2:44,45 which I think is the passage you are referring to:

I fully agree that Israel has a future prophetic role and destiny to fulfill her promises and calling, but it sounds like you are reading into the text in this case. We should squeeze the text for every last nugget, but in doing so it's easy to get into left field as we look through the lenses of our own presumptions. I certainly can't claim to be free of that problem!

24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. 25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree (Artaxerxes in 458BC)  to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince (JESUS OF GALILEE)  there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. 26 Then AFTER (3.5 years after)  the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people (EVIL GALILEAN ZEALOTS) of the prince who is to come (JESUS OF GALILEE) will RUIN the city and the sanctuary (through immorality/corruption/dissension/desecration) . And its end will come with a flood (THE ROMANS IN 70AD) ; even to the end there will be war (70AD); desolations are determined (70AD) . 27 And he (JESUS THE PRINCE) will CONFIRM/STRENGTHEN  a firm covenant (THE MESSIANIC PROMISE) with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he (JESUS) will stop the week by a gift of sacrifice (JESUS THE LAST SACRIFICE); and on the wing of abominations will come one (THE FUTURE ANTICHRIST) who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

 

After the Babylonian exile, 490 restored years are declared for the Jews.   

483 years of restoration of Israel  (458BC to 26AD)

3.5 years of the covenant Messiah received by Israel (Autumn 26 AD- Spring 30AD). At the crucifixion in 30AD they rejected Him and the 490 Jewish years were broken.

3.5 years of a future safe period of openness to the gospel - the covenant Messiah received by Israel.(Romans 11:25  Revelation 12)

The bolded part above is not in the Bible, not in any translation. Poor form.

The decree by Artaxerxes that fits the prophecy is the one from Nehemiah, in 445BC. (The 3 earlier Ezra decrees relate to the temple, not the city with wall and moat).

The years are 360 day years (half of these seven years is 1260 days).

...until Messiah, v25. What was the first occasion when Christ allowed Himself to be presented as Messiah, even pre-arranging the donkey and foal with the innkeeper? -Palm Sunday. Every earlier occasion, when the crowd got excited He would say "my hour is not yet come" or slip through the crowd to escape, or tell those receiving miracles to tell no one. He was reserving the public announcement of his role as Messiah until a particular day, which happened to be 483x360=173,880 days from the going forth of the decree, above. (This is Sir Robert Anderson's analysis, which has its detractors but I think still holds up).

v26: "and after 62 weeks (verse 25) (a bunch of stuff happens)". It should be noted that v26 comes between v25 and 27. This is oddly missed by many commentators. Verse 26 describes the interval between the end of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th week.**

Then verse 27 deals with the 70th week, and  Rev 6-19 is basically an expansion of Dan 9:27.

------------

**This is one of the incidences of the "church gap" that shows up throughout scripture. The classic example is comparing Luke 4:17-19 with the passage Jesus quotes from in Isa 61:1,2 where Jesus stops his quote at the comma in the middle of Isa 61:2, closes the book, and leaves unsaid "and the day of vengeance..."

That "comma" has lasted almost 2000 years.

Was reading in Hebrews 7.

Who was Melchizedek?

Was he Jesus or a separate individual?

7 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him,

2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” 3

Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

Does God overlook/ turn a blind eye to sin in the life of the believer?

Hebrews 12:5-8

5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:

6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.

7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Background, Genesis 1:2-

"2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." (And understand that the word for darkness also means "obscure, hidden, misery, chaos")

A doctor, an engineer, and an attorney are discussing Genesis and arguing about the oldest profession.

The doctor mentions the operation done on Adam to create Eve, clearly indicating medicine to be the oldest profession.

The engineer brings up the formation of the land and dividing of the waters, so clearly engineering was done earlier.

The attorney says the world was void and chaotic before all that, which proves that the lawyers got there first...

So we see Paul saying "I reckon" and "you all" throughout his letters, so we conclude he was a southerner.

But, we know he was not a Texan, because he said:

Philippians 4:11 (KJV) "...for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content."

Is the God of heaven somehow different than God?

More importantly, in every gospel passage that uses Kingdom of heaven versus kingdom of God there is no meaningful distinction- the terms are used interchangeably. Gospel writers even use both terms in the same parable (Mat 19:23,24), or different writers use different terms when recounting the same passage (compare Matthew versus Luke with the beatitudes, the verse in question here- Mat 11:11 vs. Luke 7:28, and so on)

I believe you are creating a distinction that doesn't exist, and using that to read a different meaning into Mat 11:11 than exists in the text.

"The kingdom" certainly applies to the millennium, but it also applies to our present citizenship. We, today, are citizens of heaven:

[Phl 3:20 NKJV] For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,

I'm probably not as interested as I should be in the semantics of whether Christ rules from David's throne over Israel, through Israel, or with Israel; nor whether the church is ruling with Christ on earth or heaven or old earth or new earth; or new, 1st, 2nd, or 3rd heaven. Just that Christ rules, from David's throne, Israel still has a part in God's plan, and I am a citizen of heaven today and forever.

Do you see a (meaningful) distinction between kingdom of God/kingdom of heaven?

They are both used interchangeably for "the saved", both OT saved (Mat 8:11, but with "shall be" making it yet future when it was spoken) and more generally referring to (future) NT saved. The natural reading of Mat 11:11 puts a contrast between OT and NT saints though, so it should be placed in company with the dozens of other verses that use kingdom of heaven/God as a reference to the Church or body of Christ. To give this one verse a special meaning in contrast to well established usage doesn't make sense. Is the millennium in view in any other kingdom of heaven reference? I looked at the 80+ gospel usages, and none appeared millennial to me...

Hmm.

You're saying the last oven is almost a million times hotter than first?

How is the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven greater than John the Baptist?

Faith.....

 

From the beginning of creation to the renewal of creation God aways ask the same... do you believe me? Seeing and believing is how much greater than believing without seeing?

(KJV) 11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

I don't think faith is it. The first half of Mat 11:11 says John the Baptist was no less than the OT heroes, who were examples of salvation by faith (see Heb 11 for a list).

And, Jesus says it's better to believe without seeing:

29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

It's interesting to look at the world as a huge display of God's love. The only true "everlasting covenant" is between the Father and Son, an agreement made before the foundation of the earth, to create a race of people with free will that couldn't possibly live up to His infinite righteousness, and therefore would need the Son's infinite sacrifice to redeem.

It's sort of God's way of saying, "Love? I'll show you love. Watch this..."

A common misconception is that man screwed up the plan and God had to send His Son to "fix" it. God knew we'd be sinners before He made the world, before He died on the cross, and before each of us was born.