Introduction to the Parables

[Jethro Bodine]

@Jethro Bodine. Greetings, Jethro. You don't know me, but you might be interested to know that you were one of the first people whose posts I read before first considering joining the forums back in 2017. I thought you were fairly sound theologically, and won the debate you were involved in. Took me years to figure out where I had seen you until JLB mentioned you in private one time and I realized it must have been here.

Thought I would share that with you. Blessings in Christ, and maybe we'll have a peaceful discussion on scripture some day.

Good seeing you active again.
- H

Thank you! That's very nice.

And blessings to you.

 

[eddif]

Greetings, gentlemen, and blessings in Christ to you both.

I don't often side with Augustine, but in this case I believe he's right. A fuller view of the context reveals the greater king was the lesser king's spiritual enemy, potentially speaking and working through his family and friends. The context suggests this is who would potentially mock and deride him and attempt to dissuade him from the faith, similar to in the Parable of the Sower how the seed fell on shallow soil and could not withstand the heat of the day.

25 Now great multitudes went with Him. And He turned and said to them, 26 “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. 27 And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. 28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it— 29 lest, after he has laid the foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, 30 saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish’? 31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? 32 Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. 33 So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple. 34 Salt is good; but if the salt has lost its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? 35 It is neither fit for the land nor for the dunghill, but men throw it out. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” (Luke 14:25-35)

In a parallel passage, the Lord's teaching on "the salt of the earth" also deals with persecution and opposition:

11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. 13 “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. (Matthew 5:11-13)

stovebolts. I own a copy of Snodgrass' book, and it's a substantive and interesting work. I think he is off, however, in some places. I recall posting with Mayflower on another parable at this forum, where I think there was more to the parable than what Snodgrass shares in his book, but it's certainly a good place to start. If you ever decide to do a long-running series on the parables in depth some day, let me know. I would be interested in participating.

Jethro Bodine. Greetings, Jethro. You don't know me, but you might be interested to know that you were one of the first people whose posts I read before first considering joining the forums back in 2017. I thought you were fairly sound theologically, and won the debate you were involved in. Took me years to figure out where I had seen you until JLB mentioned you in private one time and I realized it must have been here.

Thought I would share that with you. Blessings in Christ, and maybe we'll have a peaceful discussion on scripture some day.

Good seeing you active again.
- H

This is a great subject.
Hidden In Him your mentioning human family and spiritual family is on track.

Who OT historically did Israel war / disagree with?
1. The outsiders (gentiles)
2. The insiders (other family tribes)
3. The leadership God set in place
4. Other?

God said destroy the people and idols of the promised land, but Israel ultimately made covenants with them.


Who is the enemy in the NT? (New Covenant)
1. Our flesh
2. Spiritual powers in high places
3. Other?


Paul and Roman leaders had basically a peace agreement…
Rome you do what Rome must do.
Christian you do what a Christian
must do.

Christian against powers / principalities in high places? The war inside us and outside us continues.

The conflict between Christian Jew and Christian gentile can be an agreement with peace. We are actually one new man and peace / same mind should exist. Our discussions should move toward peace / agreement.

Our levels of conflict are quite a bit more complex than are normally discussed.
The PaRDeS Jewish exegesis format makes sense to me. Snodgrass is not complex enough sounding to me. Looking at parables is a needed subject of discussion.

Summer wheat and winter wheat seed are planted at different times. Corn is planted. Corn without free vitamin B3 causes Pelegra.
Rice over processed causes beriberi. To leave off complexity or to over use complexity can cause problems. The law used lawfully is good. I know about food problems, but the battle to live off the good word of God is the real reality.

Enough redneck
eddif

 

[Hidden In Him]

This is a great subject.
Hidden In Him your mentioning human family and spiritual family is on track.

Who OT historically did Israel war / disagree with?
1. The outsiders (gentiles)
2. The insiders (other family tribes)
3. The leadership God set in place
4. Other?

God said destroy the people and idols of the promised land, but Israel ultimately made covenants with them.


Who is the enemy in the NT? (New Covenant)
1. Our flesh
2. Spiritual powers in high places
3. Other?


Paul and Roman leaders had basically a peace agreement…
Rome you do what Rome must do.
Christian you do what a Christian
must do.

Christian against powers / principalities in high places? The war inside us and outside us continues.

The conflict between Christian Jew and Christian gentile can be an agreement with peace. We are actually one new man and peace / same mind should exist. Our discussions should move toward peace / agreement.

Our levels of conflict are quite a bit more complex than are normally discussed.
The PaRDeS Jewish exegesis format makes sense to me. Snodgrass is not complex enough sounding to me. Looking at parables is a needed subject of discussion.

Summer wheat and winter wheat seed are planted at different times. Corn is planted. Corn without free vitamin B3 causes Pelegra.
Rice over processed causes beriberi. To leave off complexity or to over use complexity can cause problems. The law used lawfully is good. I know about food problems, but the battle to live off the good word of God is the real reality.

Enough redneck
eddif

I find you pretty complex for a redneck, Lol.

I agree that opposition comes at us from all sides. I focused on family simply because this was first and foremost what Jesus was warning about. But Satan knows who we are, and can get to us through people at any time, even if those being used don't consciously know what they are doing. It's why people will inexplicably get ugly with you in traffic, or in public, or at the store, or at work. The enemy within them knows who you are just like they knew who Paul was, and will try and give you Hell any way they can if possible.

I think it's why Jesus said to rejoice when people say all manner of evil against you falsely, and why James said to count it all joy when you suffer various trials and hardships. It's a more sure sign you are making the enemy unhappy than if everything is just turning up roses.

 

[stovebolts]

@stovebolts. I own a copy of Snodgrass' book, and it's a substantive and interesting work. I think he is off, however, in some places. I recall posting with Mayflower on another parable at this forum, where I think there was more to the parable than what Snodgrass shares in his book, but it's certainly a good place to start. If you ever decide to do a long-running series on the parables in depth some day, let me know. I would be interested in participating.

That’s great that you have his book. I’ve greatly enjoyed reading it and I’ve learned much.
The thing with Augustine on this particular parable is this. Augustine wasn’t around for several hundred years after Jesus spoke this story with intent. If the story had an intent for the original listeners, I find it difficult to think Augustine suddenly figured it out. From what I know of Augustine, is he was a master at the art of rhetoric so much that he also taught rhetoric. The beauty of rhetoric is you don’t have to be right, you merely need to sound right with the correct argument to defend that your right.

That being said, kudos to Augustine on this parable. He is very convincing. I believe Augustine put together a very good dissertation and has value. I just don’t think it’s at the heart of Jesus story. As a result, I tend to agree that it’s more about the cost of decipleship.

As far as a study of the parables, perhaps one day. It is something I would love to do but probably won’t for several more years.

It’s good to hear from you.

 

[Hidden In Him]

That being said, kudos to Augustine on this parable. He is very convincing. I believe Augustine put together a very good dissertation and has value. I just don’t think it’s at the heart of Jesus story. As a result, I tend to agree that it’s more about the cost of decipleship.

It’s good to hear from you.

Good hearing from you as well : )

Not actually sure what Augustine taught on this parable specifically, btw, so I can't comment on it intelligently. Was just sharing what I thought the context implied.

As far as a study of the parables, perhaps one day. It is something I would love to do but probably won’t for several more years.

Quite alright. Biding my time on putting together a full set of teachings on the parables myself, so maybe it all comes together at the same time some day.

Be blessed!
- H

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Who is the enemy in the NT? (New Covenant)
1. Our flesh
2. Spiritual powers in high places
3. Other?

Before conversion as an unbeliever residing in the kingdom of darkness, God is the enemy.

The parable is not about a believer, but the one who should first weigh the cost of believing in and following Christ. The believer is the one who considers the cost of resisting God/Jesus, the stronger king, and chooses to accept terms of unconditional surrender long before God/Jesus appear to judge their enemies. A peace negotiated through a delegation of ministers of the gospel.

 

[Anaphora]

Matthew chapter 13, parables are directed to Gods Elect. The word disciples means discipline. Many people have spirit of slumber and can't understand. God's election are teachers, pastors, prophets and apostles for different offices of body of christ. tles. Read Roman's chapter 12. The last prophet was John and jesus. Gods elect in the end times are teachers and pastors. Jesus spoke in parables because mystery of God is hidden from most people. Once again, many people have spirit of stupor.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Matthew chapter 13, parables are directed to Gods Elect. The word disciples means discipline. Many people have spirit of slumber and can't understand. God's election are teachers, pastors, prophets and apostles for different offices of body of christ. tles. Read Roman's chapter 12. The last prophet was John and jesus. Gods elect in the end times are teachers and pastors. Jesus spoke in parables because mystery of God is hidden from most people. Once again, many people have spirit of stupor.

All forgiven and redeemed believers are among the chosen, the elect.

 

[popsthebuilder]

All forgiven and redeemed believers are among the chosen, the elect.

...who are to gather together and not divide?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

...who are to gather together and not divide?

Who?

 

[popsthebuilder]

Who?

Lol....the elect; the chosen; the ambassadors of reconciliation.... friendo

 

[Mr. G Lee]

...who are to gather together and not divide?

It's the living abiding word of God we lovingly commanded to gather together and rightfully divide and not add or subtract from its power. . . making His word desolate by the oral traditions as philosophies of dying mankind

Parables teach us "how" to walk after our new born again faith as a new understanding . . his . Comparing the temporal things seen literal historical to the unseen eternal understanding . Hid as a parable or called hidden manna meaning .What is it????? (no familiarity with our own thoughts )

I would think it is why he has freely given us the mixing tool to rightly divide the parables. I call it the 20/20 prescription

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Comparing the temporal seen the historical literal . . .to the unseen eternal things of God . . .mixing the two . .we can hear the outcome, the gospel rest yoked with Christ.

Hebrews 4 1:2 King James Version4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
A salvation tool. God giving us his understanding as it is written .

 

[eddif]

It's the living abiding word of God we lovingly commanded to gather together and rightfully divide and not add or subtract from its power. . . making His word desolate by the oral traditions as philosophies of dying mankind

Parables teach us "how" to walk after our new born again faith as a new understanding . . his . Comparing the temporal things seen literal historical to the unseen eternal understanding . Hid as a parable or called hidden manna meaning .What is it????? (no familiarity with our own thoughts )

I would think it is why he has freely given us the mixing tool to rightly divide the parables. I call it the 20/20 prescription

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Comparing the temporal seen the historical literal . . .to the unseen eternal things of God . . .mixing the two . .we can hear the outcome, the gospel rest yoked with Christ.

Hebrews 4 1:2 King James Version4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
A salvation tool. God giving us his understanding as it is written .

Welcome aboard.

Romans 1:18 kjv
18. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed itunto them.
20. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Colossians 2:16 kjv
16. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

The parable of the sower was started at creation. Hidden in the seed DNA was the story of development. Written in scripture is the story of man and his development.

The seed is the word of God
The ground is men’s hearts.

The disciples did not get the understanding till Jesus explained it to them. The disciples asked why Jesus spoke in parables? (they did not know).

Jesus said. Hear now the parable of the sower. No understanding before the explanation of the parable.

Hearing they hear not
Seeing they see not

Matthew 13, Mark 4, Luke 8

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[Johann!@#]

I'd like to add to the above.

Jesus spoke in parables for all the reasons listed above.
There are a couple of other reasons that Jesus spoke in parables of which you may want to comment.

1. He spoke in parables because the persons He was speaking to were very familiar with His topics and they could ADD to what He was saying. They could enrich their own experience with what He was teaching by the moral. They were left free to understand it in a personalized way.
If someone just tells you WHAT to believe or think,,,it's more limiting....if the ending is "open" and the story simple,,,you could add to it and make it suit your personal experience more.


2. Jesus said that He spoke in parable so that in hearing some may not hear. Mathew 13:13 He was referring to Isaiah 6:10 and Psalm 119:70

Jesus wanted the persons listening to hear not only with their ears, but with their heart....Mathew 13:15d,e
He wanted them to make an effort to understand what He was saying and that it had eternal consequences. This reminds me of Mathew 16:24 and Luke 14:28

(from my own notes)



Mathew 13:13
13“Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.


Isaiah 6:10
10“Render the hearts of this people insensitive,
Their ears dull,
And their eyes dim,
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,
Understand with their hearts,
And return and be healed.”


Psalm 119:70
70Their heart is covered with fat,
But I delight in Your law.



Mathew 13:15d,e
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’


Mathew 16:24
24Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.


Luke 14:28
28“For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it?

1700 - The Parable of the Soils
(Mk. 4:1-20) 1705 - Pharisee and Sinner
(Lk. 18:9-14) 1710 - The Mote and the Beam
(Mt. 7)
1701 - The Pattern Parable
(Matt. 13) 1706 - Techniques for Interpreting Parables and Workers for the Field
(Matt. 20:1-16) 1711 - The Millstone and Lost Sheep
(Matt. 18:6ff)
1702 - The Fig Tree
(Mk. 13:28-37) 1707 - The Prodigal Son
(Lk. 15:11-24) 1712 - Forgiving is the Test of Forgiveness
(Matt. 18:21-35)
1703 - Parable of the Wicket Tenants
(Mk. 12:1-12) 1708 - The Father's Heart
(Lk. 15:1-32) 1713 - An Attitude Check
(Lk. 17:1-10)
1704 - The Deadly Choice
(Lk. 14:15-24) 1709 - Parable of the Shrewd Steward and Lazarus
(Lk. 16:1-31)

1700 - The Parable of the Soils (Mk. 4:1-20)	1705 - Pharisee and Sinner (Lk. 18:9-14)	1710 - The Mote and the Beam (Mt. 7)
1701 - The Pattern Parable (Matt. 13)	1706 - Techniques for Interpreting Parables and Workers for the Field (Matt. 20:1-16)	1711 - The Millstone and Lost Sheep (Matt. 18:6ff)
1702 - The Fig Tree (Mk. 13:28-37)	1707 - The Prodigal Son (Lk. 15:11-24)	1712 - Forgiving is the Test of Forgiveness (Matt. 18:21-35)
1703 - Parable of the Wicket Tenants (Mk. 12:1-12)	1708 - The Father's Heart (Lk. 15:1-32)	1713 - An Attitude Check (Lk. 17:1-10)
1704 - The Deadly Choice (Lk. 14:15-24)	1709 - Parable of the Shrewd Steward and Lazarus (Lk. 16:1-31)	Interpreting Difficult and Controversial Biblical Texts Difficult and controversial Bible passages explained by Dr. Bob Utley. Presented in MP3 audio. www.freebiblecommentary.org Excellent sermons here-MP3 format.

 

[Johann!@#]

Ok hawkman here is the book’s viewpoint. (?)

(The violent take the kingdom by force). This is a scripture.

Right now we are left deciding.

eddif

11:12
NASB, NKJV, NRSV  "the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force"
TEV  "the Kingdom of heaven has suffered violent attacks, and violent men try to seize it"
NJB  "The Kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence and the violent are taking it by storm"
Peshitta  "the Kingdom of heaven has been administered by force, and only those in power control it"
There has been much discussion about what this verse meant and how it should be translated. The first phrase can be used

in a positive sense, indicate that the kingdom of heaven is vigorously pressing forward
in a negative sense, refer to the violent reaction of the Jewish leaders to both John's and Jesus' preaching

The second phrase seems to be a play on the word "vigorous" and was used of sinners eagerly grasping, or responding to, the gospel (cf. Luke 16:16). The Septuagint uses this verb in the sense of a "strong invitation" (cf. Gen. 33:11; Jdgs. 19:7).

Matthew Chapter 11

11:13 "for all the prophets and Law" The Hebrew canon was divided into three sections, "the Law," "the Prophets," and "the Writings." This was the NT way of indicating the entire OT (cf. Luke 24:44). The OT pointed toward Jesus and the gospel.

SPECIAL TOPIC: HEBREW CANON

11:13 "until John" This seems to imply that the old covenant comes to an end (cf. Galatians 3 and the book of Hebrews) with the preaching of John the Baptist, who was the last old covenant prophet. Something radically new has come in Jesus. John is His forerunner! The new age of the Spirit; the new covenant; the promise of Gen. 3:15; 12:3 has come! The New Testament is about Jesus, not Israel.

SPECIAL TOPIC: PAUL'S VIEW OF THE MOSAIC LAW

11:14 "if" This is a FIRST CLASS CONDITIONAL SENTENCE which is assumed to be true from the author's perspective or for his literary purposes.

"John himself is Elijah who was to come" This is implied in Luke 1:17. In John. 1:20-25, John denied that he was Elijah, but this was in the context of the specific questioning by the Pharisees. John was denying that he was Elijah reborn. Jesus asserted that John fulfilled the prophecy of the return of Elijah before the Messiah from Mal. 3:1 and 4:5, (cf. Matt. 11:10).

11:15 "He who has ears to hear, let him hear"
This idiom (PRESENT PARTICIPLE and PRESENT IMPERATIVE) refers to the fact that unless the Holy Spirit aids believers' insight they cannot understand spiritual truth (cf. Isa. 6:9-10; 50:5; Matt. 13:9,43; Mark 4:9,23; Luke 8:8; 14:35; very similar to Rev. 2:7,11,17,29; 3:6,13,22; 13:9). However, it also implies that the willingness of the individual to hear and respond is also necessary. Revelation involves a divine sender and a human hearer/responder (i.e., covenant).

 

[eddif]

11:12
NASB, NKJV, NRSV  "the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force"
TEV  "the Kingdom of heaven has suffered violent attacks, and violent men try to seize it"
NJB  "The Kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence and the violent are taking it by storm"
Peshitta  "the Kingdom of heaven has been administered by force, and only those in power control it"
There has been much discussion about what this verse meant and how it should be translated. The first phrase can be used

in a positive sense, indicate that the kingdom of heaven is vigorously pressing forward
in a negative sense, refer to the violent reaction of the Jewish leaders to both John's and Jesus' preaching

The second phrase seems to be a play on the word "vigorous" and was used of sinners eagerly grasping, or responding to, the gospel (cf. Luke 16:16). The Septuagint uses this verb in the sense of a "strong invitation" (cf. Gen. 33:11; Jdgs. 19:7).

Matthew Chapter 11

11:13 "for all the prophets and Law" The Hebrew canon was divided into three sections, "the Law," "the Prophets," and "the Writings." This was the NT way of indicating the entire OT (cf. Luke 24:44). The OT pointed toward Jesus and the gospel.

SPECIAL TOPIC: HEBREW CANON

11:13 "until John" This seems to imply that the old covenant comes to an end (cf. Galatians 3 and the book of Hebrews) with the preaching of John the Baptist, who was the last old covenant prophet. Something radically new has come in Jesus. John is His forerunner! The new age of the Spirit; the new covenant; the promise of Gen. 3:15; 12:3 has come! The New Testament is about Jesus, not Israel.

SPECIAL TOPIC: PAUL'S VIEW OF THE MOSAIC LAW

11:14 "if" This is a FIRST CLASS CONDITIONAL SENTENCE which is assumed to be true from the author's perspective or for his literary purposes.

"John himself is Elijah who was to come" This is implied in Luke 1:17. In John. 1:20-25, John denied that he was Elijah, but this was in the context of the specific questioning by the Pharisees. John was denying that he was Elijah reborn. Jesus asserted that John fulfilled the prophecy of the return of Elijah before the Messiah from Mal. 3:1 and 4:5, (cf. Matt. 11:10).

11:15 "He who has ears to hear, let him hear"
This idiom (PRESENT PARTICIPLE and PRESENT IMPERATIVE) refers to the fact that unless the Holy Spirit aids believers' insight they cannot understand spiritual truth (cf. Isa. 6:9-10; 50:5; Matt. 13:9,43; Mark 4:9,23; Luke 8:8; 14:35; very similar to Rev. 2:7,11,17,29; 3:6,13,22; 13:9). However, it also implies that the willingness of the individual to hear and respond is also necessary. Revelation involves a divine sender and a human hearer/responder (i.e., covenant).

Cutting to an understanding.

The Jewish leadership of the religious kingdom of the time of Jesus:
Tried to remove Jesus as a leader by using violence.
They had previously killed prophets.

The New Jerusalem is coming down out of Heaven. The violent oppose that kingdom with violence. The fact that some disciples were killed supports this whole discussion.

I generally do not like being so blunt. Pentecost and gentile inclusion was the start of our part of the arrival of the New Jerusalem.

Can I tone it down? I hope so. The Jews were the first to receive the Holy Spirit. The true Jew has the advantage of having the oracles of God. They can look at OT scripture and see the things to come. Blind Jewish leadership resisted the truth.

Jesus used parables to conceal. Matthew 13, Mark 4, Luke 8. The disciples had to ask to understand why Jesus spoke in parables. The disciples had to be told why parables. In spite of Isaiah 6 telling why parables.

Today force is still used to try and silence truth.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[Johann!@#]

Cutting to an understanding.

The Jewish leadership of the religious kingdom of the time of Jesus:
Tried to remove Jesus as a leader by using violence.
They had previously killed prophets.

The New Jerusalem is coming down out of Heaven. The violent oppose that kingdom with violence. The fact that some disciples were killed supports this whole discussion.

I generally do not like being so blunt. Pentecost and gentile inclusion was the start of our part of the arrival of the New Jerusalem.

Can I tone it down? I hope so. The Jews were the first to receive the Holy Spirit. The true Jew has the advantage of having the oracles of God. They can look at OT scripture and see the things to come. Blind Jewish leadership resisted the truth.

Jesus used parables to conceal. Matthew 13, Mark 4, Luke 8. The disciples had to ask to understand why Jesus spoke in parables. The disciples had to be told why parables. In spite of Isaiah 6 telling why parables.

Today force is still used to try and silence truth.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

I guess that is one way of "seeing it"
J.

 

[Johann!@#]

Can I tone it down? I hope so.

Harpazo is used 13 times in the NT…

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force (grasping in the sense of either resisting or laying claim to the Kingdom as their own - see comment).

Comment: This is a difficult verse to interpret and can mean that evil forces from without sought to violently seize and destroy the kingdom of God or that persons who were ready for the advent of the King responded vigorously to His announcement, "violently" seeking to enter the kingdom of God,. The latter interpretation implies the difficulty with which one enters His kingdom {cp the related passage Luke 16:16 which has the second meaning.} Both interpretations indicate that John the Baptist's initial announcement of the coming King and Kingdom met with a "violent reaction" either by evil opponents or by enthusiastic supporters.

Matthew 13:19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away (robs, plunders, swoops in and steals away) what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road.

John 6:15 Jesus therefore perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force, to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone.

Comment: This use of harpazo illustrates the violent nature of the seizing - here is a forcibly taking of someone.

John 10:12 He who is a hireling, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, beholds the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep, and flees, and the wolf snatches them, and scatters them.

John 10:28 and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. 10:29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

Comment: Here harpazo underscores the believer's security in Christ, speaking of the impossibility of anyone snatching a believer out of the hands of Jesus or His Father.

Acts 8:39 And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away (from the presence of the Ethiopian eunuch and drag off to a different place); and the eunuch saw him no more, but went on his way rejoicing.

Comment: This "rapture" entails the movement from one place on earth to another, in contrast to the "rapture" in 2Cor 12:2,4, 1 Thes 4:17, Rev 12:5, all of which refer to one being caught up to a supernatural world.

Acts 23:10 And as a great dissension was developing, the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them and ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force, and bring him into the barracks.

2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago-- whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows-- such a man was caught up to the third heaven… 4 was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 (note) Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Jude 1:23 save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.

Revelation 12:5 (note) And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up (passive voice indicating God did the snatching) to God and to His throne. (Comment: This event is described in Acts 1:9-11 {these verses do not use harpazo} where Jesus was taken up into the cloud).

Harpazo is used 34 times in the non-apocryphal Septuagint (LXX)

Ge 37:33; Lev. 6:4; 19:13; Deut. 28:31; Jdg. 21:21, 23; 2 Sam. 23:21; Job 20:19; 24:2, 9, 19; Ps. 7:2; 10:9; 22:13; 50:22; 69:4; 104:21; Isa. 10:2; Ezek 18:7, 12, 16, 18; 19:3, 6; 22:25, 27; Hos. 5:14; 6:1; Amos 1:11; 3:4; Mic. 3:2; 5:8; Nah. 2:12

A number of the uses of harpazo in the LXX translate the Hebrew word meaning to tear (taraph; 2963) (as of beasts of prey, tear to pieces - Ge 37:33, Ps 7:2, 50:22, Hos 5:14, 6:1) which brings out the violent aspect of harpazo. None of the LXX uses of harpazo convey the same sense of rapture as found here in 1 Thessalonians, although there are two OT "raptures", the first of Enoch who "walked with God and he was not for God took him" (Ge 5:24) and the other of Elijah who "went up by a whirlwind to heaven" (2Ki 2:11).

Below are some representative uses of harpazo in the LXX…

Leviticus 6:4 then it shall be, when he sins and becomes guilty, that he shall restore what he took by robbery (Hebrew = gazal, 1497; Lxx = harpazo), or what he got by extortion, or the deposit which was entrusted to him, or the lost thing which he found,

Job 20:19 "For he has oppressed and forsaken the poor; He has seized (Hebrew = gazal, 1497; Lxx = harpazo) a house which he has not built.

Job 24:2 "Some remove the landmarks; They seize (Hebrew = gazal, 1497; Lxx = harpazo) and devour flocks… 24:9 Others snatch (Hebrew = gazal, 1497; Lxx = harpazo) the orphan from the breast, And against the poor they take a pledge.

Psalm 10:9 He (the wicked man) lurks in a hiding place as a lion in his lair; He lurks to catch (Hebrew = chataph, 2414; Lxx = harpazo) the afflicted; He catches (Hebrew = chataph, 2414; Lxx = harpazo) the afflicted when he draws him into his net.

Still a mashal?

suffereth violence = forceth itself upon men's attention. Greek. biazomai. Occurs only here and Luk_16:16. Supposed to be only passive (as rendered here), but this agrees neither with the facts nor with the context. Deissmann (Bib. Stud., p. 258) tells of the discovery of an inscription of Xanthus the Lycian, found near Sunium (E. Attica), containing the regulations as to approaching the healing divinity of the sanctuary of Men Tyrannos: "If any one forces himself in, his offering was not acceptable. "Those who fulfilled the conditions had the founder's good wishes. This last clause is conclusive and agrees with Luk_16:16.

the violent = forceful ones. No Art. Greek. biastes. Occurs only here.

take it by force = lay hold of it.

Suffereth violence (biazetai). This verb occurs only here and in Luk_16:16 in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 258) quotes an inscription “where biazomai is without doubt reflexive and absolute” as in Luk_16:16. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, etc.) so that “there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of Mat_11:12; Luk_16:16.” So then in Mat_11:12 the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like “men of violence take it by force” (biastai harpazousin autēn) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean “experiences violence” or “forces its way” like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John “had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples” (Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 26).
RWS

J.

 

[eddif]

I guess that is one way of "seeing it"
J.

And I left out the gentile ignorance. The Jew as still the one with the advantage; no matter what some gentiles seem to think. Gentiles have not replaced the Jewish people. The Jews wrote the new testament. The miracles the prophets did are ignored. A gentile has no background. And, I was one. Not that I converted but I have A Jewish Savior.

I like the subject of parables. The only thing is, like you said, it takes revelation to understand.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[Johann!@#]

And I left out the gentile ignorance. The Jew as still the one with the advantage; no matter what some gentiles seem to think. Gentiles have not replaced the Jewish people. The Jews wrote the new testament. The miracles the prophets did are ignored. A gentile has no background. And, I was one. Not that I converted but I have A Jewish Savior.

I like the subject of parables. The only thing is, like you said, it takes revelation to understand.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

1. The Jews have no more advantage-
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
2. Paul is not speaking in meshalim.

What were you-Hassidic-Othodox-Ultra Orthodox?
In addition to ethnic diversity, modern Jewish adherents are divided into several different branches or sects. In North America, the four main branches include Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist. Orthodox Judaism is considered the most traditional form of modern Judaism.

My apologies for my curt replies.
Johann.