Re: Outer Darkness?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

What we know brother awareness is that there is substance behind the parables as the one you cited in Matthew 13 clearly states. That parable and its explanation show that the parable represents the responses to receiving the word of the kingdom....and having it snatched away by the enemy, or withered because of persecution or tribulation, or choked by the deceitfulness of riches .. or better those that receive it and understand it produce thirty, sixty, hundredfold....that my brother is a serious and wonderful, (or not), matter.

The parables are provided for His followers to receive and understand. It really is not our place to dismiss the parables.... we have to seek the Lord for their meaning in the context of the entire completed Bible and according to the indwelling Spirit that guides us faithfully. The parable you brought up in Matthew 13 is precisely about our conversation right now..... receiving the word of the kingdom and producing manifold fruit.

Drake

Okay brother, how literal are we to take the parables? How about this one in Luke 19, The Parable of the Ten Minas. This parable advises to slaughter one that doesn't invest with interest :

Luk 19:27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'"

Did Jesus literally advise to slaughter, for such as small infraction? Or was it allegory?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

Okay brother, how literal are we to take the parables? How about this one in Luke 19, The Parable of the Ten Minas. This parable advises to slaughter one that doesn't invest with interest :

Luk 19:27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'"

Did Jesus literally advise to slaughter, for such as small infraction? Or was it allegory?

Brother, you should read the parable more carefully.

The Nobleman, the Lord Jesus, did not slay His servant. Each servant was rewarded according to their return on investment from what the Lord had given them assessed when He returned.The faithful servants that did his business He made rulers over cities. To the one servant that hid his portion in a napkin the Lord took the money away from him and gave it to the the servant that returned 10x... the punishment was that he was not only not made a ruler over cities to rule and reign with the Nobleman upon His return as the other two servants mentioned but also what he had been given to invest had been taken away also. An appropriate punishment for the servant.

In v27, the Nobleman brought His enemies who would not have Him rule over them and slew them. Those are not servants, but citizens mentioned in v14... obviously an accurate description of the unbelieving Jews.

So here we see again how balanced, generous, yet strict the Lord is toward His servants and severe toward those who reject Him altogether.

Hope that helps.

Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hope that helps.

Drake

Okay then, slaughter it is. I'll make a note of that. The literal interpretation of Luke 19 is literal slaughter of those awful Jews who rejected Jesus. So much for love your enemies. Slaughter it is ... cuz a parable says so ... that Jesus says he speaks because "it's not given to know." Given that, I'll stand by the sermon on the mount, before the parables.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Okay then, slaughter it is. I'll make a note of that. The literal interpretation of Luke 19 is literal slaughter of those awful Jews who rejected Jesus. So much for love your enemies. Slaughter it is ... cuz a parable says so ... that Jesus says he speaks because "it's not given to know." Given that, I'll stand by the sermon on the mount, before the parables.

But bro, how can you pick and choose which verses you like and stand by when you have so many posts that question the validity of every scripture?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But bro, how can you pick and choose which verses you like and stand by when you have so many posts that question the validity of every scripture?

Your favorite attack.

But I'm not picking and choosing willy-nilly. It's Jesus that tells his disciples why he speaks in parables in Matt. 13:11.

But I understand. You see yourself as one of the disciples, not among those that are given not to know. So you think because it's in the inerrant inspired word of God that, you can understand them as well as the disciples understood them. But sorry bro Ohio, you are not one of the disciples. Neither am I, or Drake. So how can we be sure we're understanding them as Jesus meant them?

And that's why I'll stand on the sermon on the mount before the parables. I'm actually keeping the scripture, not questioning the validity of them, by heeding what Jesus himself said were the purpose of his parables.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

Okay then, slaughter it is. I'll make a note of that. The literal interpretation of Luke 19 is literal slaughter of those awful Jews who rejected Jesus. So much for love your enemies. Slaughter it is ... cuz a parable says so ... that Jesus says he speaks because "it's not given to know." Given that, I'll stand by the sermon on the mount, before the parables.

Jesus spoke the sermon on the mount and He also spoke the parables ... He also said the scripture cannot be broken. The Jews of His day were breaking the scriptures... neglecting or rejecting whatever parts didn’t fit their view. That is why I say our understanding of the scriptures must seek to reconcile the whole else you might as well make up your own. We like the sound of whomsoever believes receives everlasting life... but tend overlook the part about perishing in unbelief though they are presented in the very same breath.

Anyway, I don’t mean to suggest that I’m smarter than you or better because I’m not. I suppose it comes down to believing ... faith.. the ability to substantiate divine facts into my beliefs. If we ask Him then He will give the gift of faith.... and I know that is true because I also know I was not born with it.

Grace to you
Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

If we ask Him then He will give the gift of faith.... and I know that is true because I also know I was not born with it.

Grace to you

Me neither bro.

Not that long ago I was talking to a sister out here on cell phones. She calls herself a rapture retard. She's really into the prophecies and is good-natured about it.

I use to be too, until I realized that neither I nor the big guns of prophecies could put it together well enough to predict anything with any degree of certainty, and everybody that tries to gets it wrong.

She told me that I needed faith to put it altogether. She said all I needed to do was to ask the Lord for the faith. So we prayed, right there on phones together, for the Lord to give me that faith.

Whether he did or not, out of the body or not, I don't know. But I still can't put the prophecies together.

Grace to you as well brother ...
Harold

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Your favorite attack.

But I'm not picking and choosing willy-nilly. It's Jesus that tells his disciples why he speaks in parables in Matt. 13:11.

But I understand. You see yourself as one of the disciples, not among those that are given not to know. So you think because it's in the inerrant inspired word of God that, you can understand them as well as the disciples understood them. But sorry bro Ohio, you are not one of the disciples. Neither am I, or Drake. So how can we be sure we're understanding them as Jesus meant them?

And that's why I'll stand on the sermon on the mount before the parables. I'm actually keeping the scripture, not questioning the validity of them, by heeding what Jesus himself said were the purpose of his parables.

How is this an attack? Yer a funny guy.

I've tried for years to find out what you actually believe, since it seems that your mission is to poke holes in everything I believe and hold dear.

Does this mean that you believe that Jesus' words are true?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Does this mean that you believe that Jesus' words are true?

I'm sure Jesus spoke true words, but I'm not sure I can get at them.

But we can only work with what we've got. So let me ask you. Did Jesus say that about his parables?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

Okay brother, how literal are we to take the parables? How about this one in Luke 19, The Parable of the Ten Minas. This parable advises to slaughter one that doesn't invest with interest :

Luk 19:27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'"

Did Jesus literally advise to slaughter, for such as small infraction? Or was it allegory?

Threatening people with slaughter and torture as practiced in the putative parables of Jesus is psychological terrorism. Lee appropriated those passages for use as psychological terrorism on his followers.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

Threatening people with slaughter and torture as practiced in the putative parables of Jesus is psychological terrorism. Lee appropriated those passages for use as psychological terrorism on his followers.

Are you saying that when Jesus warned of outer darkness, Hades, weeping and gnashing of teeth, he was promoting the gospel by fear and terrorism?

That torpedoes my hippie idea of Jesus, that he thought forgiveness and love.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

Are you saying that when Jesus warned of outer darkness, Hades, weeping and gnashing of teeth, he was promoting the gospel by fear and terrorism?

That torpedoes my hippie idea of Jesus, that he thought forgiveness and love.

The text attributes the parable to Jesus. Interpreted literally it contradicts Jesus's teaching that we should love and forgive our enemies. Jesus doesn't interpret the parable nor does he endorse the actions of any of the characters in it.

The first century social environment was one in which harsh treatment of "servants" [a euphemism for slave] was probably not uncommon. So the parable's contemporary audience would have been easily able to empathize with the slave/protagonist.

Interpreting the parable as we were taught elicits a remarkable irony. The third servant says to his lord "I was afraid of you because you are a severe man you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow." His lord replies " I will condemn you out of your own mouth you wicked servant you knew that I was a severe man taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow." He then condemns the man according to the man own words.

The irony is that if the reader concludes from the parable that Christ is a severe Lord who will harshly punish his servants the reader is making the same mistake that the so-called wicked servant did--viewing the Lord as a severe and unjust man.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

The text attributes the parable to Jesus. Interpreted literally it contradicts Jesus's teaching that we should love and forgive our enemies. Jesus doesn't interpret the parable nor does he endorse the actions of any of the characters in it.

The first century social environment was one in which harsh treatment of "servants" [a euphemism for slave] was probably not uncommon. So the parable's contemporary audience would have been easily able to empathize with the slave/protagonist.

Interpreting the parable as we were taught elicits a remarkable irony. The third servant says to his lord "I was afraid of you because you are a severe man you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow." His lord replies " I will condemn you out of your own mouth you wicked servant you knew that I was a severe man taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow." He then condemns the man according to the man own words.

The irony is that if the reader concludes from the parable that Christ is a severe Lord who will harshly punish his servants the reader is making the same mistake that the so-called wicked servant did--viewing the Lord as a severe and unjust man.

I don't know what the parable means. Clearly, the purpose of parables is to keep us guessing.

Here's what troubles me. In the introduction to the parable it says :

Luk 19:11* And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.*

Then Jesus "added" this story about a nobleman going far away to receive a kingdom. But his citizens hated him, and refused to be ruled over by him.

Then this nobleman, now a King, comes back expecting to reap where he didn't sow. And when a "wicked servant" doesn't deliver Jesus uses that to teach that "unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him."

Oooooookay then!?!

What troubles me is this seems to be about the Kingdom of God (as stated in the introduction), and moreover, what the king does to his citizens that hate him.

If in this parable Jesus is revealing the Kingdom of God, and how it will be, I want no part of it. Surely Jesus didn't mean that. It was just a story Jesus told. It didn't represent something of reality, or reality to come. Surely not. That would mean that the Kingdom of God is a violent dictatorship. I don't know about everybody else, if this is the case, I'm gonna be one of the slaughtered citizens that hated the king. Rather than live under a dictatorship, I'd rather be a martyr ... for the Sermon on the Mount (that wasn't one of those confusing parables).

*

[OBW]

Originally Posted by awareness

. . . . She calls herself a rapture retard. . . .

Not sure what that is supposed to mean.

But if it suggests someone who is a reluctant dispensationalist or reticent Calvinist, then I might be one too.