Christs parables

(Matthew 13:24-30) Another illustration he set before them, saying: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder came up and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow fine seed in your field? How, then, does it come to have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy, a man, did this.’ They said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go out and collect them?’ He said, ‘No; that by no chance, while collecting the weeds, you uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the harvest season I will tell the reapers, First collect the weeds and bind them in bundles to burn them up, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”

To what does Christ refer to and why?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
(Matthew 13:24-30) Another illustration he set before them, saying: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder ca ...[text shortened]... p, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”

To what does Christ refer to and why?

On the Positive side only right now:

He refers to the divine life of God implanted into man and growing in man.

He refers to the growth of Person who can be dispensed into people and develop in a way of being mingled with them.

Growth indicates life. And here it is not the natural life but the life of God which can blend into man's life to unite man with God.

Learn more - www.regenerated.net

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
(Matthew 13:24-30) Another illustration he set before them, saying: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder ca ...[text shortened]... p, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”

To what does Christ refer to and why?

The parable that you are referring to is the parable of the 'Tares among the Wheat'...

Tares among Wheat

24 Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. 26 But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. 27 The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ 28 And he said to them, ‘An enemy has done this!’ The slaves *said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?’ 29 But he *said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’”

If you read a little further, the meaning of the parable is explained...

The Tares Explained

36 Then He left the crowds and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.” 37 And He said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man, 38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one; 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels. 40 So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
(Matthew 13:24-30) Another illustration he set before them, saying: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder ca ...[text shortened]... p, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”

To what does Christ refer to and why?

The key is to realize that the wheat and tares are aspects of character, not whole people (unless one believes that the Adversary sews/generates/creates actual people). The fire is the fire of God’s agape, and is curative, cleansing/purging/removing hamartia. (And hamartia/sin is an affliction.) All of the other metaphors in the parable and its explanation (which is still metaphorical—unless one believes that the evil one has actual children) need to be seen in this light.

Any other view leads to Manicheaism, and/or double-predestination—and/or a pure works-salvationism (after all, the righteous do not need grace).

Originally posted by vistesd
The key is to realize that the wheat and tares are aspects of character, not whole people (unless one believes that the Adversary sews/generates/creates actual people). The fire is the fire of God’s agape, and is curative, cleansing/purging/removing hamartia. (And hamartia/sin is an affliction.) All of the other metaphors in the parab ...[text shortened]... le-predestination—and/or a pure works-salvationism (after all, the righteous do not need grace).

Sometimes God's punishment is corrective or curative as you say.
Sometimes correction is not the goal but retribution.

It would be a mistake to regard all usage of fire of God's judgment to be curative.

I do not believe the tares are corrected in that parable.
There are other parables where a servant of Christ is punished with a view towards correction. I don't think He has that in mind in the parable of the wheat and the tares.

But if I err, there is nothing pleasant about the tares being bound into bundles and burned.

That they are bound into different bundles may indicate that there are different kinds of counterfeit Christians.

Originally posted by sonship
Sometimes God's punishment is corrective or curative as you say.
Sometimes correction is not the goal but retribution.

It would be a mistake to regard all usage of fire of God's judgment to be curative.

I do not believe the tares are corrected in that parable.
There are other parables where a servant of Christ is punished with a view towards co ...[text shortened]... into different bundles may indicate that there are different kinds of counterfeit Christians.

If one takes seriously John’s claim that God is agape (and not just, say, loving), then all attributes of God (e.g., righteous/just) must be reflections of agape (see my post on Grampy’s “Ancient Dilemma” thread). Retribution does not in any way serve love (or, necessarily, justice).

Besides, all the people would have to be either wholly-righteous or wholly-wicked for this parable to work that way (same for the sheep/goats).

_______________________________________

The tares are not corrected; the tares are removed, like a tumor on the whole person.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
(Matthew 13:24-30) Another illustration he set before them, saying: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder ca ...[text shortened]... p, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”

To what does Christ refer to and why?

Christ presents the kingdom of heaven in two aspects. The wheat depicts true believers, like me, and the tares are mere professors, like Muslims and JWs. The field represents the world and Christ is the sower of the good seed, who are the ones like me that understand His message, and Satan is the sower of the weeds, like Muslims and JWs that are not genuine followers of the King. The reapers are angels who will gather the harvest at the end of the age and throw the weeds in the lake of fire.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God! Holy! Holy! Holy!

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
Christ presents the kingdom of heaven in two aspects. The wheat depicts true believers, like me, and the tares are mere professors, like Muslims and JWs. The field represents the world and Christ is the sower of the good seed, who are the ones like me that understand His message, and Satan is the sower of the weeds, like Muslims and JWs that are not genuin ...[text shortened]... of fire.

Halleluyah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God! Holy! Holy! Holy!

The Instructor

umm i would certainly say that your inclusion of Muslims is wrong, it refers to those professing exclusively to be Christian, for its well known the Christ had in mind, bearded darnel, a poisonous plant that looks like wheat, but is of course counterfeit. So far peoples perspectives have been quite interesting bordering on almost pure allegory to the super real.

Originally posted by vistesd
If one takes seriously John’s claim that God [b]is agape (and not just, say, loving), then all attributes of God (e.g., righteous/just) must be reflections of agape (see my post on Grampy’s “Ancient Dilemma” thread). Retribution does not in any way serve love (or, necessarily, justice).

Besides, all the people would have to be ...[text shortened]... ______

The tares are not corrected; the tares are removed, like a tumor on the whole person.[/b]

If one takes seriously John’s claim that God is agape (and not just, say, loving), then all attributes of God (e.g., righteous/just) must be reflections of agape (see my post on Grampy’s “Ancient Dilemma” thread). Retribution does not in any way serve love (or, necessarily, justice).

Besides, all the people would have to be either wholly-righteous or wholly-wicked for this parable to work that way (same for the sheep/goats).

Your contributions are usually more sophisticated. Now let me see if I can review what you are saying.

1. The bible says God IS Love which is stronger than equating any other attribute of God to God.

2. Therefor love being so overwhelming the description of what God is unlike what he has as some other attribute, this enfluences you to believe retributive judgment has no place for it is contrary to God as love.

Is that a fair summation of what you mean ?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
umm i would certainly say that your inclusion of Muslims is wrong, it refers to those professing exclusively to be Christian, for its well known the Christ had in mind, bearded darnel, a poisonous plant that looks like wheat, but is of course counterfeit. so far peoples perspectives have been quite interesting bordering on almost pure allegory to the super real.

The weeds actually represent all unbelievers including atheists. However, I just wanted to give the Muslims and the JWs a special little dig for my own fun. 😏

By the way, there is nothing specifically about any bearded darnel in that parable, even though it could be included among the many types of weeds available to Satan the devil.

The Instructor

If one takes seriously John’s claim that God is agape (and not just, say, loving), then all attributes of God (e.g., righteous/just) must be reflections of agape ... Retribution does not in any way serve love (or, necessarily, justice).

It is God's love to deter future worlds from going down the wrong path as Satan and his opposition party of rebel angels, demons, and unrepentant human beings.

It is God's love toward the eternally saved and whatever other beings He might create in the vastness of the universe and eternal ages, that the example of a long fermented rebellion came to nothing.

Why would that not be an expression of God's agape love towards those who have been saved ?

Second question: Yes we have "God is love".
We also have "God is light".

And in fact we have "Our God is a consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29)

Is light and consuming fire of judgment as strongly then an attribute of God ?

To those who choose to live in spiritual and moral darkness, would not infinitely bright spiritual and moral light be a suffering ?

Besides, all the people would have to be either wholly-righteous or wholly-wicked for this parable to work that way (same for the sheep/goats).

Let me come back to this after some contemplation.

___________________________________

The tares are not corrected; the tares are removed, like a tumor on the whole person.

According to the interpretation given by Jesus Himself, it is the unrighteous who are cast into the furnace of fire. Not germs or tumors they alone have but THEM themselves.

" ... and the reapers are angels, Therefore just as the tares are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the consummation of the age.

The Son of Man will send His angels, and they will collect out of His kingdom all the stumbling blocks and those who practice lawlessness, And will cast them into the furnace of fire. In that place there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth." (vs.40b-42)

Tumors do not weep or gnash their teeth.
People gathered forcefully by strong angels and cast into a fire would.

It is very difficult to misunderstand this teaching.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The weeds actually represent all unbelievers including atheists. However, I just wanted to give the Muslims and the JWs a special little dig for my own fun. 😏

By the way, there is nothing specifically about any bearded darnel in that parable, even though it could be included among the many types of weeds available to Satan the devil.

The Instructor

no i don't think they do, i think they refer to those sown in the same field, that is Christians and those who profess to be Christians, atheists and Muslims are not sown in the same field and look quite different spiritually speaking. No it could not be any type of weed, they would need to look similar for the parable to make any sense.

Originally posted by sonship

If one takes seriously John’s claim that God is agape (and not just, say, loving), then all attributes of God (e.g., righteous/just) must be reflections of agape ... Retribution does not in any way serve love (or, necessarily, justice).

It is God's love to deter future worlds from going down the wrong path as Satan and his opposition p ...[text shortened]... and cast into a fire would.

It is very difficult to misunderstand this teaching.

You’re right that I’m being brief today (but thanks for the compliment).

It’s not a matter of relative strength among attributes; it’s a matter of an attribute needing to be understood in terms of God’s essence. God’s righteousness, for example, must be an expression of God’s essence as agape, regardless of whatever might otherwise be said about righteousness. We are limited in how we are to read any/all such attributes and activities of God, once we accept (if we do accept) that the qualitative nominative predicate in 1st John entails a statement of God’s essence. That means we need to interpret (an re-interpret, if necessary) other terms and texts in that light—even if it goes against what we have believed and assume.

Therefore, the consuming fire must be an expression of agape; likewise light. (Remember that judgment is neither the verdict nor the sentence, even in a juridical (pardon/punishment) model of salvation; in the healing model, it is diagnosis.)

It is not the tumors that weep, it is the patient that is undergoing the treatment. (Okay, I used a physical affliction, whereas hamartia is a psychological/spiritual affliction.)

The explanation, as well as the parable seems clearly metaphorical—or do you believe that there are (wholly righteous) seeds that are “sons of the kingdom”, and (wholly wicked) seeds that are “sons of the evil one? Do you take “sons” literally or metaphorically? Do you ascribe to Calvinistic double predestination? [I mean those as serious questions, not just rhetorical or argumentative ones.]

I’ll think about your “future worlds”, but remember—the need to either destroy or punish eternally means that God is unable to heal the affliction. It also means that people must be in full knowing consciousness, with no impairment of their consciousness due to hamartia.

Originally posted by vistesd
The key is to realize that the wheat and tares are aspects of character, not whole people (unless one believes that the Adversary sews/generates/creates actual people). The fire is the fire of God’s agape, and is curative, cleansing/purging/removing hamartia. (And hamartia/sin is an affliction.) All of the other metaphors in the parab ...[text shortened]... le-predestination—and/or a pure works-salvationism (after all, the righteous do not need grace).

This interpretation makes a lot more sense. In my old church, they never seemed to consider the point that the tares don't transform into wheat. And yet they believed bad people could be redeemed. They were not Calvinist/Predestinationist.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
This interpretation makes a lot more sense. In my old church, they never seemed to consider the point that the tares don't transform into wheat. And yet they believed bad people could be redeemed. They were not Calvinist/Predestinationist.

indeed they are sown to look exactly like wheat and only after a period of time, will it be evident that they are not wheat.